Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Syncretic Party - New political group


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, taxme said:

It's interesting how the elite and the Queen work together to screw we the people. Working with the UN is a crime against humanity in itself. The UN has never solved anything. They only screw things up more. For the Queen to side with the enemy, the UN, is a crime. I wish that the UN would be abolished. That is what I wish for. Maybe my wish will come true. :D

We elite and our Queen stand against the forces of darkness in defence of the light of civilization itself.  Come and take this crown from our cold dead hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you su

I have a few questions. Nice web site. Grats on at least putting your thoughts and policies out there vs a lot of hazy babblethought from most parties. Syncretic means neither political left nor

It seems they want to do better by being even more involved in their vision of micro-managing the economy taking the "best" from the New Democrats and nationalizing industries and the "best" from the

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

We elite and our Queen stand against the forces of darkness in defence of the light of civilization itself.  Come and take this crown from our cold dead hands.

It may have to happen one day. Hey, you never know, eh? :D So far, the Queen and the elite have shown that they are not there for nor are interested in we the people or civilization but are only there for themselves to get richer and remain and hold control and power over we the people and all at our expense of course.  Just saying. 

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

It may have to happen one day. Hey, you never know, eh? :D So far, the Queen and the elite have shown that they are not there for nor are interested in we the people or civilization but are only there for themselves to get richer and remain and hold control and power over we the people and all at our expense of course.  Just saying. 

Not too worried about it at this juncture.  When the fascists resolve to take some sort of action against the interests of the Crown, we will pounce and they will be dealt with. 

In the meantime, you enjoy the protection of the British Crown, although Canada does have laws rendering fascism a crime, I do not enforce those laws, as I find them to be unconstitutional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 2:48 PM, SyncreticParty said:

This is somewhat difficult to answer. The purpose of organizing something like a political party is so that individuals with common beliefs can band together to take action in what they believe in. At the same time, Canadians vote for political parties because they feel those political parties best serve their interests. If you are an elected member of Syncretic, you obviously have to believe in the core values. It isn't necessary for you to agree with everything but you must believe in the core values. In addition, as elected members its important that you represent the best interests of your constituents and if they (cons.) voice their beliefs the elected members should listen. That being said, we believe that one of the bigger issues with "democracy" is that sometimes people are not informed. Nuclear power was new technology in the 50s and it was something that would have revolutionized our societies. People like the member "Rue" have a misconception about nuclear power. If we had pursued it aggressively, this whole climate change/global warming issues would have never occurred. The main people fighting it were environmentalist backed by the oil industry. Ironic.

To give your question a more direct answer, it's more important for us for the constituents to be represented than to whip votes since the core values of the Syncretic Party is based around "Canadians and Country first, always".
https://www.syncretic.ca/aboutus-ourvision

https://www.syncretic.ca/aboutus-commitment

 

Yes. We believe you are either Canadian or you are not. We think many of the Acts surrounding First Nations need to be reworked. We want a unified country, under the same flag. We don't believe anyone should get special treatment. The issue is that it is a very sensitive topic. We think it's something that needs to be addressed gradually, starting with accountability:

https://www.syncretic.ca/first-nations-accountability

Maxime (m not n) Bernier is Libertarian-lite. He is against net neutrality and he believes that climate change/environment is something that should be left up to the provinces. While we believe his heart is in the right place for many things, his view points on some issues are fundamentally at odds with the greater good. As a libertarian-lite, he believes in free markets and minimal government. Are you okay with the government reducing/abolishing standards and safety guidelines in the name of profit? We are not interested in going back to lead paint and asbestos in buildings.

We're looking to change this. The truth should never be blasphemy.

https://www.syncretic.ca/immigration

https://www.syncretic.ca/immigration-irregular-immigrants

https://www.syncretic.ca/immigration-cost-and-quota

It's one of our main topics but the issue is no one seems to be interested in supporting us. It's unfortunate that so many Canadians are upset with the status quo, but refuse to pitch even a single dollar in helping someone, anyone, to change the system. Look at how many people have viewed this thread and responded. If each one of them had donated even 1 dollar, we would have more momentum to try and change things. We've come to find that Canadians love to complain but hate taking action.

Thanks to everyone for your input.

 

In my earlier post I asked if you were going to have a whip. You evaded the question that tells me the answer is yes. Making you no better than the garbage we have now.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hates politicians said:

In my earlier post I asked if you were going to have a whip. You evaded the question that tells me the answer is yes. Making you no better than the garbage we have now.

 

He also didn't answer my question about outlawing in-camera lobbying.

Maybe he didn't understand the question. You see that a lot from politicians but what's scary is how many constituents also won't touch that question with a 10 foot pole, specially fans of mainstream political parties.

I'm convinced the vast majority of people really don't care or believe in-escapble accountability is possible. The have been ample opportunities to make it almost impossible for corruption to occur and yet....here we are, again.

I'm half convinced a critical mass of voters of all stripes probably believe democracy is impossible without corruption and that is a necessary ingredient of any government system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hates politicians said:

In my earlier post I asked if you were going to have a whip. You evaded the question that tells me the answer is yes. Making you no better than the garbage we have now.

 

The question was not evaded. It was answered - see bold and underlined:

On 2/9/2019 at 2:48 PM, SyncreticParty said:

This is somewhat difficult to answer. The purpose of organizing something like a political party is so that individuals with common beliefs can band together to take action in what they believe in. At the same time, Canadians vote for political parties because they feel those political parties best serve their interests. If you are an elected member of Syncretic, you obviously have to believe in the core values. It isn't necessary for you to agree with everything but you must believe in the core values. In addition, as elected members its important that you represent the best interests of your constituents and if they (cons.) voice their beliefs the elected members should listen. That being said, we believe that one of the bigger issues with "democracy" is that sometimes people are not informed. Nuclear power was new technology in the 50s and it was something that would have revolutionized our societies. People like the member "Rue" have a misconception about nuclear power. If we had pursued it aggressively, this whole climate change/global warming issues would have never occurred. The main people fighting it were environmentalist backed by the oil industry. Ironic.

To give your question a more direct answer, it's more important for us for the constituents to be represented than to whip votes since the core values of the Syncretic Party is based around "Canadians and Country first, always".
https://www.syncretic.ca/aboutus-ourvision

https://www.syncretic.ca/aboutus-commitment

 

If you'd like a more direct answer: NO. Our party will not whip votes.

 

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

He also didn't answer my question about outlawing in-camera lobbying.

Maybe he didn't understand the question. You see that a lot from politicians but what's scary is how many constituents also won't touch that question with a 10 foot pole, specially fans of mainstream political parties.

I'm convinced the vast majority of people really don't care or believe in-escapble accountability is possible. The have been ample opportunities to make it almost impossible for corruption to occur and yet....here we are, again.

I'm half convinced a critical mass of voters of all stripes probably believe democracy is impossible without corruption and that is a necessary ingredient of any government system.

This question was also answered - see bold and underlined:

On 1/23/2019 at 12:22 AM, SyncreticParty said:

One of our mandates will be to increase transparency and accountability. We agree with you and we do not intend for any back rooming dealing.

If you'd like a more direct answer: NO. Our party will not meet in secret/private with lobbyists.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SyncreticParty said:

This question was also answered - see bold and underlined:

If you'd like a more direct answer: NO. Our party will not meet in secret/private with lobbyists.

I'll believe it when I see it. When I fish for example the black box digital video record of all fishing activity on the boat is audited and further validated by log-book entries and human observers.

The only thing you'd need to promise, the only thing you'd need to campaign on would be that you promise to pass a rigorous piece of legislation that outlaws in-camera lobbying.

Say you'll outlaw in-camera lobbying of politicians here in this forum - use those precise words.  Consult with your peers and associates if you must before doing so. Also spell it out unambiguously in your media releases and brochures and I'll send you $1000 and start campaigning for you. I'm quite certain I can get several of my friends to campaign for you on that basis too so....

The promise is in your court.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, eyeball said:

I'll believe it when I see it. When I fish for example the black box digital video record of all fishing activity on the boat is audited and further validated by log-book entries and human observers.

The only thing you'd need to promise, the only thing you'd need to campaign on would be that you promise to pass a rigorous piece of legislation that outlaws in-camera lobbying.

Say you'll outlaw in-camera lobbying of politicians here in this forum - use those precise words.  Consult with your peers and associates if you must before doing so. Also spell it out unambiguously in your media releases and brochures and I'll send you $1000 and start campaigning for you. I'm quite certain I can get several of my friends to campaign for you on that basis too so....

The promise is in your court.

Will you have a whip or not? Simple question. Not yes, we have a whip but we  won't use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Hates politicians said:

Will you have a whip or not? Simple question. Not yes, we have a whip but we  won't use it.

Already answered. If you scroll up you will see our response, which was quoted below:

16 hours ago, SyncreticParty said:

If you'd like a more direct answer: NO. Our party will not whip votes.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, eyeball said:

I'll believe it when I see it. When I fish for example the black box digital video record of all fishing activity on the boat is audited and further validated by log-book entries and human observers.

The only thing you'd need to promise, the only thing you'd need to campaign on would be that you promise to pass a rigorous piece of legislation that outlaws in-camera lobbying.

Say you'll outlaw in-camera lobbying of politicians here in this forum - use those precise words.  Consult with your peers and associates if you must before doing so. Also spell it out unambiguously in your media releases and brochures and I'll send you $1000 and start campaigning for you. I'm quite certain I can get several of my friends to campaign for you on that basis too so....

The promise is in your court.

Please stand by. We're updating our website and twitter accordingly and will post here with those precise words some time later today. We would appreciate you (and your friends) joining as members as well, since we're seeking registered status. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Hates politicians said:

Will you have a whip or not? Simple question. Not yes, we have a whip but we  won't use it.

I could care less about whips. Like most of the things about our system that piss people off I'm quite certain whips would also fade to insignificance in a world where lobbying in-camera was outlawed.

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

Please stand by. We're updating our website and twitter accordingly and will post here with those precise words some time later today. We would appreciate you (and your friends) joining as members as well, since we're seeking registered status. 

Don't forget the press release and brochures.

I would also really advise your party drop it's apparent focus on native transparency otherwise a number of my friends will not be interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2019 at 12:12 PM, Dougie93 said:

Not too worried about it at this juncture.  When the fascists resolve to take some sort of action against the interests of the Crown, we will pounce and they will be dealt with. 

In the meantime, you enjoy the protection of the British Crown, although Canada does have laws rendering fascism a crime, I do not enforce those laws, as I find them to be unconstitutional.

So tell me Mr. Crown man, just who are these fascists anyway that you speak of? Please explain.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, eyeball said:

He also didn't answer my question about outlawing in-camera lobbying.

Maybe he didn't understand the question. You see that a lot from politicians but what's scary is how many constituents also won't touch that question with a 10 foot pole, specially fans of mainstream political parties.

I'm convinced the vast majority of people really don't care or believe in-escapble accountability is possible. The have been ample opportunities to make it almost impossible for corruption to occur and yet....here we are, again.

I'm half convinced a critical mass of voters of all stripes probably believe democracy is impossible without corruption and that is a necessary ingredient of any government system.

We the people must first ask the question as to who is really pulling the strings of our media and our dear leader politicians? All political party's appear to dance to the same tune of political correctness. They are all for more massive immigration, more foreign aid, more multiculturalism, and more of socialism and communism. They also appear to be in favor of more government, more taxes and less freedom. How can we the people get anywhere when we are being controlled by unpatriotic politicians and media who appear to only serve the globalist zionist international banker elite.

The Syncretic Party will probably be no different. The party will be taken over by someone from the elite very quickly if they appear to be making any kind of headway against the elite. It's a matter of fact. With so many party's being created in Canada today the division of we the people will become even greater and the two many non patriotic political party's in Canada will always rule. We the people will always end up like the pawns on a chessboard. They are there to protect the king and queen elite from getting checkmated. We the people are just expected to pay your taxes and shut the hell up. What a deal for we the people, eh? :unsure: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Don't forget the press release and brochures.

I would also really advise your party drop it's apparent focus on native transparency otherwise a number of my friends will not be interested.

Press releases and brochures once we get to the point where we can do that. Native transparency: Can you elaborate? Anytime tax payer money is involved we need transparency and accountability. Whether it is first nations related or not is irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SyncreticParty said:

Press releases and brochures once we get to the point where we can do that. Native transparency: Can you elaborate? Anytime tax payer money is involved we need transparency and accountability. Whether it is first nations related or not is irrelevant.

You sure make it appear relevant when you talk about (re)instating a First Nations Transparency act in your platform.  Accountability is the first thing you see when you click on the First Nations page on your website.

All you need is one Transparency Act for the senior-most levels of the senior-most powerful government in Canada.  The rest will follow suit because they simply won't have any choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, taxme said:

So tell me Mr. Crown man, just who are these fascists anyway that you speak of? Please explain.  

By logical inference, those who are calling for the Canadian Forces to forsake their oaths and violate national and international law and the laws of armed conflict, to make war upon United Nations protected persons, in the name of a Canadian de jure ethno-nationalist state,

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eyeball said:

You sure make it appear relevant when you talk about (re)instating a First Nations Transparency act in your platform.  Accountability is the first thing you see when you click on the First Nations page on your website.

All you need is one Transparency Act for the senior-most levels of the senior-most powerful government in Canada.  The rest will follow suit because they simply won't have any choice.

Most Canadians see them as separate things so we need to present it as such. This way it is 100% clear regarding our stance. From a legislative aspect, we could have one transparency act. For the purpose of outlining our platform, we call out accountability and transparency for each category on our website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...