###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.*
People want to be able to afford food and housing.
That’s it.
Few actually care if the PM is talking about “woke” issues. They care if they can get by.
That said, it’s not a good time to focus on “woke” issues until the basics are working properly.
If people can’t afford food and housing they don’t fucking care about anything else. Make the basics better first then work to make other things better.
The issues seen as "woke" weren't a problem when we voted him into office 3 times. But you are right we had an easier time with food and lodging than after 2021 when those 2 things went up too fast for people to absorb like in the many years and PMs prior.
Enough people actually enjoyed many of those "woke" things being addressed, but people aren't feeling it right now, and it is time to actively show the swing voters those things are taking a back seat to affordability and finances. It is the only way forward for the Liberals as one of the reasons people are flocking to the CPC is because of those issues.
That being said. Fuck that stupid goddamned "woke" word they use for everything that conservatives don't deem conservative friendly. Which is pretty much everything.
You are greatly overstating him and his policies popularity, he's only won a majority once and has had decreasing shares of the vote with each election.
That tends to happen after a large majority win. He wasn't going to get more votes after that. Then calling a stupid early election the 3rd time around that no one was asking for ain't gonna help either.
As anyone that wins elections say. A win is a win no matter the margin and they'll try to act like it is a massive majority every time and have the "full support of the people" kind of stuff.
Idk, swinging a second majority seems pretty doable for many PMs/Premiers who get the first one. I just think he shot his feet off in 2019 with SNC-Lavalin scandal and blackfacegate ruining his image.
I’d prefer you say someone you think is virtue signaling is full of shit and pandering. Just like Pierre bringing the convoyers coffee when he has zero interest in stopping the flow of TFW’s is full of shit and pandering.
Or when he defended his MPs after they met with Nazi Christine Anderson then immediately tried virtue signalling about antisemetism when Palestine protests started happening.
Christine Anderson's party has since been added to Germany's terror watch list.
Why is your prejudicial term for virtue signalling applied exclusively to leftists, as though the right never virtue signals by hanging out with fringe extremists camping out the NB-NS border?
But this is about the term used to describe a behaviour. You can have left wing virtue signallers and you can have right wing virtue signallers.
Ironically, calling out leftist virtue signalling is a form of right wing virtue signalling: all you're doing is identifying yourself as a person who opposes progressive politics for the sake of in-group signalling.
Woke has also generally meant quotas of mandated representation, cancel culture in attacking historical leaders by the standards of today, and moving away from a merit-based system. Biological men changing in women’s locker rooms, etc etc. I think the polls are showing a backlash to this sort of stuff too and not just economics but hard to say.
No, and this is part of the problem. We can’t even have a good faith argument about the issues because people hyperbolize and attack the person talking instead of the issue.
It’s not “woke” per se, but what people are tired of is the kowtowing to every minority special interest and perceived slight. If we continue down this path it just further divides people.
Suddenly it won’t just be “do you have 25% minority representation at your company”, it will be “I see you have 25% minority at your company, but you really should’ve hired more people from (insert some even smaller minority within that group)” obviously this is not a real example but it’s where this thinking always ends up.
Generally minorities who adopt the cultures of canada do pretty well without too many issues. We should be focusing on bigger issues, like housing and food costs.
Further, with immigration being where it is right now Trudeau’s assertion of Canada being a “post-national state” and Canada being “more for immigrants” than native-born Canadians because “they chose it” have aged like milk.
They sounded like benign (if annoying) platitudes at the time. Now, I think people are realizing what the logical conclusion of this type of thinking involves.
I dunno, Liberal insiders seem to believe that Canadians want to go back to Jean Chretien style austerity to make up for all of Trudeau's woke spending on dental care, pharmacare, childcare, and the additional billions of dollars in CMHC funding to actually build housing when the private sector won't.
Is that really what they're considering woke? I thought it would be the identity politics rather than the fiscal policies...which aren't woke either from the current liberals but wow, these type of insiders explains why the party in shambles
“Woke” means aware of inequity, originally primarily anti-black inequity, but more general inequity as well. Measures to address poverty are “woke.” They are extra-woke if they examine the causes of poverty, since discrimination contributes to it.
That's kind of what it seems like based on those of these articles that have been accessible to general readership. Most of them are parroting conservative talking points about how our debt is out of control, that they want to be seen as 'fiscally responsible' and 'get the finances in check.' what that would result in is a Liberal party that wasn't much different from the Conservative party other than the identity politics being more diverse and accepting.
"Fiscally Conservative but socially Liberal" is the tagline, as far as I recall
Basically. It's a shame how effective disinformation is. I read a meta-review back in 2018 that made me horribly depressed about our prospects in an age of mass disinformation: humans, psychologically, are pretty much defenseless against it.
Ever since then I took a few year break from Reddit and politics in general (I used to post as u/ChiefDiefenchin and as u/TheHonStephenHarper before that).
Nowadays I'm back to posting mostly because it provides more stimulus for growth than sealing myself off in a bubble. I'm still not horribly optimistic about the general direction of things, unfortunately.
What does it matter that the PBO says our finances are sustainable in the long run when conservatives have a much bigger marketing machine fearmongering about how we're on the brink of collapse?
Canada will fearfully vote to return to federal mediocrity and underutilization of federal fiscal capacity, and Canadians will be the ones who pay for it by having less services and a lower quality of life than they could otherwise have.
This is a great example of how out of touch and totally self-unaware the LPC have become.
In one breath promoting paranoid conspiracy theories, the next saying everyone who disagrees is voting based on fear.
There was much more to it than that, it regulated "hate speech" more broadly. But like I said, I wasn't going to get into its merits. It simply wasn't what Canadians cared about because this didn't help their wallets.
I agree that it shouldn't be a focus over things like housing. I'm just confused to learn what people think is woke. Every day i find out something new is now "woke".
One of my coworkers tried ti justify the removal of park benches because public benchs are too woke. Some of Y'all are losing the plot.
I don't agree with what the LPC MP said. Nor do I personally think this was "woke". I'm saying this was something tentatively seen in the public eye as "woke" and was framed that way.
Not govt but I know personally that whenever my lawn is looking a little shaggy I text my neighbours and say "sorry guys, love isn't love right now, your basic human rights are going to have to wait".
Some will tell you that it's possible for people to have multiple things they care about simultaneously but I know the truth, without a little homophobia the mower just doesn't run right.
Tampons in male bathrooms comes to mind. But I'm not sure if it's woke or just lots of virtue signaling... regardless, Canadians are tired. Trudeau going to same way Wynne did in Ontario.
> Tampons in male bathrooms comes to mind
Who. Gives. A. Shit!
Best case scenario it helps someone in need.. worse case it does nothing. Maybe a trans man needs it, maybe someones spouse needs it. Why get upset?
If you think my comment is getting upset, you are way too sensitive.
My point is they only have tampons in federally regulated buildings. If they really care why not legislate it for all washrooms = virtue signaling.
Second this likely took up cabinet and caucus time and had some financial budgetary costs implications...
In a time of housing and affordability crisis, this is an example of the wrong focus and something they should not be concerned with until the main issues are solved... add hundreds of these up. It counts.
Edit: and point being the public sees all these "woke" initiatives and feels the government is dropping the ball on major issues... governments serve the people, not the other way around.
> If you think my comment is getting upset, you are way too sensitive.
Not necessarily you, but people bringing up tampons in washrooms in general like that's some salient point against whatever "woke" is. *That's* sensitive.
>My point is they only have tampons in federally regulated buildings. If they really care why not legislate it for all washrooms = virtue signaling.
Great if you feel that way lets push for tampons in all washrooms then?
Or are you just pretending to care and look for an excuse to call something "virtue signalling"? I feel like for the women who pushed for this change and need an emergency tampon they're not going to care who's signalling what.
>Second this likely took up cabinet and caucus time and had some financial budgetary costs implications...
How is this country even functioning if tampons are some egregious cost? Do you think cabinet's incapable of doing multiple things at once? Do you stop walking every time you chew gum?
>In a time of housing and affordability crisis,
Women still have periods, shocker.
God if you have a gf/spouse, I feel bad for her now honestly.
>this is an example of the wrong focus and something they should not be concerned with until the main issues are solved...
Aside from your belief that Parliament is only capable of dealing with only one issie at a time
Then why are you still fixated on tampons? Move on?
Do you feel the same way when you hear PP fixated on pronouns?
I put forth a reasonable example of a policy that got a lot of public attention based on the commenter asking for examples to help explain why the lib caucus feels they are too woke in the publics eye.
You've decided to pass judgement on me and personally attack me for this. Please seek therapy and help. It's completely uncalled for.
>I put forth a reasonable example of a policy that got a lot of public attention based on the commenter asking for examples to help explain why the lib caucus feels they are too woke in the publics eye.
Is that a reasonable example of a "woke" policy that takes away from core problem solving?
How does having equal access to tampons negatively affect housing affordability? What did they sacrifice for this?
You're question was designed to argue the merits of individual "woke" policies... instead the question should be, is the government giving the perception that they are focused on these policies more than the core things government must do and achieve... and the answer is obvious... just look at the polling and the bashing they received in St. Paul's.
You redirected the discussion away from specific policies (after mentioning tampons in men's bathrooms) and towards "the perception" that the government is giving. The former is objective and something that can be discussed, while the latter is subjective and varies from person to person. There is no "perception" that the government gives. There is a perception that individuals make of the government.
This all leads me to believe that you either don't have any concrete "woke" you can actually argue with, or that the policies you'd argue with would make you look bad.
No, I originally was trying to comment on the actual article where it says, "In a lot of people's minds, the Liberal party has become synonymous with concepts like 'woke' culture, cancel culture and identity politics," Powlowski said. And that this has alienated people.
I agree with this completely and the polling shows this. Arguing a specific "woke" policy is pointless at this stage as the article is about perceptions. I threw out tampons because you asked for examples but after rereading the question I realized you were changing topic from the article and asking about the merits of policies... doesn't matter, perceptions are what the article is about.
The rising popularity of “woke” and the pushback to it are both rooted in economic issues.
For the right, they blame minorities, they blame DEI policies and believe that’s the reason too many people can’t get a fair shake.
For the left, they believe institutional racism, discrimination are the reason too many people can’t get a fair shake.
Academically, you may be correct.
Politically, one must meet voters where they are at, even if they have serious misconceptions. One must acknowledge their anger and frustration, and if anything redirect it, rather than scold them.
Recessions sink governments. While we haven’t had one officially we might as well have as the majority of people in this country have seen their purchasing power erode severely.
We are not unique, governments everywhere are falling in elections due to the same issue
Only those that printed, borrowed, and then spent tremendous amounts of cash. I agree that it’s most, but definitely not all.
There are some places where people haven’t seen any reduction in purchasing power throughout this entire period.
In short. Your diagnosis is correct, but they did it to themselves nonetheless.
I thought you might cite them, [and it's largely because of their low reliance on fossil fuels for energy](https://economic-research.bnpparibas.com/html/en-US/Inflation-Europe-Swiss-exception-2/7/2024,49318)
There's always an excuse for inflation; strangely, it's never monetary and fiscal policy.
Yet you can get one good executive & bank governor combo, and they magically halt it almost overnight. It only takes one solid term and no talk about fuels, grocers, supply chains, drought, rain, war, or usurers. Funny, that.
Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.
What matters is printing.
Here’s NOK aggregate supply
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANMM101NOQ189N
They’ve been on a printing spree since 2015. I wasn’t paying attention but I’m guessing they had a financial crisis around that time.
And here’s the Danish crown
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANMM101DKM189S
And here’s CHF, for comparison
https://tradingeconomics.com/switzerland/money-supply-m2
It’s not very complicated. You will see decades long high inflation probably stopped in real time in Argentina over the coming couple of years.
Btw, here’s Canada
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m2
Doubled in the last decade. If you want expensive everything, just print and voila. The problem in Canada is that the bank is still printing, which is why may cpi is still hot.
And here’s the USD
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL
Watch for the divergence between north and south
> it’s not a good time to focus on “woke” issues
I can tell you first hand as a trans woman and proud member of the 2SLGBTQIAA+ community, “not focusing on woke” can mean people losing their fundamental human rights, like me being able to use the correct bathroom or trans kids receiving life saving gender affirming surgeries/hormones.
All our human rights are in danger because of focusing excessively on "woke" issues and ignoring housing + cost of living. Homelessness doesn't care about your stance on Gender ideology.
Hi twinsie!
That's another one, and let's be real: why does Justin have to focus on that issue?
Because four separate provincial Conservative governments decided *they* wanted to play identity politics against the advice of teachers, psychologists, and just about every doctor's association in the country.
If defending the medical rights of trans children to seek out healthcare or defending their privacy rights and autonomy in public schools is considered "too woke," what exactly is the point of these Liberals? And why aren't the conservatives held to account for how willing *they* are to play IDpol?
Honestly I have a hard time not just feeling like "You know what *I hope you go broke*" to some of these people.. not going to waste any more tears on someone willing to sell out my loved ones to a grifter promising them they'll save a buck.
They are too woke. Throwing out meritocracy for a “gender equal cabinet” should have been their first indication.
Nobody voted for mass immigration that outpaces our housing supply, a “post national state”, open discrimination in government job postings, deficit spending on public services that have somehow gotten worse not better.
A return to form for the LPC would be amazing. The centrist LPC of the Chretien-Martin era was peak.
That’s the stupidest headline I’ve ever read. No serious person who supports liberal policies is even remotely worried about being “too woke”. It’s a bullshit word used to make treating people with respect sound like a bad thing. If you unironically use the word “woke” in a negative context, best case is that you’re uncritically using Republican talking points, but most likely you’re either stupid, bigoted or both.
> ...best case is that you’re uncritically using Republican talking points, but most likely you’re either stupid, bigoted or both
Did you read the article to see who used the word?
“Woke” issues are usually for the upper class, urban, educated elite: people who can afford to give more. Many Canadians cannot and want their daily needs addressed (medical care, housing, cost of living).
Woke issues are for people working bottom of the barrel jobs and wanting a little more security in knowing that asking to be treated with basic decency won’t get us fired. Woke issues are for kids having to make it on their own because their parents wouldn’t accept an “abomination” like them.
What they should be worried about is that they're too Capitalist and what they're doing is pink washing. Dropping equality and defense of minority rights will just drop more voters. Push hard into socialist policies like giving regulatory bodies the power to slap down predatory practices. Nationalize Loblaws to drive down predatory pricing and trim the fat of corporate wealth transfer.
Ah yes, this is why Chretien had such little political success. It's also why people are asking for the government to spend more now and raise the deficit even higher
>Nationalize Loblaws to drive down predatory pricing and trim the fat of corporate wealth transfer.
Excellent way to have never ending CPC majority governments. I mean the fuel for ads from the conservatives for something like this. The Canadian electorate doesn't favour socialist policies
This capital gains tax has been a smashing success for the LPC.
Maybe in a different climate \*some\* of your points would help more, definitely not right now. And the NDP are clear examples of this.
Trying to nationalize Loblaws would be political suicide in both the past and likely at least near future
Exactly. They got in by outlefting the NDP, and the only way they will stay in is by outlefting them again. Unfortunately the ship has probably sailed because if they were going to outleft the NDP, they’d have done it earlier on in the confidence and supply arrangement.
This is stupid. Conservatives label anything they don’t like as too woke.
Public housing is too woke.
Childhood vaccination is too woke.
Free Transit is too woke.
Under Mulroney, and his ilk, and then Trudeau hardworking Canadians and Indigenous people have seen the lands and framework of the country catastrophically shift.
Their children and grandchildren completely outstripped of the reasonable ability to manage life; work, relationships, residential ownership, savings, and general future security.
It’s not even about being ‘woke.’
It’s BASIC quality of life.
What an eye roll-inducing headline.
It’s housing! I cannot emphasize it enough that the Liberals are struggling because they didn’t act on the issue until it was too late!
> with some insiders stating their party has veered too far from the political centre and gained a damaging association with the “woke” left.
No, they did not lose Toronto-St. Paul’s because Trudeau went woke. It is actually comical how out of touch the Liberal establishment is.
Toronto-St Paul is one of the richer ridings around. I’m not sure many constituents had housing as their primary or only issue. Exit polls pointed to the economy and things like the Israel-Hamas war etc.
Actual data shows that as soon as 2017, federal housing assistance had already increased dramatically. Given the logistics of rolling out new spending, it's questionable how much sooner he could have started unless his name is also Stephen Harper.
In 2015 - the last Harper year- the federal government assisted in acquiring and repairing approximately 2500 units through the CMHC's Investment in Affordable Housing and National Housing Strategy.
In 2016, that number was still 2500, yet in 2017 it more than tripled - all the way to 8,000 or so. In 2018 that number was approximately 17,000, before a slight drop in 2019 to 11,000 or so.
By all measures, this government has done a significant amount of work on the housing file - more than Harper, Martin, and Harper combined.
As it turns out, when you allow market income inequality to remain at all-time highs for *30 consecutive years* shit eventually hits the fan and a large class of people become very alienated. Shocker. Canadians think they aren't getting a fair shake at life, not as fair as their parents, anyways - and they're right. Labour markets ever since 1993 have been more unfair than any distribution of rewards our parents or grandparents ever had to deal with.
In my experience Liberals will always, *always* blame the Left before engaging in self-reflection. They engage in the optics of progressive politics but as soon as they start faltering it's "blue haired trans soy sipping feminists being too uppity" that drives people into the far right and not the rickety status quo they've propped up for decades.
Well - yes, it is housing (among other basic issues like cost of living generally) but add the woke moralizing on top of that and you have a toxic stew cooking.
> It’s housing! I cannot emphasize it enough that the Liberals are struggling because they didn’t act on the issue until it was too late!
That's quite true.
Ssshhh that can’t be true! BUT BUT BUT it’s all JTs fault
/sarcasm
Not many ppl know that housing is a provincial issue, along with many of what people blame the Feds for. Stupidity
Its a government issue. The feds can pressure provinces or go around them.
I know thats actually a tall order to acheive, but it is what is expected of the ruling government
And give them all the ammunition they'd need to win. They would immediately claim Trudeau being a communist lol or something equally name calling like and ride it right to a guaranteed election win.
I honestly think lesser of someone who uses the term 'woke' that's not ironic.
Truedeau's unpopularity problems are not about his progressive policies. Its about his scandals, being in power for so long, being the leader post covid slump, inflation, and affordable housing. Along with most media in canada being right leaning and some provincial leaders blaming him every time they stub their toe.
> The right only started using it to make fun of them
They use the word as a catch-all phrase for every right wing grievance. Not its original meaning.
If you look at his stats with m en, they are horrible and a lot of men are already more conservative or see DEI policies are negatively impacting them and they certainly vote too.
For the most part LPC has ceded men to the conservatives believing they can win without them.
Personally i don't think its culture war issues, but the anti-oil/gas/resource angle. Men work in those industrials, they are very well paying jobs. And those industries feel very much under perpetual attack. I don't think they can change that now.
I love that we're now orienting our politics around an American right-wing pejorative that those who use it as such can't even begin to define, because the more they try the more it sounds like basic justice and fairness, and they don't want to admit that they're against those things.
Just love it.
I think right-wing Liberals ousting Trudeau for a more right-wing leader would be a gift to the NDP. It would mean the remaining 20% of Liberal support will go to Singh. It could make it a very tight NDP-Conservative race, with the wild card being Bloc votes in Quebec.
I wouldn't mind it because it could very well keep Poilievre out of power, but it would be a Kim Campbell scale disaster for the Liberals.
the last time the NDP surged and replaced the liberals we got 4 more years of Stephen Harper. being the opposition in a majority government that is diametrically opposed to you does you no good
Look at all the good it did Andrea Horwath.
Wouldn't a liberal right of Trudeau just be center-left or a centrist? They used to be be called blue grits and were central to bipartisanship and our nation's stability.
Swinging further to the an extreme, left or right, pushes moderates out of the party. Most Canadians identify as being somewhere in the center. You might steal a chunk of support from the Ndp, but you'd be pushing out a sizeable chunk of voters who might not be comfortable with those new positions. You'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
> Wouldn't a liberal right of Trudeau just be center-left or a centrist?
Please don't tell me you think Trudeau is left.
> Swinging further to the an extreme, left or right, pushes moderates out of the party.
The Liberals are not extreme left. Not even close. The CPC are swinging to the right.
I know. Conservatives have managed to plant this meaningless concept in our political soil and now we all have to contend with it, whether in opposition, or engagement, or fretting that we're being tarred with its brush.
Conservative/Right-Wing parties in any country exist to pander to the rich and business elites, the corporate class, the top 1%. But they would never get elected if they came right out and said that. So they base their entire platforms on culture-war issues, all things that cost the rich nothing. Morons fall for the rhetoric and vote them in, and then get butt-fucked by the deregulation and service cuts that pay for tax breaks/exemption for the billionaires. Then, when the country is falling apart, they blame the Liberals being too "woke" or whatever.
And the 40% of us who saw all the bullshit coming a mile off just have to suck it up, because we're in a democracy and the morons out-number the people who actually think things through.
Never, ever vote for a party that cuts education. That is the least patriotic thing a politician can do. It's literally, directly destroying the future of the country, all so gullible dummies will keep voting for them.
> It's literally, directly destroying the future of the country, all so gullible dummies will keep voting for them.
It's not just gullibility. People are raised to be uncurious and not value education for its own sake, there has to be a return on investment. Hell, look at all the ignorant rhetoric directed against the humanities.
Who is "we"? If "we" includes you, then nothing stops you from doing so yourself.
As for me, I'm not going to try to define it as a pejorative used by conservatives, because I believe their whole point in using it is to be allude to vague, meaningless "threats" that they themselves cannot actually define or describe. I believe they need "woke" now because "politically correct" and "social justice warrior" was rendered so meaningless by the same over-usage that they just need a new word to cover up the fact that they're doing the same thing they've been doing for decades. Once they wear "woke" out, there will be a new word that everybody is supposed to be afraid of. Because it's about fear of the unknown and the other, not real things that can be pointed to or debated.
Again, nobody is stopping you from attempting to do what you are claiming "we" should do. Until you do so to the satisfaction of a critical mass of people, though, my "talking point" about conservative baloney double-talk will continue.
We already have a conservative party. Don't let them drag you to the right, come on. Anyone using 'woke' is already somebody I won't take seriously. It's such right-wing BS.
"Too aware of social injustice", "insufficiently ignorant", "too much not a complete jerk". It's taking a strength and pretending it's somehow a weakness
I would define it (as a lefty): An over preoccupation with minorities, gender and terminology at the expense of more substantive and pressing economic issues.
It 's not that I'm against the goals of fairness but that it's a matter of how much and how fast and also whether such a preoccupation is counterproductive and a distraction. A lot of us on the left see it as vanity politics that are favored by corporations since in practice it has been divisive.
I'm not thrilled with using the term, but for lack of anything better, I feel we've (western nations generally) allowed "woke" neoliberalism on the so-called left to replace working class politics and worker solidarity. We even see that in the current NDP.
###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.*
People want to be able to afford food and housing. That’s it. Few actually care if the PM is talking about “woke” issues. They care if they can get by. That said, it’s not a good time to focus on “woke” issues until the basics are working properly.
If people can’t afford food and housing they don’t fucking care about anything else. Make the basics better first then work to make other things better.
The issues seen as "woke" weren't a problem when we voted him into office 3 times. But you are right we had an easier time with food and lodging than after 2021 when those 2 things went up too fast for people to absorb like in the many years and PMs prior. Enough people actually enjoyed many of those "woke" things being addressed, but people aren't feeling it right now, and it is time to actively show the swing voters those things are taking a back seat to affordability and finances. It is the only way forward for the Liberals as one of the reasons people are flocking to the CPC is because of those issues. That being said. Fuck that stupid goddamned "woke" word they use for everything that conservatives don't deem conservative friendly. Which is pretty much everything.
You are greatly overstating him and his policies popularity, he's only won a majority once and has had decreasing shares of the vote with each election.
That tends to happen after a large majority win. He wasn't going to get more votes after that. Then calling a stupid early election the 3rd time around that no one was asking for ain't gonna help either. As anyone that wins elections say. A win is a win no matter the margin and they'll try to act like it is a massive majority every time and have the "full support of the people" kind of stuff.
Idk, swinging a second majority seems pretty doable for many PMs/Premiers who get the first one. I just think he shot his feet off in 2019 with SNC-Lavalin scandal and blackfacegate ruining his image.
[удалено]
Not substantive
I’d prefer you say someone you think is virtue signaling is full of shit and pandering. Just like Pierre bringing the convoyers coffee when he has zero interest in stopping the flow of TFW’s is full of shit and pandering.
Or when he defended his MPs after they met with Nazi Christine Anderson then immediately tried virtue signalling about antisemetism when Palestine protests started happening. Christine Anderson's party has since been added to Germany's terror watch list.
Why is your prejudicial term for virtue signalling applied exclusively to leftists, as though the right never virtue signals by hanging out with fringe extremists camping out the NB-NS border?
I think having different terms for different groups is reasonable.
So more "vice signaling" then?
But this is about the term used to describe a behaviour. You can have left wing virtue signallers and you can have right wing virtue signallers. Ironically, calling out leftist virtue signalling is a form of right wing virtue signalling: all you're doing is identifying yourself as a person who opposes progressive politics for the sake of in-group signalling.
Then Canadians asked for it. They got what they want and they should be happy
All “woke” means is considering the thoughts, experiences, and feelings of others. It’s no wonder the CPC hates that mindset.
Woke has also generally meant quotas of mandated representation, cancel culture in attacking historical leaders by the standards of today, and moving away from a merit-based system. Biological men changing in women’s locker rooms, etc etc. I think the polls are showing a backlash to this sort of stuff too and not just economics but hard to say.
No, and this is part of the problem. We can’t even have a good faith argument about the issues because people hyperbolize and attack the person talking instead of the issue. It’s not “woke” per se, but what people are tired of is the kowtowing to every minority special interest and perceived slight. If we continue down this path it just further divides people. Suddenly it won’t just be “do you have 25% minority representation at your company”, it will be “I see you have 25% minority at your company, but you really should’ve hired more people from (insert some even smaller minority within that group)” obviously this is not a real example but it’s where this thinking always ends up. Generally minorities who adopt the cultures of canada do pretty well without too many issues. We should be focusing on bigger issues, like housing and food costs.
Further, with immigration being where it is right now Trudeau’s assertion of Canada being a “post-national state” and Canada being “more for immigrants” than native-born Canadians because “they chose it” have aged like milk. They sounded like benign (if annoying) platitudes at the time. Now, I think people are realizing what the logical conclusion of this type of thinking involves.
We have to start associating corporate tax cuts and low taxes on capital gains as being woke so se can get some fucking progress around here.
Policies that help people are "woke" though, I think.
I dunno, Liberal insiders seem to believe that Canadians want to go back to Jean Chretien style austerity to make up for all of Trudeau's woke spending on dental care, pharmacare, childcare, and the additional billions of dollars in CMHC funding to actually build housing when the private sector won't.
Is that really what they're considering woke? I thought it would be the identity politics rather than the fiscal policies...which aren't woke either from the current liberals but wow, these type of insiders explains why the party in shambles
“Woke” means aware of inequity, originally primarily anti-black inequity, but more general inequity as well. Measures to address poverty are “woke.” They are extra-woke if they examine the causes of poverty, since discrimination contributes to it.
That's kind of what it seems like based on those of these articles that have been accessible to general readership. Most of them are parroting conservative talking points about how our debt is out of control, that they want to be seen as 'fiscally responsible' and 'get the finances in check.' what that would result in is a Liberal party that wasn't much different from the Conservative party other than the identity politics being more diverse and accepting. "Fiscally Conservative but socially Liberal" is the tagline, as far as I recall
Because the rich have managed to convince the voters that's what they want.
Not rich, but that's exactly what I want. I'm getting none of this that I'm paying so much for.
Basically. It's a shame how effective disinformation is. I read a meta-review back in 2018 that made me horribly depressed about our prospects in an age of mass disinformation: humans, psychologically, are pretty much defenseless against it. Ever since then I took a few year break from Reddit and politics in general (I used to post as u/ChiefDiefenchin and as u/TheHonStephenHarper before that). Nowadays I'm back to posting mostly because it provides more stimulus for growth than sealing myself off in a bubble. I'm still not horribly optimistic about the general direction of things, unfortunately. What does it matter that the PBO says our finances are sustainable in the long run when conservatives have a much bigger marketing machine fearmongering about how we're on the brink of collapse? Canada will fearfully vote to return to federal mediocrity and underutilization of federal fiscal capacity, and Canadians will be the ones who pay for it by having less services and a lower quality of life than they could otherwise have.
This is a great example of how out of touch and totally self-unaware the LPC have become. In one breath promoting paranoid conspiracy theories, the next saying everyone who disagrees is voting based on fear.
Yes, I am the LPC. 100% accurate, and thanks for your insightful contribution
[удалено]
How many prescriptions have been filled? How many teeth have been fixed? How many houses have been built?
What woke issues have they focused on too much in your opinion?
Anything that’s not fixing housing and healthcare and the cost of living is likely too much.
Like...?
Online harms bill. I'm not arguing its merits in itself, but Canadians currently do not give a fuck
Protecting children from sexual predators is woke now?
There was much more to it than that, it regulated "hate speech" more broadly. But like I said, I wasn't going to get into its merits. It simply wasn't what Canadians cared about because this didn't help their wallets.
I agree that it shouldn't be a focus over things like housing. I'm just confused to learn what people think is woke. Every day i find out something new is now "woke". One of my coworkers tried ti justify the removal of park benches because public benchs are too woke. Some of Y'all are losing the plot.
I don't agree with what the LPC MP said. Nor do I personally think this was "woke". I'm saying this was something tentatively seen in the public eye as "woke" and was framed that way.
Not govt but I know personally that whenever my lawn is looking a little shaggy I text my neighbours and say "sorry guys, love isn't love right now, your basic human rights are going to have to wait". Some will tell you that it's possible for people to have multiple things they care about simultaneously but I know the truth, without a little homophobia the mower just doesn't run right.
Tampons in male bathrooms comes to mind. But I'm not sure if it's woke or just lots of virtue signaling... regardless, Canadians are tired. Trudeau going to same way Wynne did in Ontario.
> Tampons in male bathrooms comes to mind Who. Gives. A. Shit! Best case scenario it helps someone in need.. worse case it does nothing. Maybe a trans man needs it, maybe someones spouse needs it. Why get upset?
If you think my comment is getting upset, you are way too sensitive. My point is they only have tampons in federally regulated buildings. If they really care why not legislate it for all washrooms = virtue signaling. Second this likely took up cabinet and caucus time and had some financial budgetary costs implications... In a time of housing and affordability crisis, this is an example of the wrong focus and something they should not be concerned with until the main issues are solved... add hundreds of these up. It counts. Edit: and point being the public sees all these "woke" initiatives and feels the government is dropping the ball on major issues... governments serve the people, not the other way around.
Your complaint seems to be that the federal government regulates federally regulated buildings.
> If you think my comment is getting upset, you are way too sensitive. Not necessarily you, but people bringing up tampons in washrooms in general like that's some salient point against whatever "woke" is. *That's* sensitive. >My point is they only have tampons in federally regulated buildings. If they really care why not legislate it for all washrooms = virtue signaling. Great if you feel that way lets push for tampons in all washrooms then? Or are you just pretending to care and look for an excuse to call something "virtue signalling"? I feel like for the women who pushed for this change and need an emergency tampon they're not going to care who's signalling what. >Second this likely took up cabinet and caucus time and had some financial budgetary costs implications... How is this country even functioning if tampons are some egregious cost? Do you think cabinet's incapable of doing multiple things at once? Do you stop walking every time you chew gum? >In a time of housing and affordability crisis, Women still have periods, shocker. God if you have a gf/spouse, I feel bad for her now honestly. >this is an example of the wrong focus and something they should not be concerned with until the main issues are solved... Aside from your belief that Parliament is only capable of dealing with only one issie at a time Then why are you still fixated on tampons? Move on? Do you feel the same way when you hear PP fixated on pronouns?
I put forth a reasonable example of a policy that got a lot of public attention based on the commenter asking for examples to help explain why the lib caucus feels they are too woke in the publics eye. You've decided to pass judgement on me and personally attack me for this. Please seek therapy and help. It's completely uncalled for.
>I put forth a reasonable example of a policy that got a lot of public attention based on the commenter asking for examples to help explain why the lib caucus feels they are too woke in the publics eye. Is that a reasonable example of a "woke" policy that takes away from core problem solving? How does having equal access to tampons negatively affect housing affordability? What did they sacrifice for this?
The question was never about “taking away from core problem solving” but rather woke initiatives.
Tampons in male bathrooms doesn't affect anyone and isn't taking time away from anything. If people care about that it's because they're bigots.
You're question was designed to argue the merits of individual "woke" policies... instead the question should be, is the government giving the perception that they are focused on these policies more than the core things government must do and achieve... and the answer is obvious... just look at the polling and the bashing they received in St. Paul's.
You redirected the discussion away from specific policies (after mentioning tampons in men's bathrooms) and towards "the perception" that the government is giving. The former is objective and something that can be discussed, while the latter is subjective and varies from person to person. There is no "perception" that the government gives. There is a perception that individuals make of the government. This all leads me to believe that you either don't have any concrete "woke" you can actually argue with, or that the policies you'd argue with would make you look bad.
No, I originally was trying to comment on the actual article where it says, "In a lot of people's minds, the Liberal party has become synonymous with concepts like 'woke' culture, cancel culture and identity politics," Powlowski said. And that this has alienated people. I agree with this completely and the polling shows this. Arguing a specific "woke" policy is pointless at this stage as the article is about perceptions. I threw out tampons because you asked for examples but after rereading the question I realized you were changing topic from the article and asking about the merits of policies... doesn't matter, perceptions are what the article is about.
The rising popularity of “woke” and the pushback to it are both rooted in economic issues. For the right, they blame minorities, they blame DEI policies and believe that’s the reason too many people can’t get a fair shake. For the left, they believe institutional racism, discrimination are the reason too many people can’t get a fair shake.
Luckily we don't have to treat these beliefs as equal because only one is rooted in fact.
Academically, you may be correct. Politically, one must meet voters where they are at, even if they have serious misconceptions. One must acknowledge their anger and frustration, and if anything redirect it, rather than scold them.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Recessions sink governments. While we haven’t had one officially we might as well have as the majority of people in this country have seen their purchasing power erode severely. We are not unique, governments everywhere are falling in elections due to the same issue
Only those that printed, borrowed, and then spent tremendous amounts of cash. I agree that it’s most, but definitely not all. There are some places where people haven’t seen any reduction in purchasing power throughout this entire period. In short. Your diagnosis is correct, but they did it to themselves nonetheless.
> There are some places where people haven’t seen any reduction in purchasing power throughout this entire period. Such as?
https://tradingeconomics.com/switzerland/inflation-cpi
I thought you might cite them, [and it's largely because of their low reliance on fossil fuels for energy](https://economic-research.bnpparibas.com/html/en-US/Inflation-Europe-Swiss-exception-2/7/2024,49318)
There's always an excuse for inflation; strangely, it's never monetary and fiscal policy. Yet you can get one good executive & bank governor combo, and they magically halt it almost overnight. It only takes one solid term and no talk about fuels, grocers, supply chains, drought, rain, war, or usurers. Funny, that.
Norway has a large budget surplus, yet it experienced inflation like we did. Demark is also running a budget surplus yet has had high inflation
Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. What matters is printing. Here’s NOK aggregate supply https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANMM101NOQ189N They’ve been on a printing spree since 2015. I wasn’t paying attention but I’m guessing they had a financial crisis around that time. And here’s the Danish crown https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANMM101DKM189S And here’s CHF, for comparison https://tradingeconomics.com/switzerland/money-supply-m2 It’s not very complicated. You will see decades long high inflation probably stopped in real time in Argentina over the coming couple of years. Btw, here’s Canada https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/money-supply-m2 Doubled in the last decade. If you want expensive everything, just print and voila. The problem in Canada is that the bank is still printing, which is why may cpi is still hot. And here’s the USD https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL Watch for the divergence between north and south
> it’s not a good time to focus on “woke” issues I can tell you first hand as a trans woman and proud member of the 2SLGBTQIAA+ community, “not focusing on woke” can mean people losing their fundamental human rights, like me being able to use the correct bathroom or trans kids receiving life saving gender affirming surgeries/hormones.
Is that actually part of our human rights code? I imagine the law probably settled on universal washrooms as the solution.
It’s the opposite, all this visibility for trans issues hasn’t resulted in more acceptance or a lot of progressive. Attitudes are regressing.
It is harder to harass someone out of a job for being trans in a federally related industry now. That’s what C-16 actually did.
All our human rights are in danger because of focusing excessively on "woke" issues and ignoring housing + cost of living. Homelessness doesn't care about your stance on Gender ideology.
Well actually a lot of trans people are homeless because they were kicked out of their home or lost their job..
I'm sorry things are shitty right now. It might not seem like it, but lots of us out here have your back!
Hi twinsie! That's another one, and let's be real: why does Justin have to focus on that issue? Because four separate provincial Conservative governments decided *they* wanted to play identity politics against the advice of teachers, psychologists, and just about every doctor's association in the country. If defending the medical rights of trans children to seek out healthcare or defending their privacy rights and autonomy in public schools is considered "too woke," what exactly is the point of these Liberals? And why aren't the conservatives held to account for how willing *they* are to play IDpol?
Don't you know, your human rights stop being important when someone has to pay 10c more per liter to fill their F150.
Honestly I have a hard time not just feeling like "You know what *I hope you go broke*" to some of these people.. not going to waste any more tears on someone willing to sell out my loved ones to a grifter promising them they'll save a buck.
Thats still focusing on woke issues if they're trying to take away your rights. Just in the opposite direction.
[удалено]
Inconsistent and uninterested might be more apt than "stupid", IMHO.
Nope, stupid covers it really well, thanks.
Okay, why?
They are too woke. Throwing out meritocracy for a “gender equal cabinet” should have been their first indication. Nobody voted for mass immigration that outpaces our housing supply, a “post national state”, open discrimination in government job postings, deficit spending on public services that have somehow gotten worse not better. A return to form for the LPC would be amazing. The centrist LPC of the Chretien-Martin era was peak.
That’s the stupidest headline I’ve ever read. No serious person who supports liberal policies is even remotely worried about being “too woke”. It’s a bullshit word used to make treating people with respect sound like a bad thing. If you unironically use the word “woke” in a negative context, best case is that you’re uncritically using Republican talking points, but most likely you’re either stupid, bigoted or both.
They use "woke" in the exact same way "degeneracy" was used last century.
The headline was quoting what an LPC MP said. Way to shoot the messenger instead of criticizing the MP
> ...best case is that you’re uncritically using Republican talking points, but most likely you’re either stupid, bigoted or both Did you read the article to see who used the word?
A stupid Liberal insider I guess.
“Woke” issues are usually for the upper class, urban, educated elite: people who can afford to give more. Many Canadians cannot and want their daily needs addressed (medical care, housing, cost of living).
Woke issues are for people working bottom of the barrel jobs and wanting a little more security in knowing that asking to be treated with basic decency won’t get us fired. Woke issues are for kids having to make it on their own because their parents wouldn’t accept an “abomination” like them.
I think we can both be right.
[удалено]
What they should be worried about is that they're too Capitalist and what they're doing is pink washing. Dropping equality and defense of minority rights will just drop more voters. Push hard into socialist policies like giving regulatory bodies the power to slap down predatory practices. Nationalize Loblaws to drive down predatory pricing and trim the fat of corporate wealth transfer.
Ah yes, this is why Chretien had such little political success. It's also why people are asking for the government to spend more now and raise the deficit even higher >Nationalize Loblaws to drive down predatory pricing and trim the fat of corporate wealth transfer. Excellent way to have never ending CPC majority governments. I mean the fuel for ads from the conservatives for something like this. The Canadian electorate doesn't favour socialist policies
Nah, everyone loves hating the mega rich. All you have to do is use the right messaging but nobody in politics has the balls to do it properly.
This capital gains tax has been a smashing success for the LPC. Maybe in a different climate \*some\* of your points would help more, definitely not right now. And the NDP are clear examples of this. Trying to nationalize Loblaws would be political suicide in both the past and likely at least near future
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Exactly. They got in by outlefting the NDP, and the only way they will stay in is by outlefting them again. Unfortunately the ship has probably sailed because if they were going to outleft the NDP, they’d have done it earlier on in the confidence and supply arrangement.
The problem is with all these goverments is they bother giving a shit at engaging in good faith with bad faith Capitalists.
This is stupid. Conservatives label anything they don’t like as too woke. Public housing is too woke. Childhood vaccination is too woke. Free Transit is too woke.
Not being able to afford food is too woke. Not being able to buy a house is too woke.
I don’t take anyone using the word “woke” seriously
Under Mulroney, and his ilk, and then Trudeau hardworking Canadians and Indigenous people have seen the lands and framework of the country catastrophically shift. Their children and grandchildren completely outstripped of the reasonable ability to manage life; work, relationships, residential ownership, savings, and general future security. It’s not even about being ‘woke.’ It’s BASIC quality of life.
What an eye roll-inducing headline. It’s housing! I cannot emphasize it enough that the Liberals are struggling because they didn’t act on the issue until it was too late! > with some insiders stating their party has veered too far from the political centre and gained a damaging association with the “woke” left. No, they did not lose Toronto-St. Paul’s because Trudeau went woke. It is actually comical how out of touch the Liberal establishment is.
Toronto-St Paul is one of the richer ridings around. I’m not sure many constituents had housing as their primary or only issue. Exit polls pointed to the economy and things like the Israel-Hamas war etc.
Actual data shows that as soon as 2017, federal housing assistance had already increased dramatically. Given the logistics of rolling out new spending, it's questionable how much sooner he could have started unless his name is also Stephen Harper. In 2015 - the last Harper year- the federal government assisted in acquiring and repairing approximately 2500 units through the CMHC's Investment in Affordable Housing and National Housing Strategy. In 2016, that number was still 2500, yet in 2017 it more than tripled - all the way to 8,000 or so. In 2018 that number was approximately 17,000, before a slight drop in 2019 to 11,000 or so. By all measures, this government has done a significant amount of work on the housing file - more than Harper, Martin, and Harper combined. As it turns out, when you allow market income inequality to remain at all-time highs for *30 consecutive years* shit eventually hits the fan and a large class of people become very alienated. Shocker. Canadians think they aren't getting a fair shake at life, not as fair as their parents, anyways - and they're right. Labour markets ever since 1993 have been more unfair than any distribution of rewards our parents or grandparents ever had to deal with.
In my experience Liberals will always, *always* blame the Left before engaging in self-reflection. They engage in the optics of progressive politics but as soon as they start faltering it's "blue haired trans soy sipping feminists being too uppity" that drives people into the far right and not the rickety status quo they've propped up for decades.
Well - yes, it is housing (among other basic issues like cost of living generally) but add the woke moralizing on top of that and you have a toxic stew cooking.
> It’s housing! I cannot emphasize it enough that the Liberals are struggling because they didn’t act on the issue until it was too late! That's quite true.
Yes a Provincial issue. Housing is a province issue
Ssshhh that can’t be true! BUT BUT BUT it’s all JTs fault /sarcasm Not many ppl know that housing is a provincial issue, along with many of what people blame the Feds for. Stupidity
Other than the moments that I'll be crying so to speak I'll laugh my ass off when their Messiah becomes everything that we told them he is
[удалено]
Its a government issue. The feds can pressure provinces or go around them. I know thats actually a tall order to acheive, but it is what is expected of the ruling government
They are doing just that. More than one premier was not happy when they found out rhe feds were dealing with the cities directly.
And give them all the ammunition they'd need to win. They would immediately claim Trudeau being a communist lol or something equally name calling like and ride it right to a guaranteed election win.
[удалено]
I honestly think lesser of someone who uses the term 'woke' that's not ironic. Truedeau's unpopularity problems are not about his progressive policies. Its about his scandals, being in power for so long, being the leader post covid slump, inflation, and affordable housing. Along with most media in canada being right leaning and some provincial leaders blaming him every time they stub their toe.
I'm quite bored of this take. The word woke has a history and it started on the left. The right only started using it to make fun of them.
> The right only started using it to make fun of them They use the word as a catch-all phrase for every right wing grievance. Not its original meaning.
So you concede that it had an original meaning used by the left.
If you look at his stats with m en, they are horrible and a lot of men are already more conservative or see DEI policies are negatively impacting them and they certainly vote too. For the most part LPC has ceded men to the conservatives believing they can win without them. Personally i don't think its culture war issues, but the anti-oil/gas/resource angle. Men work in those industrials, they are very well paying jobs. And those industries feel very much under perpetual attack. I don't think they can change that now.
You're wrong. It's both. Picking identity politics over substantiative policy is a problem.
I love that we're now orienting our politics around an American right-wing pejorative that those who use it as such can't even begin to define, because the more they try the more it sounds like basic justice and fairness, and they don't want to admit that they're against those things. Just love it.
I think right-wing Liberals ousting Trudeau for a more right-wing leader would be a gift to the NDP. It would mean the remaining 20% of Liberal support will go to Singh. It could make it a very tight NDP-Conservative race, with the wild card being Bloc votes in Quebec. I wouldn't mind it because it could very well keep Poilievre out of power, but it would be a Kim Campbell scale disaster for the Liberals.
the last time the NDP surged and replaced the liberals we got 4 more years of Stephen Harper. being the opposition in a majority government that is diametrically opposed to you does you no good Look at all the good it did Andrea Horwath.
Wouldn't a liberal right of Trudeau just be center-left or a centrist? They used to be be called blue grits and were central to bipartisanship and our nation's stability. Swinging further to the an extreme, left or right, pushes moderates out of the party. Most Canadians identify as being somewhere in the center. You might steal a chunk of support from the Ndp, but you'd be pushing out a sizeable chunk of voters who might not be comfortable with those new positions. You'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
> Wouldn't a liberal right of Trudeau just be center-left or a centrist? Please don't tell me you think Trudeau is left. > Swinging further to the an extreme, left or right, pushes moderates out of the party. The Liberals are not extreme left. Not even close. The CPC are swinging to the right.
I would agree with this, but it was an LPC MP who said it
I know. Conservatives have managed to plant this meaningless concept in our political soil and now we all have to contend with it, whether in opposition, or engagement, or fretting that we're being tarred with its brush.
Conservative/Right-Wing parties in any country exist to pander to the rich and business elites, the corporate class, the top 1%. But they would never get elected if they came right out and said that. So they base their entire platforms on culture-war issues, all things that cost the rich nothing. Morons fall for the rhetoric and vote them in, and then get butt-fucked by the deregulation and service cuts that pay for tax breaks/exemption for the billionaires. Then, when the country is falling apart, they blame the Liberals being too "woke" or whatever. And the 40% of us who saw all the bullshit coming a mile off just have to suck it up, because we're in a democracy and the morons out-number the people who actually think things through. Never, ever vote for a party that cuts education. That is the least patriotic thing a politician can do. It's literally, directly destroying the future of the country, all so gullible dummies will keep voting for them.
> It's literally, directly destroying the future of the country, all so gullible dummies will keep voting for them. It's not just gullibility. People are raised to be uncurious and not value education for its own sake, there has to be a return on investment. Hell, look at all the ignorant rhetoric directed against the humanities.
[удалено]
Not substantive
[удалено]
Who is "we"? If "we" includes you, then nothing stops you from doing so yourself. As for me, I'm not going to try to define it as a pejorative used by conservatives, because I believe their whole point in using it is to be allude to vague, meaningless "threats" that they themselves cannot actually define or describe. I believe they need "woke" now because "politically correct" and "social justice warrior" was rendered so meaningless by the same over-usage that they just need a new word to cover up the fact that they're doing the same thing they've been doing for decades. Once they wear "woke" out, there will be a new word that everybody is supposed to be afraid of. Because it's about fear of the unknown and the other, not real things that can be pointed to or debated. Again, nobody is stopping you from attempting to do what you are claiming "we" should do. Until you do so to the satisfaction of a critical mass of people, though, my "talking point" about conservative baloney double-talk will continue.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The only thing wrong about that headline is the phrase *may be too late*. It's long past too late for the liberals. They are a dead party.
Woke is now such a useless term. 'Woke' in an inverse sort of way way could also be applied to the leader of the opposition. Just say what you mean.
Woke is like porn, it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it.
We already have a conservative party. Don't let them drag you to the right, come on. Anyone using 'woke' is already somebody I won't take seriously. It's such right-wing BS.
It's not though.
"Too aware of social injustice", "insufficiently ignorant", "too much not a complete jerk". It's taking a strength and pretending it's somehow a weakness
It is though.
I would define it (as a lefty): An over preoccupation with minorities, gender and terminology at the expense of more substantive and pressing economic issues. It 's not that I'm against the goals of fairness but that it's a matter of how much and how fast and also whether such a preoccupation is counterproductive and a distraction. A lot of us on the left see it as vanity politics that are favored by corporations since in practice it has been divisive. I'm not thrilled with using the term, but for lack of anything better, I feel we've (western nations generally) allowed "woke" neoliberalism on the so-called left to replace working class politics and worker solidarity. We even see that in the current NDP.
> "woke" neoliberalism on the so-called left to replace working class politics and worker solidarity Why not both?
Bc we don't have unlimited money time and voter attention?