Goldtent TA Paradise

ANALYSIS : IS CANADA REALLY DECISIVELY A LEFT WING COUNTRY ?

1. Fullgoldcrown says:

   April 30, 2023 - 8:39 pm at 8:39 pm

   Is Canada a left-wing country?

   That’s what we are often told.

   It’s almost considered ‘conventional wisdom’ in Canadian political circles – especially among those who would benefit the most from that perception like the Liberals/NDP and the media.

   But is it true?

   A new poll gives us some clues as to the answer.

   The Leger polling firm asked Canadians how they would vote if there was an official Liberal-NDP alliance in which they agreed not to run candidates against each other.

   In such a scenario, every riding would feature a Conservative candidate facing off against either a Liberal or NDP candidate, but never both.

   Here’s how Canadians responded:

   41% said they would vote for the Liberal/NDP alliance.

   39% said they would vote Conservative.

   8% said they would vote for the Bloc.

   6% said they would vote Green.

   3% said they would vote PPC.

   3% said they would vote ‘other’.

   If we add up the ‘left-wing’ parties (Lib/NDP/Green), you get to 47% of the vote, less than half the country.

   If you add up the ‘right-wing’ parties (CPC/PPC), you get to 42%.

   The question of the Bloc is interesting, since they are a mix of nationalists, decentralists, statists, cultural conservatives, and secularists. The Bloc often favours ‘big government’ but in the context of Quebec being left alone, reducing federal government power, and then imposing state-chosen values, though those values often tend to be more individualist – with the exception of language laws.

   As strange as it seems, an informal Conservative-Bloc agreement may very well take place after the next federal election.

   If the Conservatives win the most seats but fall short of a majority, and if there are more Conservative + Bloc seats than Liberal + NDP seats, the Conservatives could govern with tacit Bloc support in return for giving Quebec further autonomy.

   That is actually more likely than the Bloc working with the Liberals/NDP.

   So, while acknowledging that the Bloc doesn’t really fit into a neat ‘right-left’ paradigm, let’s put it with the CPC and PPC for now to illustrate a point.

   In the scenario of a Liberal-NDP alliance, the CPC/PPC/Bloc vote equals exactly 50%.

   To further consider the implications of this, let’s look at the current federal standings in the latest Leger poll.

   36% say they will vote Conservative.

   30% say they will vote Liberal.

   19% say they will vote NDP.

   7% say they will vote Bloc.

   4% say they will vote Green.

   2% say they will vote PPC.

   1% say they will vote ‘Other’.

   Most notable is that the combined Liberal-NDP vote is 49% when they are considered separately, but that it falls to 41% when they are considered together.

   The Conservative vote rises from 36% to 39%, the Bloc vote rises from 7% to 8%, the Green vote rises from 4% to 6%, the PPC vote rises from 2% to 3%, and the ‘other’ vote rises from 1% to 3%.

   This shows that a hypothetical Liberal-NDP alliances loses votes to the Conservatives, the Bloc, the Greens, and even the PPC.

   What does this mean?

   It means that there are a significant number of Canadians who are currently voting Liberal & NDP who don’t consider themselves as left-wing and will recoil from the prospect of an explicitly left-wing alliance.

   Now, given the way in which both the Liberals & NDP have shifted in a more and more authoritarian socialist direction, it can be hard to fathom that many Canadians still see either party as ‘centrist’ or ‘moderate,’ but this only shows the power of branding and historical momentum.

   The Liberals often were a centrist party. At times in the past, they were more in favour of economic freedom and individual liberty than the Conservatives were. Both Paul Martin and Michael Ignatieff were far more pro-capitalist and pro-fiscal responsibility than Justin Trudeau. Many pro-business Canadians are still holding on to the idea that the Liberals are their party, despite all evidence to the contrary. The brand still exists in the minds of many Canadians.

   Likewise, the NDP – especially in the Prairies – was often the party of working-class people and had respect for more traditional values and the importance of real, tangible work. Many saw the NDP as the party that represented regular Canadians, compared to the Liberals representing the ‘elites.’ While the NDP has abandoned such things under Jagmeet Singh, some still haven’t caught up with that yet.

   However, when – as the Leger question does – Liberals are forced to really think of their party as left-wing, and when NDP supporters are forced to think of their party as ‘the same as the Liberals,’ a significant number go elsewhere.

   Clearly, Canada is increasingly divided politically and ideologically. Trudeau has lost support in every election since 2015 for a clear reason: The more he governs, the more obvious it is that he’s a socialist, not an old-school Liberal.

   It’s no coincidence that Singh & Trudeau are having to work together, because their agenda is deeply unpopular with many Canadians.

   About half the country – give or take – wants to see Canada shift to the right (though to varying degrees).

   There is no way we can look at these results and conclude any longer that Canada is a left-wing nation.

   Other polls – focused on the parties as they are currently constituted rather than hypothetical scenarios – are also showing a relatively consistent picture.

   The Conservatives lead the Liberals 34% to 31% in the latest Nanos Research survey.

   The latest Ipsos right track/wrong track survey shows 61% saying Canada is on the wrong track, compared to 39% saying it’s on the right track.

   The numbers on the same question in a Morning Consult poll are nearly identical, with 62% saying “wrong track” and 38% saying “right track”.

   Finally, when it comes to Justin Trudeau’s approval rating in the latest Morning Consult poll, 54% disapprove while 39% approve, giving him a net rating of -15%.

   Thus, the overall look at Canadian public opinion demonstrates that Justin Trudeau remains an unpopular Prime Minister, the Conservatives retain a decent national lead, and the country is increasingly divided along ideological lines.

   Why we must challenge the philosophical underpinnings of our authoritarian socialist leaders
   Nobody would confuse Justin Trudeau & Jagmeet Singh with philosophers. To the extent to which they articulate any kind of deeper ideas, it usually sounds like pure ignorance.

   Trudeau claimed, “the budget will balance itself.”

   He said the economy had to “grow from the heart out.”

   Jagmeet Singh spends much of his time demonizing rich people and blaming grocery stores for inflation, ignoring the impact that his ‘borrow tax and spend’ policies have had.

   Or he’ll Tweet out things like this – nice empty thoughts without any follow-up or actual substance:

   “I believe that if you work 40hrs a week, you shouldn’t struggle to put food on the table.
   Or worry about how you’ll pay for rent.
   That’s why I’ll always stand up for working Canadians.
   That’s a promise.”
   https://twitter.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1652727013902262272

   However, just because Trudeau & Singh can’t really explain their ideas in detail, doesn’t mean they don’t have an ideology.

   In fact, they get away with much of what they do because they have an ideology that ‘feels right’ to many people, while not actually matching reality.

   And unless we can identify and confront their ideology, we cannot defeat it.

   To start with, Justin Trudeau & Jagmeet Singh both believe that the state has an inherent right to take away our money.

   They view the government as a creator of wealth, rather than an extractor of wealth.

   They believe that the public should serve the government, rather than the government serving the public.

   And they believe that instead of praising the most wealthy and successful among us, that we should punish, constrain, and leech off the most successful people.

   Their economic views and their social views are one in the same. Just as they see capitalism and Western civilization as systems of exploitation rather than systems of empowerment, they believe that every successful group or culture could only have succeeded by stealing from and oppressing others.

   This ‘zero-sum’ view of the world leaves out the possibility of wealth creation and economic expansion and seeks to simply redistribute wealth that has already been generated.

   And of course, a powerful centralized government must be at the centre of all of this, to ensure ‘fairness’ and ‘equality.’

   If all of this sounds like socialism to you, that’s because it is.

   Trudeau, Singh, and many of their followers are indeed animated by the same mindset behind the most ruthless socialist regimes in history. A mindset built upon jealousy towards the most successful among us. A mindset built on an obsession with control. A mindset built on seeking to ‘level the playing field’ by punishing the most gifted and most accomplished people.

   Even though the results have been disastrous whenever socialism is imposed, it doesn’t seem to stop people from falling for its utopian claims.

   And this is largely because socialism’s opponents rarely articulate a strong or coherent defence of capitalism.

   Capitalism is seen almost as something to be avoided or shunned. It shouldn’t be talked about. It shouldn’t be defended. It shouldn’t be explained. The fact that it works is seen as an unfortunate fact of reality, rather than something to be celebrated.

   But this attitude gives socialism a huge advantage. The side that articulates its views will always beat the side that doesn’t.

   Thus, the entire argument is ceded to people like Trudeau & Singh from the very beginning.

   We end up debating how much the government should punish the wealthy through ‘progressive’ taxation, rather than whether progressive taxation should exist at all.

   We debate how much debt the government will pile up, rather than debating whether the government has any right to burden future generations.

   We debate how much to pay public sector workers who are on strike, rather than debating why we even need such a large and highly paid public sector in the first place.

   The government gets bigger and bigger and bigger, yet the debates tend to be all about tinkering around the edges.

   The deeper problem here is that we have – as a society – accepted a fundamentally flawed idea: That the government has a claim on the productivity of individual Canadians.

   We have accepted the idea that the more someone succeeds, the more should be taken away from them to ‘help’ those less successful.

   This idea has twisted our minds around – precisely because we have made ‘helping’ people mandatory. There’s nothing wrong with a wealthy person choosing to give their money to causes they find worthy. The moral inversion happens when we force them to do so. If a productive individual created no wealth, then there would be nothing to take. But since they created it, the government – and much of society – somehow feels entitled to it.

   As a result of this dangerous and immoral idea, much of our society seems entirely upside down.

   Just look at the hypocrisy of the Liberals who are simultaneously denouncing Elon Musk as an “American tech billionaire” (even though he is a Canadian Citizen), while inviting Hillary Clinton to speak at their AGM. They despise Elon Musk because he builds real things and achieved wealth through providing products people choose to buy, while praising Hillary Clinton because she gained power and influence by using government power to redistribute wealth generated by others.

   Doesn’t that seem completely backwards? Shouldn’t Elon Musk be more of an example to follow than Hillary Clinton? Don’t people like Elon Musk move the world while politicians – especially of the statist variety – tend to hold it back?

   Many of us feel – almost instinctively – that there is something wrong with the socialist creed. But few of us take the next step towards defending and promoting capitalism. Yet, that is exactly what we must do. Capitalism should be celebrated. Capitalism should be praised. It is the most moral system, because it is the system that best empowers individual human beings and secures individual liberty by unleashing creativity and entrepreneurial drive.

   Meanwhile, it is socialism that is based upon greed. It’s not greedy to want to keep what you’ve earned from your own effort. It is greedy to use government power to force others to give up what they earned. That is the fundamental truth.

   Knowing that truth, we must fight against the moral inversion caused by socialism, because that moral inversion is weakening and sickening our society.

   Spencer Fernando

   • Strider says:

     April 30, 2023 - 9:41 pm at 9:41 pm

     Castreau and Singh are not ideological crusaders. They are a comedy team owned and operated by WEF powers. To the extent that it matters at all, they are ideological fascists. Canadians are informed by a centralized, government controlled media in service to establishment propagated memes. In short, Canadians are ignorant and naive. The media doesn’t seek to inform them, it seeks to mold a self-impression for them. It works wonders! Canadians see themselves as caring, accepting, peaceful, polite and orderly; in a word, nice. Ideological analysis is fruitless. Our elections are decided by the suburban women of southern Ontario. You know, the nice ones. Just ask them.

     • Fullgoldcrown says:

       April 30, 2023 - 9:49 pm at 9:49 pm

       Welcome Back Strider !

       https://youtu.be/Mmm3KTa601s

2. Kewl2 says:

   May 1, 2023 - 12:07 am at 12:07 am

   Strider — you nailed it!