this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2026
17 points (87.0% liked)

Canada

12622 readers
665 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

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


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


🌐 Other Relevant Communities


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.

  2. Provide sources when making a claim. Do your research or google it doesn't cut it. The one making the claim is responsible for backing it.

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


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I’m fairly ok with the « conclusions » of this « analysis », even if I agree with Lisée it’s an important reminder that he advocates for a wall at the Roxham Road and some Trumpist idea about how to handle migrants there which he said as a panelist for Radio-Canada in a high viewership tv spot. He kept his place despite a massive complains against him.

He [Lisée]also stressed that Quebec's sovereigntist parties have historically been social-democrat,[..]

This is also factually not true anymore. PSPP advocates conservative policies against Trans people and migrants, he promise Police Fraternities more money and cut into the social net. He hinted privatizing some health programs to relieve wait time and expand the two speeds healthcare Quebec system. The only time I’ve seen him advocate ecological law was to explain that the Independence will help us draft our own ecological laws which he never explained what they will be if we achieve independence. And let’s not start about how they treat First Nations Councils.

all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] supersquirrel@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Everybody is obsessed with a cowboy vision of the world that when things get tough you need to pull away from everyone and become entirely self reliant. In every apocalypse movie or show it is the people willing to reach out and trust people that are violently obliterated leaving only the silent, lone square jawed man to carry on the torch.

It always has been and always will be a dangerous fantasy.

[–] Subscript5676@piefed.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's a bit of an need-this-off-my-chest in making this comment, but I really abhor the thinking that we live in a world where it's every person for themselves, and so we should focus on just taking care of ourselves and others will sort of just take care of themselves. Those who step out of that lane are bound to be taken advantage of, and end up bringing ruin to themselves and those they love, and so anyone who does so are naive, idiots, or both. Honest and kind people never get what they want or need, and never achieve anything meaningful in life, because they'd be spending time for others when they could be spending those times on themselves.

And these sort of thinking seems to be pretty universal. It doesn't matter it's America, some country in Europe, or even in Asia.

To a lot of these people, this is the truth of the world and its rules. Anyone who doesn't follow are simply unaccepting of the truth, that the world is a cruel place and so we should be ruthlessly focused on the self. When a friend is about to make the wrong decision, it's their choice and that it should be respected, and they shall deal with those consequences, and maybe I'll help if I decide that I have the time and energy for it.

I... just hate such a world. Why must we go at the hardships of life all alone? Sure, we can't solve the world's and everyone else's problems, and especially when our own plate is full, and the feeling of just watching someone else suffer and not being able to do anything gives us a strong feeling of guilt and shame, and that sucks, and it can ruin our day or week and thus make it harder for us to solve our own problems. But it doesn't mean that each person should be the sole person to be responsible for their own happiness; we should all share an amount of responsibility in everyone else's happiness. Maybe that way, we'd all feel a lot less lonely in this world that's chock full of people.

A person decided to go on a murdering spree. Retribution as justice may help some victims find peace, and serve as a warning to others who dare emulate, but it doesn't address the root of the problem: why did they decide to kill? Some news coverage will end up digging up some tragic backstory, but we rarely seem to try to do things to prevent those tragic back stories to exist in the first place. Restorative justice is a good direction for future prevention, but I believe we need to be able to recognize the seeds that lead to tragedy and find ways to minimize their reproduction. Law and Order enforced through an iron fist will only hold for as long as the fist is still held. A society that knows how to reach out to others to help others before they succumb to hopelessness and crime, by fostering trust between people, seems fragile and reliant on honesty that's difficult to prove, but would that not maintain Law and Order for longer, given that embers are generally identified early on and be safely handled?

I've yapped. Sorry for just dumping a long reply on your comment.

[–] supersquirrel@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Great comment, I am here for the rant you are 100% right

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

We can compare them but Quebec wins every time.