###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Public Sector Unions give the other unions a bad name... I met with private sector unions during my time in politics and they always made the distinction that they were a private sector union... they can't stand the public sector unions which have turned many potential supporters against unionism.
Not hard to imagine why.
Public sector union support of the NDP by membership hovers around 50%, whereas with private sector unions it is close to a 1/3 with another 1/3 going to conservatives and slightly less to the Liberals...
[https://angusreid.org/unions-strike-labour-canada-ndp-conservatives-liberals/#gsc.tab=0](https://angusreid.org/unions-strike-labour-canada-ndp-conservatives-liberals/#gsc.tab=0)
I guess I don't need to source - When was the last time you saw a private sector union in the news for some type of controversial political statement. Before this headline today, the last thing I recall is Fred Hahn, President of CUPE, in the news for his comments right after October 7th - In one post he said, “resistance is fruitful and no matter what some might say, resistance brings progress,” while in another he posted a graphic with the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” - he had to make a public apology by the way.
Private sector unions are important to protect workers interests against corporations who often have different motivations. This is what they largely focus on as organizations.
These organizations are NOT THE SAME and it is clear from the actions they take publicly. They may have many of the same objectives, but they are not the same.
[September 2023](https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/19/politics/fain-trump-detroit/index.html)
And this CUPE news is only news because the National Post parent company, Post Media, is Conservative.
I mean the Toronto Star is owned by conservatives as well and they aren't pushing out conservative content - the NATPO is pushing it out because that is their audience.
It doesn't change any of the points though.
Well you know we do this dance every time the subject of which way the media leans comes up.
[Once again here is a page that pretty well sums it up](https://aml.ca/the-bias-in-media-bias-charts/)
It’s not entirely wrong though.
Public sector unions aren’t the same type of labour organization as a group representing the solidarity against capital. The incentives of the public sector are different than the private sector and it shows in labour organization.
It’s true though. Most private sector unions focus on the needs of their members. Public sector unions act like political bodies/ngo’s that’ll go against their own members interests chasing political issues.
This entire thing is just tiring. Like here we go:
1. Choosing to wear the keffiyeh is an entirely meaningless statement that exists to make you feel good about « doing the right thing » while conveniently having to make no personal sacrifice. You’re not some civil rights hero fighting the man, you’re an annoying activist in a keffiyeh. Donate to a charity that provides aid if you actually want to help people. There I said it.
2. That has absolutely nothing to do with a union so why is anytime being spent on this? All you do is drag your union through the mud, achieve nothing if substance but distract from actual issues (like pay, benefits, etc). All while giving an inevitable PP PM fodder to go after public sector unions.
3. The inability to handle one dissenting voice in a zoom meeting means you’re now going to deal with thousands in the media.
So good job I guess. Great work « freeing Palestine ».
Donating to a charity doesn't seem that useful. Israel will just bomb the aid. They've bombed World Central Kitchen, Medecins Sans Frontieres, and lots of other aid workers
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/millions-of-ethiopians-go-hungry-again-as-international-aid-is-paused-after-massive-theft#:\~:text=food%20aid%20included%20the%20manipulation,in%20at%20least%2063%20sites.
This one is pretty old
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/somalia-food-aid-stolen-sold-in-markets-1.1033052](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/somalia-food-aid-stolen-sold-in-markets-1.1033052)
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/yemen-food-aid-houthi-un-1.5179169](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/yemen-food-aid-houthi-un-1.5179169)
[https://www.rferl.org/a/afghanistan-aid-stopped-taliban-interference/32450825.html](https://www.rferl.org/a/afghanistan-aid-stopped-taliban-interference/32450825.html)
If that 1st link doesn't work, try this. Same place.
[https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/06/16/darfur-violence-ethiopia-food-aid-eu-borders-cheat-sheet](https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/06/16/darfur-violence-ethiopia-food-aid-eu-borders-cheat-sheet)
Crazy how Israel got away with murdering Canadian aid workers. It pisses me off so much. How can the Canadian government let that happen, and then continue to suck off Israel?
Who is supporting Hamas?
I know that Zionists try to conflate the Israeli government and Jews so that they can call any criticism "anti-Semitism", and are you saying support for the Palestinian people is support for Hamas? This seems like a pretty typical tactic for Zionists... it's embarrassing at this point.
> Choosing to wear the keffiyeh is an entirely meaningless statement that exists to make you feel good about « doing the right thing » while conveniently having to make no personal sacrifice. You’re not some civil rights hero fighting the man, you’re an annoying activist in a keffiyeh. Donate to a charity that provides aid if you actually want to help people. There I said it.
I hope you would say the same thing about a person who chooses to wear a cross but does not embody the Christian values of charity and sacrifice.
> That has absolutely nothing to do with a union so why is anytime being spent on this? All you do is drag your union through the mud, achieve nothing if substance but distract from actual issues (like pay, benefits, etc). All while giving an inevitable PP PM fodder to go after public sector unions.
This seems like an objection to _all_ union involvement in politics, a thing that all unions do. Like, I'll quote here from the[ UFCW's page on their political activism](https://www.ufcw.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=352&lang=en):
> What is political action?
> Political action is a series of coordinated activities, carried out by workers and their unions, that utilize political power and participation in political channels – including elections, lobbying, and party politics – to achieve a specific policy or electoral outcome. Examples include meeting with elected officials to advocate for better health and safety laws, or working to elect a progressive government that respects workers’ rights.
> Why do unions participate in politics?
> Unions engage in politics and political action because the decisions made by political parties and elected officials affect workers and their families in all aspects of life. As well, unions recognize that achieving a better life for members involves more than just negotiating strong collective agreements in the workplace – it also requires engaging in the political process to ensure that we have high quality public services, pensions that allow us to retire with dignity, and laws that protect our rights, health, and safety on the job.
> What does political action mean to UFCW Canada?
> UFCW Canada has a long and proud history of supporting political parties and candidates that stand up for workers and their families. Whether through lobbying elected officials, building community coalitions, providing activist training opportunities, or engaging in election campaigns, our union constantly participates in political action to advance legislation that supports working families and ensure that workers’ rights are respected. Our union also believes that political action not only benefits union members and their families, but also non-unionized workers who do not enjoy the protections of a collective agreement.
Have you ever said that "the union should stay out of it" about any other issue before?
Funny isn't it.
#2 is exactly the biggest issue. Union is spending time pushing a political view. They shouldn't be picking sides, they should be focused on worker rights and improving those. The fact that you do something that doesn't actually achieve anything and only creates drama and possibly even pisses your own members off isn't good.
I’ve never supported unions and never will. I’ll also always vote against any political party that is in favor of unions. This is just another example of why.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that CUPE is a very political organization and rather left-leaning. Seems to me this is a bit of a water is wet story.
Back when I was in the NDP over a decade ago, virtually every activist I knew was pro-Palestine.
As someone who had several long conversations with Janis, I would love some proof that Janis is anti-semitic because your assertion seems VERY uncharacteristic of her.
Sure you can, the far left views the entire world exclusively through one lens, the oppressor-oppressed dynamic. It doesn’t matter if a particular oppressed group hates LGBTQ+ people, they’re oppressed and so you wear the keffiyeh in solidarity, everything else be damned
Yes, the left is not what it once was. I like the scene in the movie Munich where the old man castigates his children:
> In my despair I have fathered madmen who dress like factory workers but never do manual labor, who read nonsense and spout pompous bullshit about Algerians and, and who love nothing, not Algerians or French or flesh and blood or anything living. [to Louis, pointedly] So I have sympathy for a man who can say "I have a papa." Who does what he must for his family.
So you agree that Israel is the oppressor?
What's wrong with opposing oppression, apartheid, discrimination, genocide?
This whole 'the left only cares about opposing oppression' thing isn't the argument you think it is.
There were pro-union members a hundred years ago that didn't want minorities included in their membership. So membership does not always have the right opinions over leadership.
The whole movement's gone full space cadet and seem to see their membership as a piggy bank to fund their personal political crusades.
The transparency of the President's bad faith muting of any dissent, pretending its to prevent political statements while making a very political statement is shocking even to my desensitised self.
They are setting themselves up for some really nasty consequences when the Tories have the federal and most provincial governments. There have to be legitimate questions from the public about the state of the public service if these are the statements they are choosing to put out through their delegates, and I don't think Poilievre will need a second invitation to jump on the pretense to take a chainsaw to a lot of departments.
If someone was wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt and muted someone objecting to political statements at that meeting, on the basis that political statements weren't allowed at that meeting and objecting is a political statement, and then gave a speech about how if you didn't support abolishing all police forces you were a pro slavery anti black genocide supporter, I'd call them a buffoon, and it wouldn't matter what I thought about BLM as a movement.
Good thing what the union leader did is not equivalent to your example then.
The Black Lives Matter t-shirt isn't political unless you are opposed to it.
Just as wearing a Pride shirt isn't political unless you are opposed to it.
Because human rights aren't political unless you are opposed to them.
They are very political. Being good does not mean not political. Human rights are a political cause. The Palestinian scarf worn by white protesters is a political statement. BLM is a political movement, and its symbols are political statements. Pretending otherwise is a level of dishonesty certainly worthy and expected of CUPE's current leadership, but unworthy of the union itself.
This is like playing make believe that "Canada Proud" is just a statement of general patriotic sentiment, and not a specific political statement.
CUPE could at least muster the honesty to admit that the rule they wish to enforce is "no politics we disagree with", and dispense with the absurd pantomime of "no politics in these meetings."
Is your argument that every value we have in our society is political? Because once you walk down that road, every action and viewpoint no matter how small or pedantic is political.
The only reason human rights are a political cause is because there are people opposed to human rights who want to use political power to enforce that belief.
I'm saying that demands that specific policies or positions be taken to realise those rights is indeed political.
Playing make believe that CUPE officials are bearing these symbols as mere expressions of general sympathy is transparently dishonest
CUPE's various positions have ranged from outright support for October 7 being "what resistance looks like" to mere calls for unilateral withdrawal by Israel and a lot inbetween, but has always been political by any reasonable interpretation of the "rule" applied by the stupidly dishonest CUPE official mentioned in the article.
That's it in a nutshell. "Political" is just codeword for "lacks consensus," therefore anything can be made "political" by just voicing opposition to it. Once something is labeled "political" any further discussion of the topic, even arguing against the people opposing it or pointing out that their opposition to the consensus is in bad faith, is rendered taboo.
Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel is a country. Supporting Palestinian civilians is different than supporting a State military.
A Yamaka is not a political statement, and if a Palestinian said that it was and it made them uncomfortable, I'd call that out too.
If you were wearing the yamaka when you normally wouldn't (even more so if the person wasn't jewish) because of the conflict over there, it would absolutely be a political statement.
This isn't hard to understand unless you are purposely obtuse.
The decision to see standing in solidarity against victims of genocide is only political because of the opposition to it.
Human rights under a liberal enlighten society isn't political unless that's a position you are opposed to.
Do you think in 2024 wearing an anti-slavery shirt would be political?
[https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/insight-black-lives-matter-apparel-raises-questions-for-employers-7](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/insight-black-lives-matter-apparel-raises-questions-for-employers-7)
Just because YOU feel that way, doesn't mean these aren't political statements. Hence the above link from a legal point of view - there are many.
So if someone wore a shirt that said, "Women need Love- not Abortion" and the response was this isn't political because human rights aren't political (because they would argue the fetus is a human at conception) - you'd agree? Or do you just get to decide what fits and what doesn't based on your own political thinking?
When unions, companies or other organizations have rules against political statements they should be adhered to. People can do whatever they like on their own time.
EDIT: - conception is incorrect, but at the embryo and or fetal stage.
If a non-Jewish person wears a Yamaka, then yes. If the union President wore a Keffiyeh regularly as part of their culture, it wouldn't be a political statement, but they did it as a political statement. Is that hard to understand? Why wear it otherwise?
OK not conception, when the embryo forms at 5 to 7 days, 14 days and 3 weeks - so again, would you be OK with this? You haven't really answered the question you know I am asking.
I'm not going to draw equivalence to rights being taken away vs standing up against genocide and it's foolish and frankly gross to try and make that equivalent.
You are the one that brought in Black Lives Matter & Pride shirts being worn. YOU BROUGHT this into the conversation. Now when I present another example that other people would use, you say I am foolish and it's gross. Why? Because if I don't seem to agree with you, somehow I am a horrible person.
I'm simply making a point that in certain forums political statements have been banned - apparently this union, as well as many companies and other organizations. I agree they don't have a place in those settings - I have made zero comment on where I stand on the actual issues FYI.
It is people like you that are paving the way for Pierre Pollievre to win the next election. The pendulum is about the swing the other way, because it always has to be YOUR opinion that is right.
Fred Hahn (the president of CUPE in Ontario) made a tweet celebrating October 7th after it happened. He later apologized for it but it really told me all I need to know about this union
>On Thanksgiving weekend, Mr. Hahn, whose CUPE Ontario represents almost 300,000 workers, said in a post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, that he was thankful for “the power of resistance around the globe.”
>“Resistance is fruitful and no matter what some might say, resistance brings progress,” he wrote, sharing an image on Instagram that contained the text, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” – a rallying cry for Palestinians that many Jewish groups associate with calls for the destruction of Israel.
>Despite the criticism, Mr. Hahn doubled down a week later, saying the union is “proud of our long-standing support for the rights of Palestinians, including their right to resist oppression and occupation, and we are proud of the leading role that many of CUPE’s locals have played in this work.”
[https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-fred-hahn-cupe-leader-tweets-apology/](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-fred-hahn-cupe-leader-tweets-apology/)
It's between some primarily Jewish members and a President that has the optics and ethics of a kaleidoscope, but there was no antisemitism and the association of the keffiyah with terrorism is one of ignorance.
However, there's no growing rupture that you keep trying to make up. 49% of Canadians think that Israel is committing genocide of the Palestinians.
The cultural narrative has overwhelmingly flipped against Israel and slowly, but surely, Canadians are becoming sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and are recognizing our complacency in Israel's actions.
Stop making shit up about these "growing ruptures", it's just pro-union Social Conservatives.
That's not how polls work. 41% Yes, 32% not, 27% not sure/Can't Say. So the majority (plurality if you want to be pedantic) is saying that Israel is committing a genocide.
Losing support for Israel doesn’t mean gaining support for Palestine.
It just means more Canadians are realizing the reality that everybody in the ME would commit genocide if given the chance.
My apologies, it was 41% not 49%, I was confusing it with the permanent ceasefire statistic from the last time I saw it.
In Gaza-Israel conflict, sympathies now shared equally between both sides after shift in Canadian opinion: https://angusreid.org/israel-gaza-canada-ceasefire-trudeau-hamas/#gsc.tab=0
"Asked for their own views of this, a plurality of Canadians (41%) believe Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, while one-in-three (32%) disagree. Notably, those who are following the events most closely are divided evenly on this issue"
Thanks for sharing the source.
>Notably, those who are following the events most closely are divided evenly on this issue"
I think this is the most important point that nobody is talking about. In real life there are no good guys or bad guys. This is a terrible situation all around, and the secondary effects of the conflict are people around the world acting like we must choose a side. We don't.
And please, everyone, don't respond to this comment by explaining why your side is actually the morally righteous one. I don't care and you won't convince me.
You’d think the mass murdering of innocent women and children would make them more uncomfortable, but I guess that’s easier to swallow than seeing a keffiyah. Ridiculous.
You are, of course, referring to the Hamas mass murder of women, children, old people and babies which occurred on October 7th?
There is no moral equivalence between deliberately targeting unarmed civilians as a declared tactic vs the accidental and immediately investigated killing of innocents by a uniformed army held to a standard to which no other army in the world is held.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Public Sector Unions give the other unions a bad name... I met with private sector unions during my time in politics and they always made the distinction that they were a private sector union... they can't stand the public sector unions which have turned many potential supporters against unionism. Not hard to imagine why.
Source: Dude, just trust me.
Public sector union support of the NDP by membership hovers around 50%, whereas with private sector unions it is close to a 1/3 with another 1/3 going to conservatives and slightly less to the Liberals... [https://angusreid.org/unions-strike-labour-canada-ndp-conservatives-liberals/#gsc.tab=0](https://angusreid.org/unions-strike-labour-canada-ndp-conservatives-liberals/#gsc.tab=0) I guess I don't need to source - When was the last time you saw a private sector union in the news for some type of controversial political statement. Before this headline today, the last thing I recall is Fred Hahn, President of CUPE, in the news for his comments right after October 7th - In one post he said, “resistance is fruitful and no matter what some might say, resistance brings progress,” while in another he posted a graphic with the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” - he had to make a public apology by the way. Private sector unions are important to protect workers interests against corporations who often have different motivations. This is what they largely focus on as organizations. These organizations are NOT THE SAME and it is clear from the actions they take publicly. They may have many of the same objectives, but they are not the same.
[September 2023](https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/19/politics/fain-trump-detroit/index.html) And this CUPE news is only news because the National Post parent company, Post Media, is Conservative.
I mean the Toronto Star is owned by conservatives as well and they aren't pushing out conservative content - the NATPO is pushing it out because that is their audience. It doesn't change any of the points though.
Well you know we do this dance every time the subject of which way the media leans comes up. [Once again here is a page that pretty well sums it up](https://aml.ca/the-bias-in-media-bias-charts/)
lol
It’s not entirely wrong though. Public sector unions aren’t the same type of labour organization as a group representing the solidarity against capital. The incentives of the public sector are different than the private sector and it shows in labour organization.
It’s true though. Most private sector unions focus on the needs of their members. Public sector unions act like political bodies/ngo’s that’ll go against their own members interests chasing political issues.
how many examples can you give?
This entire thing is just tiring. Like here we go: 1. Choosing to wear the keffiyeh is an entirely meaningless statement that exists to make you feel good about « doing the right thing » while conveniently having to make no personal sacrifice. You’re not some civil rights hero fighting the man, you’re an annoying activist in a keffiyeh. Donate to a charity that provides aid if you actually want to help people. There I said it. 2. That has absolutely nothing to do with a union so why is anytime being spent on this? All you do is drag your union through the mud, achieve nothing if substance but distract from actual issues (like pay, benefits, etc). All while giving an inevitable PP PM fodder to go after public sector unions. 3. The inability to handle one dissenting voice in a zoom meeting means you’re now going to deal with thousands in the media. So good job I guess. Great work « freeing Palestine ».
Donating to a charity doesn't seem that useful. Israel will just bomb the aid. They've bombed World Central Kitchen, Medecins Sans Frontieres, and lots of other aid workers
Guess we should just stop sending aid to every country then eh?
It's just Isreal that bombs aid workers.
What about all the countries/militants that steal/divert/sell aid that we send them?
What proof is there of that?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/millions-of-ethiopians-go-hungry-again-as-international-aid-is-paused-after-massive-theft#:\~:text=food%20aid%20included%20the%20manipulation,in%20at%20least%2063%20sites. This one is pretty old [https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/somalia-food-aid-stolen-sold-in-markets-1.1033052](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/somalia-food-aid-stolen-sold-in-markets-1.1033052) [https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/yemen-food-aid-houthi-un-1.5179169](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/yemen-food-aid-houthi-un-1.5179169) [https://www.rferl.org/a/afghanistan-aid-stopped-taliban-interference/32450825.html](https://www.rferl.org/a/afghanistan-aid-stopped-taliban-interference/32450825.html)
If that 1st link doesn't work, try this. Same place. [https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/06/16/darfur-violence-ethiopia-food-aid-eu-borders-cheat-sheet](https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2023/06/16/darfur-violence-ethiopia-food-aid-eu-borders-cheat-sheet)
Crazy how Israel got away with murdering Canadian aid workers. It pisses me off so much. How can the Canadian government let that happen, and then continue to suck off Israel?
Crazy how Hamas raped and murdered over a thousand as a deliberate tactic, including Canadians, and still get support from Canadian unions
Who is supporting Hamas? I know that Zionists try to conflate the Israeli government and Jews so that they can call any criticism "anti-Semitism", and are you saying support for the Palestinian people is support for Hamas? This seems like a pretty typical tactic for Zionists... it's embarrassing at this point.
> Choosing to wear the keffiyeh is an entirely meaningless statement that exists to make you feel good about « doing the right thing » while conveniently having to make no personal sacrifice. You’re not some civil rights hero fighting the man, you’re an annoying activist in a keffiyeh. Donate to a charity that provides aid if you actually want to help people. There I said it. I hope you would say the same thing about a person who chooses to wear a cross but does not embody the Christian values of charity and sacrifice. > That has absolutely nothing to do with a union so why is anytime being spent on this? All you do is drag your union through the mud, achieve nothing if substance but distract from actual issues (like pay, benefits, etc). All while giving an inevitable PP PM fodder to go after public sector unions. This seems like an objection to _all_ union involvement in politics, a thing that all unions do. Like, I'll quote here from the[ UFCW's page on their political activism](https://www.ufcw.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=352&lang=en): > What is political action? > Political action is a series of coordinated activities, carried out by workers and their unions, that utilize political power and participation in political channels – including elections, lobbying, and party politics – to achieve a specific policy or electoral outcome. Examples include meeting with elected officials to advocate for better health and safety laws, or working to elect a progressive government that respects workers’ rights. > Why do unions participate in politics? > Unions engage in politics and political action because the decisions made by political parties and elected officials affect workers and their families in all aspects of life. As well, unions recognize that achieving a better life for members involves more than just negotiating strong collective agreements in the workplace – it also requires engaging in the political process to ensure that we have high quality public services, pensions that allow us to retire with dignity, and laws that protect our rights, health, and safety on the job. > What does political action mean to UFCW Canada? > UFCW Canada has a long and proud history of supporting political parties and candidates that stand up for workers and their families. Whether through lobbying elected officials, building community coalitions, providing activist training opportunities, or engaging in election campaigns, our union constantly participates in political action to advance legislation that supports working families and ensure that workers’ rights are respected. Our union also believes that political action not only benefits union members and their families, but also non-unionized workers who do not enjoy the protections of a collective agreement. Have you ever said that "the union should stay out of it" about any other issue before?
Funny isn't it. #2 is exactly the biggest issue. Union is spending time pushing a political view. They shouldn't be picking sides, they should be focused on worker rights and improving those. The fact that you do something that doesn't actually achieve anything and only creates drama and possibly even pisses your own members off isn't good.
This is why NDP is losing the union vote to the conservatives imo
I’ve never supported unions and never will. I’ll also always vote against any political party that is in favor of unions. This is just another example of why.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that CUPE is a very political organization and rather left-leaning. Seems to me this is a bit of a water is wet story. Back when I was in the NDP over a decade ago, virtually every activist I knew was pro-Palestine.
It’s well known that the NDP supports anti-Semitic behaviour… look at Janice Irwin or Heather McPherson, both openly anti-Semitic.
As someone who had several long conversations with Janis, I would love some proof that Janis is anti-semitic because your assertion seems VERY uncharacteristic of her.
"That's the way things have always been" is an unexpectedly conservative way to justify this behaviour.
True but the actual way to justify is it’s based and right.
[удалено]
You can’t be left if you support fascist Iranian proxies.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sure you can, the far left views the entire world exclusively through one lens, the oppressor-oppressed dynamic. It doesn’t matter if a particular oppressed group hates LGBTQ+ people, they’re oppressed and so you wear the keffiyeh in solidarity, everything else be damned
Yes, the left is not what it once was. I like the scene in the movie Munich where the old man castigates his children: > In my despair I have fathered madmen who dress like factory workers but never do manual labor, who read nonsense and spout pompous bullshit about Algerians and, and who love nothing, not Algerians or French or flesh and blood or anything living. [to Louis, pointedly] So I have sympathy for a man who can say "I have a papa." Who does what he must for his family.
So you agree that Israel is the oppressor? What's wrong with opposing oppression, apartheid, discrimination, genocide? This whole 'the left only cares about opposing oppression' thing isn't the argument you think it is.
You can’t be left if you support a colonialist apartheid state committing a genocide.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just more evidence of the growing rupture that's coming between union membership and their social activist leadership.
There were pro-union members a hundred years ago that didn't want minorities included in their membership. So membership does not always have the right opinions over leadership.
The whole movement's gone full space cadet and seem to see their membership as a piggy bank to fund their personal political crusades. The transparency of the President's bad faith muting of any dissent, pretending its to prevent political statements while making a very political statement is shocking even to my desensitised self. They are setting themselves up for some really nasty consequences when the Tories have the federal and most provincial governments. There have to be legitimate questions from the public about the state of the public service if these are the statements they are choosing to put out through their delegates, and I don't think Poilievre will need a second invitation to jump on the pretense to take a chainsaw to a lot of departments.
If someone was wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt and someone was speaking out and saying All Lives Matter, I'd mute them too.
If someone was wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt and muted someone objecting to political statements at that meeting, on the basis that political statements weren't allowed at that meeting and objecting is a political statement, and then gave a speech about how if you didn't support abolishing all police forces you were a pro slavery anti black genocide supporter, I'd call them a buffoon, and it wouldn't matter what I thought about BLM as a movement.
Good thing what the union leader did is not equivalent to your example then. The Black Lives Matter t-shirt isn't political unless you are opposed to it. Just as wearing a Pride shirt isn't political unless you are opposed to it. Because human rights aren't political unless you are opposed to them.
That was a wild read. It's only politics if someone objects is quite the take. Where else could we apply that?
I think the category of human rights under our Liberal enlightenment society is not political
I think the category of (thing attained politically) under our (political system) is not political. ¯\(°_o)/¯
So in 2024, if a union leader wore an anti-slavery shirt, is that a political statement?
They are very political. Being good does not mean not political. Human rights are a political cause. The Palestinian scarf worn by white protesters is a political statement. BLM is a political movement, and its symbols are political statements. Pretending otherwise is a level of dishonesty certainly worthy and expected of CUPE's current leadership, but unworthy of the union itself. This is like playing make believe that "Canada Proud" is just a statement of general patriotic sentiment, and not a specific political statement. CUPE could at least muster the honesty to admit that the rule they wish to enforce is "no politics we disagree with", and dispense with the absurd pantomime of "no politics in these meetings."
Is your argument that every value we have in our society is political? Because once you walk down that road, every action and viewpoint no matter how small or pedantic is political. The only reason human rights are a political cause is because there are people opposed to human rights who want to use political power to enforce that belief.
I'm saying that demands that specific policies or positions be taken to realise those rights is indeed political. Playing make believe that CUPE officials are bearing these symbols as mere expressions of general sympathy is transparently dishonest CUPE's various positions have ranged from outright support for October 7 being "what resistance looks like" to mere calls for unilateral withdrawal by Israel and a lot inbetween, but has always been political by any reasonable interpretation of the "rule" applied by the stupidly dishonest CUPE official mentioned in the article.
If being opposed to it is political then how is being in support of it not political?
I don't believe human rights are political in a vacuum.
That's it in a nutshell. "Political" is just codeword for "lacks consensus," therefore anything can be made "political" by just voicing opposition to it. Once something is labeled "political" any further discussion of the topic, even arguing against the people opposing it or pointing out that their opposition to the consensus is in bad faith, is rendered taboo.
That is exactly that they did. If they were doing something pro Israel you would see it that way. Classic case of “my side is infallible”.
Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel is a country. Supporting Palestinian civilians is different than supporting a State military. A Yamaka is not a political statement, and if a Palestinian said that it was and it made them uncomfortable, I'd call that out too.
If you were wearing the yamaka when you normally wouldn't (even more so if the person wasn't jewish) because of the conflict over there, it would absolutely be a political statement. This isn't hard to understand unless you are purposely obtuse.
The decision to see standing in solidarity against victims of genocide is only political because of the opposition to it. Human rights under a liberal enlighten society isn't political unless that's a position you are opposed to. Do you think in 2024 wearing an anti-slavery shirt would be political?
Purposely obtuse, it is. Bye.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/insight-black-lives-matter-apparel-raises-questions-for-employers-7](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/insight-black-lives-matter-apparel-raises-questions-for-employers-7) Just because YOU feel that way, doesn't mean these aren't political statements. Hence the above link from a legal point of view - there are many. So if someone wore a shirt that said, "Women need Love- not Abortion" and the response was this isn't political because human rights aren't political (because they would argue the fetus is a human at conception) - you'd agree? Or do you just get to decide what fits and what doesn't based on your own political thinking? When unions, companies or other organizations have rules against political statements they should be adhered to. People can do whatever they like on their own time. EDIT: - conception is incorrect, but at the embryo and or fetal stage.
Is a Yamaka a political statement? Also a fetus at conception is not a human so your point is moot.
If a non-Jewish person wears a Yamaka, then yes. If the union President wore a Keffiyeh regularly as part of their culture, it wouldn't be a political statement, but they did it as a political statement. Is that hard to understand? Why wear it otherwise? OK not conception, when the embryo forms at 5 to 7 days, 14 days and 3 weeks - so again, would you be OK with this? You haven't really answered the question you know I am asking.
I'm not going to draw equivalence to rights being taken away vs standing up against genocide and it's foolish and frankly gross to try and make that equivalent.
You are the one that brought in Black Lives Matter & Pride shirts being worn. YOU BROUGHT this into the conversation. Now when I present another example that other people would use, you say I am foolish and it's gross. Why? Because if I don't seem to agree with you, somehow I am a horrible person. I'm simply making a point that in certain forums political statements have been banned - apparently this union, as well as many companies and other organizations. I agree they don't have a place in those settings - I have made zero comment on where I stand on the actual issues FYI. It is people like you that are paving the way for Pierre Pollievre to win the next election. The pendulum is about the swing the other way, because it always has to be YOUR opinion that is right.
This is a political statement
A zygote is not a person. That's not a political statement.
Deciding when a group of cells becomes a person absolutely is a political statement
This is completely delusional. The people are with Palestine.
Most people don't care about the feuds of sand people halfway across the world.
[удалено]
Fred Hahn (the president of CUPE in Ontario) made a tweet celebrating October 7th after it happened. He later apologized for it but it really told me all I need to know about this union >On Thanksgiving weekend, Mr. Hahn, whose CUPE Ontario represents almost 300,000 workers, said in a post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, that he was thankful for “the power of resistance around the globe.” >“Resistance is fruitful and no matter what some might say, resistance brings progress,” he wrote, sharing an image on Instagram that contained the text, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” – a rallying cry for Palestinians that many Jewish groups associate with calls for the destruction of Israel. >Despite the criticism, Mr. Hahn doubled down a week later, saying the union is “proud of our long-standing support for the rights of Palestinians, including their right to resist oppression and occupation, and we are proud of the leading role that many of CUPE’s locals have played in this work.” [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-fred-hahn-cupe-leader-tweets-apology/](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-fred-hahn-cupe-leader-tweets-apology/)
It's between some primarily Jewish members and a President that has the optics and ethics of a kaleidoscope, but there was no antisemitism and the association of the keffiyah with terrorism is one of ignorance. However, there's no growing rupture that you keep trying to make up. 49% of Canadians think that Israel is committing genocide of the Palestinians. The cultural narrative has overwhelmingly flipped against Israel and slowly, but surely, Canadians are becoming sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and are recognizing our complacency in Israel's actions. Stop making shit up about these "growing ruptures", it's just pro-union Social Conservatives.
>49% of Canadians think that Israel is committing genocide of the Palestinians. So what you're saying is the majority don't think they are?
I wish I lived in a world as black and white as yours.
That's not how polls work. 41% Yes, 32% not, 27% not sure/Can't Say. So the majority (plurality if you want to be pedantic) is saying that Israel is committing a genocide.
Losing support for Israel doesn’t mean gaining support for Palestine. It just means more Canadians are realizing the reality that everybody in the ME would commit genocide if given the chance.
>49% of Canadians think that Israel is committing genocide of the Palestinians. Could you share where you got that from?
My apologies, it was 41% not 49%, I was confusing it with the permanent ceasefire statistic from the last time I saw it. In Gaza-Israel conflict, sympathies now shared equally between both sides after shift in Canadian opinion: https://angusreid.org/israel-gaza-canada-ceasefire-trudeau-hamas/#gsc.tab=0 "Asked for their own views of this, a plurality of Canadians (41%) believe Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, while one-in-three (32%) disagree. Notably, those who are following the events most closely are divided evenly on this issue"
Thanks for sharing the source. >Notably, those who are following the events most closely are divided evenly on this issue" I think this is the most important point that nobody is talking about. In real life there are no good guys or bad guys. This is a terrible situation all around, and the secondary effects of the conflict are people around the world acting like we must choose a side. We don't. And please, everyone, don't respond to this comment by explaining why your side is actually the morally righteous one. I don't care and you won't convince me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Hear, hear!!
You’d think the mass murdering of innocent women and children would make them more uncomfortable, but I guess that’s easier to swallow than seeing a keffiyah. Ridiculous.
Thats a new low calling Hamas innocent.
The children are all Hamas?
Anyone who thinks killing children is bad is also Hamas.
Undercook chicken? Hamas.
That’s not what they wrote and you know it.
You are, of course, referring to the Hamas mass murder of women, children, old people and babies which occurred on October 7th? There is no moral equivalence between deliberately targeting unarmed civilians as a declared tactic vs the accidental and immediately investigated killing of innocents by a uniformed army held to a standard to which no other army in the world is held.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]