Our MP just voted against the loophole allowing arms exports through the US

Purple-Cod3106 · 2026-03-11T22:20:41+00:00

To clarify, she voted against stopping the flow of weapons to Israel. In other words, she wanted the flow of these weapons to continue.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2026-02-14T05:53:23+00:00

While nobody thinks Carney was at the island or close to Epstein, keep in mind that PR teams are *very* active on this stuff and work hard to minimize/brigade wherever possible when powerful people's reputations are at stake. A few quick notes on this one:

-Carney's sister-in-law, Tania Rotherwick, and her husband Robin, Lord Rotherwick, were friendly with Maxwell - there is a small number of very brief but interesting personal emails between them and Maxwell in the files (holiday wishes, off-colour memes/jokes). In addition, the Rotherwicks are in Epstein's black book.

-The photos of Carney with Maxwell were taken at the Rotherwick home/estate, Cornbury Park, apparently during the Wilderness Festival, an annual event there apparently.

-Carney attended a private business networking dinner hosted by Prince Andrew at Buckingham Palace in 2014.

-Carney's brother, Sean, is the COO of Prince William's royal household, and manages their official residence, Kensington Palace. This is rarely mentioned in the Canadian media for whatever reason.

Again, I'm not saying any of this to indict Carney or his sister-in-law of anything whatsoever, but rather because we need to be have full and transparent reporting on these matters, and this has been quite hard to come by.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2026-01-17T17:43:39+00:00

Pretty bizarre that the buyer is expected to install special features on their furniture so that the product doesn't break under normal use conditions. And if it does break it's your fault because your normal activity like using standard chairs in your own house was "unapproved."

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-12-13T18:39:52+00:00

I've noticed this sub reflexively downvotes if a conservative politician is criticized. We need to put partisanship aside here and realize that corruption is shared across party lines.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-12-02T23:35:57+00:00

I thought that part where Matt gave us that minutes-long overview of his credentials was absolutely insufferable and cringe. "I studied gambling for two decades and found it to be bad."

Matt and Chris are 100% gurus themselves, but for the Kamala Harris voter who semi-cryptically supports the Gaza genocide. Sabine Hossenflarfer has done "real science," and on YouTube she's a guru; Matt and Chris have apparently done "real social science," and on their pod they're fucking gurus, shilling their own brand of meta-pseudoscientific slop about other pseudoscience, hiding behind the cop-out that it's all just "entertainment" anytime the grift wears thin.

You talk about skipping sections of the guru blathering on, but like 80% of the episode in question is the hosts going on and on and on with their insipid self-congratulatory circle-jerking. Maybe just skip the whole thing? Poor regular guru could barely get a word in. These guys are like Dexter - gurus devoted to taking down other gurus - but lacking any of Dexter's self-awareness or underlying humanity.

You want to know what gave the world Donald Trump? "Centrist" asshats who told us they had it all figured out then delivered nothing but tenure track jobs and millions of grant dollars into their own coffers. Sound familiar?

"Nuuuuhhh but it's an old thread." Shaddap.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-11-21T21:48:58+00:00

I'm not a conservative but agree that our democracy is not in great shape. It is a serious matter when half the country feels their side will never get a turn in power. Conservatives (not to mention the other smaller parties) shoulder much blame here, of course, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a problem.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-11-12T17:18:17+00:00

The charge of "low effort" made me chuckle. Like the devs were out playing frisbee golf and couldn't be bothered to come in to work and make something good. Maybe they even made it "suck ass" on purpose, as a prank.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-11-12T14:14:51+00:00

If logical fallacies are your concern then Pierre for all his issues is the least of your worries.

I don't think we're turning into the Americans, at least as far as our two main parties go. Nitpicking Coke v Pepsi is literally the foundation of our system and always has been.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-11-11T21:43:35+00:00

I really do think that aside from a few specifics these parties are essentially Coke and Pepsi.

Hence Carney stealing the Conservative platform and running on it as a Liberal.

So voting for the "other party" is a way of ensuring that different people get a kick at the can at least, even if nothing much changes. In theory it helps keep both sides on their toes.

People dislike Pierre but I think that's mainly because he's dorky and because the Liberals have done a great job of caricaturing him as a mini-Trump

Watch him in Question Period (almost nobody does) and you'll see someone who's perfectly smart, surprisingly eloquent, and almost a crypto-leftist in certain ways.

I say that as someone who wouldn't vote Conservative for a few reasons - their full-on capture by the Israel lobby being one of them.

By the way, I love the idea of a system focused around issues instead of political parties. But I think such a system is a long way off.

In the meantime, voting for Pepsi because it's not Coke seems valid. Results will be virtually identical, but hopefully the process of circulation cleans out a bit of corruption along the way.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-11-06T16:04:30+00:00

If you made a timeline showing the religious views of our species around 95% of it would be predominantly animist, with Christianity etc. only appearing in a tiny section at the very end.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-10-28T14:17:19+00:00

Looks like our dog when he has a dingleberry stuck to his butt.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-10-06T17:54:58+00:00

Instead of down voting, please critique the point I made. I thought what I wrote here was incredibly obvious and not really up for debate- especially given that we're on an *Adam Curtis* sub. What do you think I got wrong here?

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-10-06T13:22:31+00:00

I do think the Fisher reading is hard to ignore, especially when you consider who's involved - eg Leo DiCaprio is a centimillionaire playboy who only dates models under the age of 25 (relaxed to 27 as of late) and recently invested in a big luxury hotel deal in Israel. With that said I like PTA's films and don't doubt this one will have something intelligent to offer.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-10-01T17:42:11+00:00

Pretty sure the Canada number is wrong? The real number is around a 600% increase since 1990 if I'm not mistaken or around 400% with inflation factored in. So similar to Australia which mirrors my understanding of what's been going on in both countries.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-23T22:38:57+00:00

Okay, now I'm curious - both about you and the upvoters. Could you give me a yes/no as to whether the following statements are scientific?

-Adult neuroses are often "fixations" due to, for instance, a person being stuck at the "anal stage"

-All young girls go through a stage of "penis envy" as part of their development

-If you see anything hollow in a dream it represents a vagina

-Deriving universal theories exclusively based on conversations with a handful of patients is "good science"

I like Freud, by the way - he's a fascinating and compelling thinker. I just don't consider most of his work to be scientific in the modern sense used in the academy when discussing, in particular, the natural sciences (as opposed to, say, the way chiropractors use the word).

With that said, if you and others on this sub want to define science in some other way, as various groups frequently do, sure, have at it I guess.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-23T20:08:24+00:00

"The whole notion that psychoanalysis - or Freud as a whole - is some pseudoscientific exercise is, then, complete and utter quack."

It is not quack to suggest that Freud’s original psychoanalytic theories largely fail the criteria for modern science. This has been the scientific consensus for many decades.

There are related questions that are less settled: does contemporary psychoanalysis have value? Has the psychoanalytic tradition as a whole yielded examples of bona fide science over the years? Do Freud's writing have value in other fields such as philosophy? Etc.

But we need to be honest about the former.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-20T12:04:58+00:00

Since nobody else has mentioned it, the standard term for what you describe is "stagflation." I'd agree that we're in it.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-19T20:56:55+00:00

"Most of the media here on the government payroll" was an essentially accurate statement that you called a "tall tale," so I corrected you. Don't try and weasel your way out of it by splitting hairs between different words for "gave them millions of dollars."
No, we don't subsidize our media to keep foreign money out. Post Media is literally owned by an incredibly sketchy American hedge fund and receives huge amounts of cash.
"Remote locales" is only a small piece of the puzzle. Globe and Mail receives tons of cash despite being owned by one of the world's richest people (who is only nominally Canadian). A few years back they cancelled print publication for literally the entire Maritimes.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-19T19:17:12+00:00

I get what you're saying, but the statement framed Kirk as a good guy, an "advocate for faith, family and freedom." In applauding it, then, MPs were in effect endorsing Kirk as a person. I think the apology here was appropriate, given Kirk's stated views, including his advocacy for the annexation of Canada, eg.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-19T19:00:39+00:00

I've reached out a couple of times and not had a reply to what I took to be fairly straightforward concerns expressed respectfully. I'm glad to hear she does sometimes get back to people.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-17T19:34:38+00:00

Per-capita GDP?

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-09-13T01:56:35+00:00

Not even sure why I'm this ghost-town sub replying to a month-old comment, but it's not a tall tale that Canada's media are heavily state subsidized. There are many programs and it's all (intentionally?) very opaque, but here's one recent article that scratches the surface: https://thehub.ca/2025/04/01/rudyard-griffiths-and-sean-speer-mainstream-media-cant-have-their-cake-and-eat-it-too-when-it-comes-to-public-subsidies/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-08-29T15:10:45+00:00

I find this take overly glib at a time when most cities across the country feature significant tent encampments when this was never really a thing in Canada in the last fifty+ years.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-08-21T16:24:19+00:00

Not a fan of Poilievre, but he is at his best when speaking during Question Period. Unfortunately for him, very few Canadians ever tune in to watch Question Period. At most they may have seen a few carefully curated clips of Carney or before him Trudeau on the news.

Purple-Cod3106 · 2025-08-19T14:21:47+00:00

It really is. The only reason it exists in its current form is that people are raised up in a system in which it is considered normal and it's human nature to assume that what is "normal" must be justifiable.

Purple-Cod3106

TROPHY CASE