HonoredMule

joined 11 months ago
[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I wouldn't worry about that. Getting by presidential veto requires a two-thirds vote.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I, a colonizer by birth and person of average shittiness, care deeply about the environment, because I live in it. I'd have to be profiting pretty obscenely from destroying humanity's future to budge that balance of self-interest. But as a regular working-class person, nothing I earn in my entire lifetime could possibly outweigh -- nor secure -- personal access to clean air and water, healthy food, and the natural beauty of our land.

In this context, the only distinction I see between myself and a "noble savage" is that indigenous people have, if anything, a stronger and more legitimate sovereign claim to Canadian territory (along with a tradition of more direct reliance on it). Why wouldn't they care? And maybe they don't care more than anyone else, especially relative to how they're personally impacted. But whether from care or convenience, they are vastly over-represented among the people that actually show up and put their bodies on the line opposing environmental destruction. They're 5% of our population, yet as best I can estimate a plurality across front lines nationwide.

With the billionaire class consistently getting to do whatever they want to the planet, it's very easy to forget: Even in the face of so much pro-business propaganda permeating our media, environmental protection is actually one of the areas where the rest of the world is not very divided at all.

Besides...the more "civilization" I see, the more attractive the label "savage" becomes.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

To what extent? Do we have an issue with Reuters or AP now? How about Canadian commentators like Steve Boots on foreign YouTube?

I'm having a hard time envisioning a rule around this that can be enforced equitably, but we can equitably reject content regardless of source, based on established merits of its substance.

 

If you don't want accusations "going there" (despite constantly doing it to the other parties yourselves with groundless, disingenuous FUD), don't lead the way with your own actions. You, Danielle Smith, have thoroughly disgraced yourself, as does Lisa Raitt and any other double-speaking conservative apologist trying to gaslight away a bald-faced plea for foreign interference.

You asked a foreign -- and currently hostile -- government to act in a manner benefitting your preferred party's electoral outcome. By extension, you implicitly acknowledged that doing otherwise is demonstrating to voters why your guy shouldn't win, and that you want breathing room so voter attention can be redirected. You even sold it in a manner that implied stronger influence over Canada at best, and outright quid pro quo at worst -- literal collusion from our highest office with a hostile foreign entity against Canada.

Neither option so much as entertains the possibility Poilievre could actually be fit to defend Canada's national interests. That's why you like him, isn't it? What is Canada to you but an obstacle to your Oil & Gas masters? Every word of that interview carried layers damning all that Poilievre's CPC and your UCP represent, from values to character to political objectives to even basic loyalty to your own nation and for that matter the ecological future of the planet itself.

I didn't think there could be a Canadian politician worse than Poilievre, yet here you are and this incident is all about you, Smith.

You put yourself on tape directly confessing and doing far worse than everything you and the entire Conservative movement have managed to conjure as insinuations against everyone else combined. You literally betrayed our entire nation for a chance at personal gain. If there's any coming back from that at all, then my faith in the basic cognitive capacity of our average Canadian voter is seriously shaken.

If no laws were broken, there will be new ones named after you.

Resign.
Emigrate.
Shred your passport.
You have no business standing on Canadian soil.