PDA

View Full Version : Left vs Right - Cost Of Bilingualism - RCMP not Law Makers



Right Edition
03-31-2014, 07:59 PM
http://youtu.be/Iap_BrktSvQ

Left vs Right - Cost Of Bilingualism - RCMP not Law Makers

I'm often asked versions of the following: Given that the political right is so corrupted by conservatives who seek to limit liberty in countless ways, wouldn't it be better to abandon the language of "left" vs. "right" and adopt new terminology?

My answer is that, because the terms "left" and "right" are already widely used to denote the basic political alternative, and because that alternative is in fact binary, the best approach for advocates of freedom is not to reject the prevalent terminology but to clarify it—by defining the relevant terms.
The problem with conventional approaches to the left-right political spectrum is that they either fail to define the alternatives in question, or proceed to define them in terms of non-essentials.

One common approach, for instance, fails to specify the precise nature of either side, yet proceeds to place communism, socialism, and modern "liberalism" on (or toward) the left—and fascism, conservatism, and capitalism on (or toward) the right.

This makes no sense, at least in terms of the right. Capitalism—the social system of individual rights, property rights, and personal liberty—has nothing in common with conservatism or fascism. Take them in turn.

more at http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2012/06/political-left-and-right-properly-defined/

Cost Of Bilingualism

Ottawa spends $1.5 billion a year on official bilingualism, and that's a conservative estimate.

It includes the cost of printing laws and government forms in both French and English, and offering bilingual service at federal offices and courts. It covers the budget of the federal language nannies at the official languages office. And it includes training civil servants to speak both languages and paying them bonuses for doing so, plus ad campaigns extolling the glories of bilingualism.

But it doesn't include the $900 million spent by the provinces or the hundreds of millions more spent by private companies to comply with federal and provincial language regulations.

Given that the Official Languages Act is now more than 40 years old, it is not much of a stretch to conclude that Canadians have spent more than $80 billion (in 2012 dollars) — maybe a lot more — on promoting and enforcing our phony linguistic duality.

It's time this expensive experiment in social engineering was ended.

As 2011 census figures on language revealed this week, all the money and effort expended has achieved almost nothing. Whereas about 14% of Canadians claimed to be bilingual on the 1971 census, last year just 17% did. And the rise over 40 years has been almost all from francophones who learned English because they wanted to or because they felt they had to to succeed.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/10/26/time-to-bid-official-bilingualism-adieu-we-canadians-are-finding-our-own-language-levels-without-the-help-of-bureaucratic-language-monitors

RCMP

Even if you think it's a good thing that a line of scary looking Swiss rifles are now banned in Canada, it should really scare you that they were arbitrarily declared illegal by police, not Parliament. It is a dark day when police, not the people's elected representatives, can suddenly transform thousands of ordinary, law-abiding Canadians into criminals with the stroke of a bureaucratic pen.

Last week, Mounties declared a list of Swiss-made, military-looking rifles to be "prohibited." The banned models had been sold legally in Canada since 2000 and as many as 13,000 Canadians own one or more.

Like many Swiss commodities, such as watches and chocolates, these well-made firearms are high-end items costing $3,000 to $4,000 or more.

Initially the word was that as of 10 p.m. Eastern time last Thursday, these guns were to be surrendered to the government without compensation. Firearms shop owners, who had them in inventory, likewise were expected to turn over their stock to the government which would not pay for the property it was confiscating. (The federal government announced Monday a five-year amnesty for owners of the Swiss rifles, saying they won't face the threat of criminal charges.)
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/05/rmps-arbitrary-gun-ban-is-frightening

Swampdonkey
03-31-2014, 08:11 PM
Great piece, thanks for posting.

Foxer
03-31-2014, 09:40 PM
the best approach for advocates of freedom is not to reject the prevalent terminology but to clarify it—by defining the relevant terms.

I dunno - sounds like "goodspeak" to me.

Waterloomike
04-01-2014, 03:55 AM
We have some very different versions of fascism available.


World English Dictionary
fascism (ˈfæʃɪzəm)

— n
1. any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any right-wing nationalist ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism
2. any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc
3. prejudice in relation to the subject specified: body fascism

[C20: from Italian fascismo , from fascio political group, from Latin fascis bundle; see fasces ]




1.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3.
( initial capital letter ) a political movement that employs the principles and methods of fascism, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

As it stands today, it could be any government that is overly authoritarian.

Trudeau the elder, certainly set us on the path of fascism and we have not made much effort to get off that path.

I don't associate fascism with any economic system because authoritarianism doesn't care who it rules or how. It seems to be indiscriminate in Canada.

The version of liberalism in Canada, or indeed the world, is authoritarianism and has zero to do with actually being liberal.

Foxer
04-01-2014, 08:37 AM
We have some very different versions of fascism available.


Good point, well made. Traditionally, 'facism' has also required the willingness to use force to obtain power or promote it's agenda/beliefs. Honestly, based on the definitions other than the direct reference to 'right wing' 'fascism' sure sounds more like a left wing concept than a right wing one.

Waterloomike
04-01-2014, 10:07 AM
Good point, well made. Traditionally, 'facism' has also required the willingness to use force to obtain power or promote it's agenda/beliefs. Honestly, based on the definitions other than the direct reference to 'right wing' 'fascism' sure sounds more like a left wing concept than a right wing one.

I'm guessing that the right wing governments of south and central america gave the leftys their excuse to tag the right with that.

but the original fascists were socialists. Which is anathema to any one desirous of Free enterprise or Freedom at all.

This is in no way a criticism of Right Edition's post.

Right Edition
04-01-2014, 12:19 PM
Thank you. When police can create and enforce their own laws I believe were are talking police state

Waterloomike
04-01-2014, 12:30 PM
Thank you. When police can create and enforce their own laws I believe were are talking police state

Always a pleasure and never a problem. :)

Yes, we have a police state. There can be no doubt.

It remains to be seen how quickly they will ramp up their controls.

When they take aim at new pariah classes, then the screaming will start.

But for now, we're an easy target.

Rory McCanuck
04-01-2014, 01:46 PM
I'm guessing that the right wing governments of south and central america gave the leftys their excuse to tag the right with that.

but the original fascists were socialists. Which is anathema to any one desirous of Free enterprise or Freedom at all.

This is in no way a criticism of Right Edition's post.

I remember a very good description from my Grage 12 Economics teaher.
Rather than thinking of it as a line, and placing groups to left or right of center, think of it as more of a circle.
As the opposite ends start to get more and more extreme, the more they start to look the same.
Finally, you end up with a dictatorial system, where everything is done by and for the state.

Waterloomike
04-01-2014, 03:43 PM
I remember a very good description from my Grage 12 Economics teaher.
Rather than thinking of it as a line, and placing groups to left or right of center, think of it as more of a circle.
As the opposite ends start to get more and more extreme, the more they start to look the same.
Finally, you end up with a dictatorial system, where everything is done by and for the state.

Or perhaps even an organ of the state, such as the rcmp. Like you said "finally".

Fascism isn't born as a fully formed monolithic monster.

Should it enter with rcmp boots, it's policies and culture will creep into other orgs by 'suggestion'.

Waterloomike
04-01-2014, 03:46 PM
Oh and to demonstrate just how skewed some of the leftys can be with their definitions, Pinochet has been described as a libertarian.

What a crock! He was a homicidal megalomaniac that craved power and nothing else.

Swampdonkey
04-03-2014, 06:42 PM
Pinochet was economically libertarian, and while harsh, did lose his office in a democratic election.

Waterloomike
04-04-2014, 12:14 PM
Pinochet was economically libertarian, and while harsh, did lose his office in a democratic election.

At best it had 'some' elements if a libertarian economy, which can be said of many economies. Banks were nationalised, the copper industry remained nationalised. He also cut a lot of slack for his buddies. None of which are elements of libertarian economics.