Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Should Canada suspend relations with China?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 686
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The country Justin Trudeau most admires because their basic dictatorship can get things done has just sentenced a human rights lawyer who they disappeared several years ago, to another 4 and a half ye

Purposefully misrepresenting my statement is nothing but trolling.

Should we suspend relations? I mean, it would be their loss, since they're exporting way more to us than the other way around. 

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

It's not called the Peace of Westphalia for nothing, pursuit of a One World Commune is not Kumbaya, it's a recipe for a world war.

Only if you insist, otherwise It simply is what it is, inevitable.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm glad to see you realize that resisting progress is ultimately futile.

FTW

Indeed, however a one-world government doesn't seem like progress to me, it seems like something that will hold back progress, especially within the foreseeable future, and that's where we differ.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Fair enough, its the people who are trying to buy the government they want you should be concerned about.  

I'm not concerned in the least,  Canada is a Nothing Burger, buying Canada gets you nothing, except a frozen wasteland full of Eskimo Communists, they can have it.

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Indeed, however a one-world government doesn't seem like progress to me, it seems like something that will hold back progress, especially within the foreseeable future, and that's where we differ.

I feel the very same way about the global economy - where we differ is that you seem to think racing to the bottom is progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Only if you insist, otherwise It simply is what it is, inevitable.   

I won't insist, America will, no matter what befalls the globe, America will remain the Hegemon, because no matter how rough it gets for America, its much rougher for everyone else.

If America is forced  to be the bulwark against communism, again, I will back them to the hilt, just like I did before, up to and including military force as necessary, just like we did before.

 

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I won't insist, America will, no matter what befalls the globe, America will remain the Hegemon, because no matter how rough it gets for America, its much rougher for everyone else.

If America is forced  to be the bulwark against communism, again, I will back them to the hilt, just like I did before, up to and including military force as necessary, just like we did before.

Yes and we can all see how well that worked out - there's still a commie under every bed and now a terrorist to boot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes and we can all see how well that worked out - there's still a commie under every bed and now a terrorist to boot.

Banditry at the margins of the Empire is of no particular consequence to me, I do not fear communists nor terrorists, regime deadenders, exactly as Rumsfeld said.

Big Green Machine rolls on without them. /shrugs

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I feel the very same way about the global economy - where we differ is that you seem to think racing to the bottom is progress.

Where we differ is that, I don't think you should throw the global economy out with the bathwater, when there are no alternatives yet devised which result in more progress, and just because it's not a perfect system doesn't mean that a One World Government is going to work any better, in reality it would work a whole lot worse.

When there is a better alternative, let me know, settling for a worse state of affairs, in a lame attempt at change for the sake of change, to make me feel like I'm doing something, even when that something is clearly counter-productive to my stated goals, that isn't my cup of tea.

Change can be positive, change can be negative, change can be somewhere in between, the people who hate on free market capitalism the most, they seem to think that changing the status quo can only lead to positive outcomes, nothing could go wrong by attempting it, but I disagree. 

It's a whole lot easier to make things worse than make things better, especially when judging by the suggested alternatives to the current economic status quo.

 

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Big Green Machine rolls on without them. /shrugs

Yep, and once it rolls off the cliff /shrugs

The path to enlightenment is always a painful one - the best learned lessons in life are always the hardest one's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eyeball said:

Yep, and once it rolls off the cliff /shrugs

The path to enlightenment is always a painful one - the best learned lessons in life are always the hardest one's.

I'm hedged for that eventuality.  In the event of the collapse of King Dollah, I go from being wealthy to being rich.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Where we differ is that, I don't think you should throw the global economy out with the bathwater,

Who said I want to do that? Jesus H Christ will you please stop listening to that fucking stupid knee of your's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Indeed, however a one-world government doesn't seem like progress to me, it seems like something that will hold back progress, especially within the foreseeable future, and that's where we differ.

A "one-world" government would essentially have to function as a dictatorship. Perhaps the "basic dictatorship" Trudeau so admires would serve as the model. Corporate globalism is essentially premised on the emergence of dictatorship. Democracy is messy and inconvenient and voters, those pesky malcontents, too often vote the wrong way(!) so the solution has to be dictatorship.

For most thinking people, the idea of a globalized world order is a nightmare. Too many fail to recognize the extent to which we're already experiencing its impacts.

Edited by turningrite
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not finding the American Hegenomy to be a nightmare, quite the opposite, it's actually beyond my wildest dreams at this point, although my wildest dreams were rather modest in the grand scheme of things, things are none the less exponentially more cushy now than as it was when I was young.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Indeed, One World Government Kumbaya is already upon the Ash Heap of History, even in a distant science fiction future

What ash heap?  Kumbaya is the first thing we teach our kids in Kindergarten.

Probably best you don't send them on to St Michael College afterwards but that said St Michael would probably be the best sort of place to properly raise a sociopathic corporate CEO.

Quote

Leftist Utopian Virtue Signalling?

 

It's the virtue that really makes you right wingers projectile vomit isn't it?

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I'm not finding the American Hegenomy to be a nightmare, quite the opposite, it's actually beyond my wildest dreams at this point, although my wildest dreams were rather modest in the grand scheme of things, things are none the less exponentially more cushy now than as it was when I was young.

Not to be disrespectful here, but did you read one book and become fixated on its thesis and terminology?  It seems to me that you tend to repeat a lot of the same points, concepts and buzzwords endlessly rather than engage in constructive dialogue and debate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eyeball said:

What ash heap?  Kumbaya is the first thing we teach our kids in Kindergarten.

Probably best you don't send them on to St Michael College afterwards but that said St Michael would probably be the best sort of place to properly raise a sociopathic future CEO. 

We don't have kids, we are DINKs, we raise dogs and horses instead of kids.

If I was to be a guardian of a child for some reason, I would send that child to private school, but I'm an Orangeman, so I would send the child to St. Andrews not St. Mikes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, turningrite said:

A "one-world" government would essentially have to function as a dictatorship.  Corporate globalism is essentially premised on the emergence of dictatorship.

Who said either has to be so bloody sociopathic and self-destructive though?

Maybe we should change the education system and put people thru kindergarten at the end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Not to be disrespectful here, but did you read one book and become fixated on its thesis and terminology?  It seems to me that you tend to repeat a lot of the same points, concepts and buzzwords endlessly rather than engage in constructive dialogue and debate. 

The denizens of this forum repeat the same fallacies over and over, the response to those fallacies doesn't change. If there is some new fallacy asserted, I'll address that appropriately.

If you are somehow denying the ascendance and world domination of the American Hegenomy and the benefits which have accrued to British North American investors, that would seem to be agumentum ad absurdum to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Who said I want to do that? Jesus H Christ will you please stop listening to that fucking stupid knee of your's.

Well you remain vague on what kind of economic regulation your World Government would be doing, and until you clarify, I will simply judge based on what I've been given, which is, you want a One World Government to exist so it can regulate the economy, because you feel big corporations wield too much political influence over nation states, which until otherwise specified, reeks of World Socialist Revolution to me.

No one is stopping you from clarifying just what it is you are proposing, and until then, all we can do is try and fill in the blanks as best we can. If my impression of your beliefs is incorrect, you are free to correct the record at any time, and clear up the confusion, if you so desire.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

Well you remain vague on what kind of economic regulation your World Government would be doing, and until you clarify, I will simply judge based on what I've been given, which is, you want a One World Government to exist so it can regulate the economy, which until otherwise specified, reeks of World Socialist Revolution to me. No one is stopping you from clarifying just what it is you are proposing, and until then, all we can do is try and fill in the blanks as best we can.

You're new around here and I don't have time to bring you up to speed on where I'm coming from.

I'll simply say for starters we'd have regulate the government...to a degree that would make Orwell himself blush.

Heck just do that alone and the economy will practically regulate itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eyeball said:

You're new around here and I don't have time to bring you up to speed on where I'm coming from.

I'll simply say for starters we'd have regulate the government...to a degree that would make Orwell himself blush.

Heck just do that alone and the economy will practically regulate itself.

Not compatible with British Westminster Parliamentary Supremacy

Havana is however at your leisure to decamp to, book a ticket, fly to your Workers Paradise, anytime now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're new around here and I don't have time to bring you up to speed on where I'm coming from.

I'll simply say for starters we'd have regulate the government...to a degree that would make Orwell himself blush.

Heck just do that alone and the economy will practically regulate itself.

Well if you don't have time to bring me up to speed, then perhaps you should cut me some slack for not knowing where you are coming from.

If you want your World Government to do so much economic regulation, that it would make Orwell blush, again, that sounds like World Socialist Revolution to me, and even if it wasn't, I don't see how that is somehow preferable to the economic current status quo, there is too much regulation as it is, and you want to double down on that?

Doesn't sound like a good idea, what specific kinds of regulations are you talking about though?

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eyeball said:

I'll simply say for starters we'd have regulate the government...to a degree that would make Orwell himself blush.

And this is why I'd be as much an enemy of a communist country as I would a capitalist country.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...