this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
148 points (84.6% liked)

Canada

10430 readers
797 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Candid_Andy@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 hours ago (2 children)
[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 minutes ago

yeah see the thing about this is that most people would say that good stuff

but good people don't also say the bad stuff

and anybody who thinks somebody is good solely because they said some good stuff is a fucking idiot, you have to consider the bad and change your view accordingly (like hopefully that woman did). but most maga nutjobs aren't rn, they just ignore what they don't like

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 hours ago

You cannot be a good person and a nazi, you are still a nazi.

[–] evan03@lemmy.ca 15 points 12 hours ago
[–] Fourth@mander.xyz 17 points 13 hours ago

What the fuck is that

[–] Alloi@lemmy.world 43 points 17 hours ago

can we stop applauding nazis in parliment for gods sake.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 25 points 16 hours ago

Propaganda works, y’all. It’s serious.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 71 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (3 children)

Misleading title. Yes, Charlie Kirk's assassination sparked a conversation about the importance of free speech and disavowing political violence. The standing ovation was not for Charlie, but for the outcome of that speech.

Still, you'd think they'd at least TRY to be reasonable with the optics of the conversation.

[–] teemrokit@lemmy.world 37 points 18 hours ago

But isn't what Kirk did constitute as hate speech here in Canada. We don't have freedom of speech, we have freedom of expression.

He didn't deserve to die but he was toxic in every sense of the word.

[–] BurgerBaron@piefed.social 6 points 13 hours ago

They don't seem interested in optics given their other clown behaviour of inviting PJ2025 galaxy brains to speak behind closrd doors.

Canada didn't cancel on them from backlash. The garbage people they invited did.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 19 points 17 hours ago

I hope somebody is keeping a list of all these people because it's straight up a list of fascists.

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 35 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Me when I read the headline: DAFUQ

Me when I read the article: oh, ok.

Me when I realized it was yahoo: God damn me for falling for click bait.

[–] epicstove@lemmy.ca 8 points 18 hours ago

Thr moment I saw thr link I thought "This has GOT to be really shitty bait."

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 56 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Conservative MP for Lethbridge Rachel Thomas pays tribute to Charlie Kirk in the House of Commons, calls for the defence of free speech and against political violence. She gets a standing ovation from the Conservatives and the Liberals.

Emphasis mine.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 hour ago

So a Canadian talks about defence of free speech when we don't even have free speech as a right. We have limits on what we can say.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 31 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you. Thst makes more sense but the optics still aren't good.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 15 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

That's right. If they had not mentioned him or mentioned a few examples, him among them, that would have made the optics very different.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 6 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

Problem with that though is their intention was specifically him. You're removing their motive from this by saying they could have not talked about him. Their motive was him. Honoring him. Lionizing him. Making a ~~murder~~ martyr of him. You can't take away the motive.

[–] KanadrAllegria@lemmy.ca 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I think someone already made a murder of him. Maybe the word you meant was martyr?

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Damn voice to text, thanks.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 19 hours ago

... in relation to the death of a fascist

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 53 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

Why the fuck is our supposedly liberal government giving standard ovations to conservative pundits? What do they hope to accomplish by pushing this rhetoric? Right wingers will never see this and think “wow maybe I’ll vote liberal next election” you fucking idiots. I hate everything.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 27 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

That's cause our liberals have been moving further right. Carney himself is pretty much an old school conservative.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 19 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Liberalism is inherently a right wing political ideology. It uses socially progressive issues for the working class to promote financial and commercial policies that benefit the ruling class.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

The benefit also being increasing their power over the rest of society by means of exercising control over their assets and public institutions staffed by likeminded people. For example by buying news media and shifting focus away from those same issues that provide those benefits.

E: Saw headlines about a couple of rumors - David Ellison buying CNN and Larry Ellison buying TikTok. The first is the same Ellison who bought CBS via Paramount and is planning to install Bari Weiss as head of news. The second is his dad, Oracle owner and a top 3 richest person in the world.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 12 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

15-20 years ago, Carney's platform would be PC, and Polieverre's failed platform would have been a joke.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 7 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Yup. Exactly. And ndp is just in the corner shitting the bed

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Maybe if all the “strategic voters” had even a little bit of a spine. “I prefer the NDP but I need to vote NDP! Hey, why does the NDP not get any support?!”

How many Canadians flatly refuse to vote for what they believe while being mad that the government isn’t reading their minds? We aggressively signal that we do not want the NDP and then get mad that they aren’t the thing we keep showing them that we do not want. Get a clue.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Sorry I'm a xis make the current NDP doesn't want me there is no fucking way I'm voting for them.

[–] dom@lemmy.ca 4 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

If this is such a systemic problem that it alters elections, the problem is with the system.

The individuals are doing a risk/benefit assessment at a micro level. It is more damaging for them to have a conservative government than it is for them to have a liberal government and that may weigh more to them than the incredibly slim possibility of having an ndp government.

You cant penalize people for picking what is in their best interest. And they can still be pissed off that the best choice they had still led to a shitty outcome.

If you want something different, the system needs to change.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

NO!!!!!

Kirk wasn't a 'conservative pundit,' he was a bigot, a homophobe, a white supremacist, a sexist piece of shit who cheered on the deaths of others.

Make it clear: he was a source of hatred and violence.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 6 points 16 hours ago

Potato potato.

[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 7 points 16 hours ago

Canadian politicians have never heard of this thing called "optics" before. It's a very isolated and fart-sniffing group of people

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 29 points 22 hours ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Sharing a post from Skeletor 🙄

[–] Bonus@lemmy.ca 17 points 21 hours ago

Why the F does anyone in Canada think they need to capitulate to the absolute worst of America? This is beyond pathetic.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 11 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

There was two mentions of Charlie Kirk, in a speech that I'd say was focused on condemning political violence, in a mostly non-partisan way. I'd like to think that in Canada we're above using weapons to prove a point. If we need to beat back the intolerant we'll do it in an enormous show of non-violent force like Torontonians just did at Christie Pits.

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2025/09/15/police-outline-charges-after-numerous-arrests-at-opposing-immigration-rallies-at-christie-pits/

Anyway the speech is what I'd expect from a Conservative, but it's nuanced enough that I get behind the primary message being conveyed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 12 points 21 hours ago

What the fuck

[–] LaserTurboShark69@sh.itjust.works 12 points 22 hours ago

It's all so performative

load more comments
view more: next ›