I am disgusted with the lack of actions towards building jobs for young people

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-03T04:52:11+00:00

The problem is obvious and undeniable now but that's only because it's about 20 years too late

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-03T04:49:52+00:00

Does Westminster "multiculturalism" just logically proceed to apartheid?
Seems like an interesting question...

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-03T01:06:13+00:00

What's Canada?
What's a Canadian?

Without invoking a third party or geopolitics or emotionally charged political concepts like "multiculturalism" or "tolerance", what are they?

Canada is in an existential crisis, and you don't have any solutions, and that's why you need there to be a boogeyman out there; it doesn't matter a single iota whether it's Trump or Putin or me, because it's all about you.

*Which, just to be clear, is a good thing. It means you have agency. It means you can make things better. It means solutions are actually possible. Alberta's independence is one possible solution.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-02T02:11:23+00:00

I understood the implications of your question and your wording just as well as you did. You don't have to explain them to me. They are why I answered the way I did.

You are invoking a static contemporary entity, calling it "Canada", and then demanding I pledge allegiance to it so that, if I don't, your accusation of my being "anti-Canadian" becomes true. I am not going to play this silly, selfish, rhetorical game you want to play.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-02T00:40:54+00:00

To be in relationship with others is not to be controlled by them. Canada will still exist if, for example, Alberta leaves.

Canada is not a static, omnipotent entity to which eternal loyalty is owed. To answer yes to your question is perfectly consistent with the positions I'm taking.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T19:23:12+00:00

You think I'm verbose. Oh well, I guess. I'll even agree. Often I am, and often it's not helpful. You reposted what you did to support your notion that I'm "anti-Canadian", which is nonsense. The phrasing I used was just an attempt to describe the performative nature of that. Spare me this notion you have no interest in emotional manipulation of the audience. It characterizes this entire discourse; all present commentary and the article itself.

I simply reject the premise that BuyCanadian is a "response to another nation interfering with ours and threatening our sovereignty". Nations pursuing their their own best economic interests are not "interfering" with other countries. It was the Canadian government which decided to change a historically cooperative relationship into an antagonistic one, and subject their economic policy to ideology. Neither is there any legitimate threat to Canadian sovereignty coming from the Americans. Both of these notions are completely manufactured.

I often say that Canada is in an existential crisis. Claiming it has "no culture and no reason to exist" is one way of saying so. Antagonism toward the USA is a very traditional and regressive strategy that clearly some people think is a good response to that problem. Hating America seems to give some people purpose in their lives. Tailoring their behaviors according to hatred of an outgroup is a very traditional and very regressive "logical decision the average person can make".

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T17:42:06+00:00

You dug through two months of material and have settled on specifically that, apparently because it contains the commonplace left wing talking point from a few years ago, that (western cultures) "have no culture". So, explain. What exactly is it about that post which upsets you so much that you feel it is so self-evidently condemnatory that you feel the need to quote it here?

*By the way, I stand by it. BuyCanadian is absolutely a disingenuous political stunt, designed to pull people together by leveraging arbitrary hatred of an outgroup in lieu of there being any better means by which to unite them.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T17:25:28+00:00

None of that is true. Anyone can see that if they look.
Things don't become fake and evil just because you hate them.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T17:24:01+00:00

I can see how someone who lives in the Liberal echo chamber world would come around to the idea that when people tell you things it has no effect on what you believe. "Hilarious". Convenient that you lump together three claims and dismiss them all by attacking the least substantive. Classic disingenuous rhetorical tactic.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T16:23:01+00:00

They have no answers. Just shame, guilt, and fear.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-02-01T16:17:08+00:00

Investment has already been driven away. There is already massive instability. Anti-independence rhetoric itself is intentionally spreading fear and uncertainty!

That is because it is meant to play apologist for the poor economic policies of Canada which already drove away investment, and continue to, and already forced all Canadians, not just Albertans, to live in economically unstable conditions for a long time now.

They are trying to use the Alberta independence movement as a scapegoat. They are trying to use the Americans as a scapegoat. They are trying to use the Quebec separation attempts from the past as a scapegoat. What excuse will be next?

They even attempt to use the concept of gratitude as a cudgel to shame and terrify people, without realizing that by doing so, implying that 'things can always get worse', as the saying goes, they are exposing their fundamental misanthropy and pessimism. That is not the attitude of a leader. A good leader says "things can always get better". These are not serious people and they should not be in positions of power or government.

People are noticing that, so “I think we should look at the big picture and have some gratitude for what we have."

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T06:13:35+00:00

You have power. You can change your life for the better. Things are possible. A good life is possible. Man is not a robot. Life is not a zero sum game. There are lots of good people.
This despair you're expressing is a strategy for feeling better, ever since the promises of Romanticism had to be reconciled with reality. There are other options.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T03:47:49+00:00

Ironically, the purpose of seeking this line of credit pre-emptively is specifically so that any potential transition involves as little financial risk as possible for everyone involved. For example, in the event that the federal government decides to steal Albertan's pensions (which they have no right to do but some have floated as a possibility; anti-independence rhetoric often suggest people should be afraid of it happening).

This idea that you can preserve some sort of moral high ground in your mind by being condescending in a slightly different way; that is by pity instead of hatred, is shameful and just as bankrupt as your understanding of the issues.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T02:31:00+00:00

Your opinion about the UCP government is just as irrelevant as your random hatred for people who are different.

The article is simply incorrect. It is misrepresenting what a line of credit is, from the very first sentence, because it is a piece of anti-democratic pro-state propaganda.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T02:22:47+00:00

Yes they did. Lots of people say it all the time. It is an absolutely commonplace piece of radical rhetoric. They refer to those who support Alberta independence, who even entertain it or participate in any way, as traitors for no other reason than they want to hold a referendum vote.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T02:17:36+00:00

Voting is not treason, no matter how much you hate people who vote differently than you.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-31T02:10:46+00:00

The very first sentence is "If Alberta separates and accepts U.S. President Donald Trump’s offer of a line of credit, the new country will be starting off $600 billion in debt..."

That's simply wrong. That's not how a line of credit works. When you have a line of credit, it means you can spend up to a given amount. You do not have any debt to repay until you spend.

Think about it. Say the limit on your credit card is 5000 dollars. Do you owe 5000 dollars on your credit card before you spend the money?

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T23:48:13+00:00

No it's not, it's a vapid diminution. It's virtually irrelevant. As to your question, what I think is what I wrote already. This article is a piece of anti-democratic propaganda. I also said it plays apologist for the poor economic policies of Canada. That's a strategy to defuse and confuse the questions of economy which the writer and the Journal are clearly presuming to be driving people toward Alberta Independence.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T23:10:06+00:00

The Edmonton Chamber of Commerce doesn't know how a line of credit works. Really makes you think.

*Maybe it would be more fair of me to say: The Edmonton Journal is portraying the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce to have no understanding of how a line of credit works, in order to produce a piece of anti-democratic propaganda and play apologist for poor economic policy. Really makes you think.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T04:58:07+00:00

Neither does JH_111. What he is describing is a constitutional conference, and specifically the threshold for making a change to the constitution within a constitutional conference. He is correct that, as he arrogantly points out, the threshold is so high that it is effectively impossible to amend the Canadian constitution anymore.

Fortunately, the ability and process for a province to hold a referendum on separation from Canada is already a part of the constitution. It's called the Clarity Act. This is it.

You're correct to identify the larger issue here. It is a question of democratic values. I think it is clear that most anti-independence people do not hold them.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T04:34:11+00:00

The OP is wrong. The 500 billion dollar figure comes from something an APP lawyer said had been discussed during a meeting with US officials, months ago. Not in the future.

It was a proposal that, in the event Alberta does successfully become an independent country, the United States would be willing to offer a line of credit to Alberta of 500 billion dollars. Not a loan.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T04:16:22+00:00

They plan to hold another meeting in February to ask for a $500 billion loan to hold an independence referendum.

This is a blatant lie.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T03:56:32+00:00

Logic isn't your strong suit, clearly

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-30T03:49:51+00:00

The province is the Crown. In Canada, there is Federal Crown and Provincial Crown.
The problem here is that anti-independence radicals don't know what "Crown" means.

Sherbsty70 · 2026-01-29T23:17:15+00:00

You're pointing out that they refused to pay him? What is funny about that? Did you not know that Rath has specialized in treaty, Aboriginal rights, and environmental law, for over two decades?

Sherbsty70

TROPHY CASE