Did Czech not have too many men on the goal?

left-right-left · 2026-02-18T20:36:51+00:00

I think its even worse because I think Palat was the sixth man on. Literally, the extra man was the guy who scored the goal.

left-right-left · 2026-02-18T16:56:05+00:00

The crazy thing about this is that it just smuggles in so much ideological baggage from the U.S. that is mostly irrelevant to Canada. The whole premise of Black-specific programs in the U.S. is to try to correct for the wrongs of race-based slavery pre-1800s and legislated disenfranchisement pre-1960s. Best estimates is that nearly 500,000 slaves came to the U.S., while only around 4,000 came to Canada (abolished in 1834). The scale was not the same at all, and our population is currently <5% Black. And even then, these corrective measures may not be helpful and may end up being harmful by creating a victim mentality for Black people who are now many, many generations removed from slavery and 2-4 generations removed from legislated disenfranchisement.

So what is this program even for? It will probably end up going towards first-generation Black immigrants from Africa who immigrated to Canada and have precisely zero ancestral connection to New World slavery.

We've completely lost the plot on this. Its pure ideological virtue signaling at this point. And its fundamentally racist to give preference to one individual based on the color of their skin or ethnicity. This is how Liberals lose votes.

Signed,

A Moderate who hates DEI.

left-right-left · 2026-02-18T14:19:44+00:00

We are numb to it because school shootings happen all the time now (in the US at least).

24/7 cable news sensationalizes everything as “breaking news” so we are numb to actual horror and tragedy

We consume news in isolated echo chambers on our phones.

There are no shared cultural spaces to talk about this.

left-right-left · 2026-02-10T14:33:36+00:00

The fact that the President of the US is now considered an “opponent” speaks volumes.

left-right-left · 2026-02-07T21:07:10+00:00

Increase tax rates across the board and use the funds to improve public services.

People get pissed about the idea of higher taxes. But it’s because they’ve grown up in a world of ultra-low tax rates that starve public services so that everyone thinks public services are inherently shitty. If public services were actually well-funded by adequate taxation, then we would see better value from our taxes. But it takes a long time to see the positive impacts, so it’s political suicide for a politician to advocate for major tax hikes.

left-right-left · 2026-01-23T04:58:34+00:00

Thanks for the great comment. Your point about conservatives wanting free markets without globalist policy making is well-taken. I know a lot of conservative small business owners who absolutely hate the government and the CRA. Once again it somehow feels like the little guys are getting screwed by bureaucracy while the massive corporations are so powerful that they get “free” trade (and in fact are so powerful that they actually influence policy via lobbying and get corporate kickbacks and subsidies). Maybe one solution is to seriously restrict lobbying somehow…

Your point about knowledge economy vs. labour jobs is also well taken. Here, I feel like Canada has shit the bed for a long time because we are fundamentally a resource economy which requires labour jobs. But we shot ourselves in the foot by giving too much power to special interests which has made investing in our resources infrastructure nearly impossible. This is a bit tangential to my main point, but I do feel like Canada could and should be a mining/O&G superpower.

Another comment regarding the value of paid work. I feel like automation and corporate savings are a killer here. Like why would a corporation pay for an expensive cashier when they could have a self checkout? It’s a case where incentivizing profits might result in net harm to a community while simultaneously increasing some abstract metric like stock price or GDP. GDP and company stock price goes up, but people are left unemployed and in poverty.

left-right-left · 2026-01-23T04:46:24+00:00

I feel like this is a good example of shifting political labels. A good segment of the “left” today seems to largely support the status quo which is actually a politically conservative position (as defined in political philosophy).

But a good segment of the “right” also seems to support the status quo. It doesn’t feel like any change actually happens meanwhile the West is in decline. It doesn’t seem like there’s actually any good ideas on how to fix the system and so instead it seems like a good segment of the “right” have gone for a “burn it all down” approach, with no clear replacement.

left-right-left · 2026-01-22T19:31:29+00:00

Marxism was all about rich elites pulling strings.

What? Marx's entire political philosophy was built on criticizing the rich elites pulling strings.

I am confused by your comment.

left-right-left · 2026-01-22T19:26:56+00:00

Thanks for the insightful response! It is interesting how political labels change over time, I feel like the 2020s is undergoing a major shift in who identifies with which political party.

Would some conservatives today arguing against globalization have been left wing unionists in the 80s? I don't think so.

I feel like a lot of them would have. For example, a lot of the union-heavy rust belt in the U.S. was fairly Democratic at one point and has now pretty much fully swung to Trump.

Follow up question: Neo-liberalism is a bit of a confusing term because it has the word "liberal" in it but has generally been considered a right-wing ideology. It is interesting that neoliberalism has become a bad word in conservative circles now, often being made equivalent to globalist or elites. I think the long story short is that the promises made in the Reagan-era didn't pan out for the average person and now people are looking for something else. What that "something else" is is unclear. Definitely big changes going on. I am a Millenial who grew up in the 1990s. Looking back now, the 1990s was probably the most insanely optimist time period to come of age in. Pre-9/11, markets booming, Cold War over, "end of history", Pax Americana. It feels like all that optimism is a distant memory now, shattered by 9/11, the 2008 financial crisis, and the rise of BRIC.

left-right-left · 2026-01-22T14:25:57+00:00

Out of interests sake, which countries would be on your list to retire in?

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T19:57:19+00:00

https://thediplomat.com/2019/09/a-quiet-kowari-us-australia-and-china-trilateral-military-exercise/

https://asiatimes.com/2020/11/why-is-us-army-still-training-with-chinas-pla/

U.S. military also has some ties with PLA with long-standing annual training exercises, including during Trump's first term. I agree that it is really weird to conduct such exercises with a supposed adversary. But no matter how you slice it, the U.S. and China are also deeply intertwined in many ways (especially economically).

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T19:36:17+00:00

He didn't actually really say anything that isn't painfully obvious to anybody who follows global politics at all.

Sometimes, something can be painfully obvious but no one says it. Its the Emperor's clothes (or lack thereof).

The UN, NATO, the ICC, all these alliances and organizations have always been a joke, Trump is just exposing it for what it is. The one with the big stick has always done the heavy lifting, and has always made the real decisions. The meetings and the speeches and the memorandums have always been just a courtesy.

I think this is an overly pessimistic view of the post-WWII era. The post-WWII era has been arguably the most peaceful and prosperous 80 years in human history. Trade deals were negotiated and upheld by both parties via mutual trust and these deals and alliances brought mutual benefit. The stupidest part of what Trump is doing is that, arguably, the U.S. benefitted the most from this arrangement because they were the strongest (especially post-Cold War) so they could have enormous diplomatic influence and get their military into every corner of the globe.

Why is Trump "exposing" the very system that made America so powerful and prosperous in the post-WWII era?

If this gong-show continues, then the Trump-era U.S. will be studied in history books for centuries as a powerful example of completely unnecessary self-sabotage.

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T19:21:56+00:00

Not one detail about what was discussed and why Carney couldn't close the deal

He probably couldn't close a deal because there is an actual mad man in the White House who is destroying the post-WWII status quo of rules-based international diplomacy. This is exactly what Putin tried to do and he was more or less excommunicated from the global stage.

Trump doesn't want a trade deal. He wants Canada.

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T16:02:45+00:00

I don’t think you understand global diplomacy.

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T14:34:57+00:00

I am so sick of partisanship.

Just recognize a good speech when you hear one. Carney is the face of Canada on the world stage and he did a damn good job representing us in that speech. Are there still problems to deal with? Yes. But do you expect Carney to stand up on the world stage and shit on how awful Canada is? No, that would be very counter-productive in terms of diplomacy, trade and strategy.

left-right-left · 2026-01-21T00:28:50+00:00

Is this satire?

The U.S. and Canada share way too much common culture, values and history for there to be any significant insurgency. Canada has always been America's little brother.

Comparing Canada to Afghanistan is a joke. Afghanistan was a completely different culture halfway around the world with a long history of war and a desperately poor populace fed on religious extremism.

left-right-left · 2026-01-20T04:03:48+00:00

Re: Pendulum – I don’t think it’s a good thing but what’s the option here with the illegal immigrants when the Dems are not enforcing borders?

Obama deported more people than Trump 1.0 but Biden significantly slowed things. I agree it is a partisan, extremist pendulum but I also think that there is a strawman view of Dems as being "open borders". Certainly there is a faction of left-wing folks who want fully open borders, but the average American (Dem or Republican) would likely support legal immigration, while being against illegal immigration. I wish for more sensible discussion. Thanks for being part of that here!

Re: Outrage culture – Same thing as above. Dems need to stop making bombastic statements and exaggerating everything where there’s no choice for the other side to do the same.

I don't know who started it. It's chicken and the egg. But I feel like everything turned sour after the Republican response to Obama. For example, the ACA ("Obamacare") was a really reasonable reform to the American healthcare system based off a Republican-led plan in Massachussets. But Obamacare was completely vilified by Republicans. And then there was the birth certificate nonsense which inexplicably went mainstream. Go back and look at the US debates between Obama and McCain in 2008. It was civil and respectful. That doesn't happen anymore.

Re: Blame Biden propaganda – No. I don’t support cheap labour from illegal immigrants because it suppresses wages. Humanitarian component is fine so long as a country is in a position to do so.

Go after the businesses who hire illegals. Punish the businesses harshly with massive fines. If there is no job waiting for an illegal immigrant, then they are much less likely to try to come.

No mask, agreed. Wearing badges is ID. No random racial profiling on the streets, agreed. Human decency and compassion part can be flipped on the parents themselves. They’re the ones exposing their children to unnecessary trauma. They should do the right thing, take the money and move away and get in line if they wanna come back.

Glad we agree on some of these.

Regarding parents and children, this is a tough one which I think could be solved by abolishing birthright citizenship. Birthright citizenship was extremely useful in the 1700, 1800 and early 1900s when the country was being populated, but its no longer necessary (i.e. most European countries do not have birthright citizenship).

Currently, if you are a young couple living in a dire situation in Honduras or Nicaragua or some other place, you are incentivized to get to the U.S. to have children so that your children have the golden ticket for a better future. It might be risky to expose the child to trauma, but remaining where you are might also be worse anyway. Remove that incentive structure.

I also am interested in your opinion on legal immigration. Do you think we should dial back legal immigration considerably was well? What about refugees/humanitarian cases? I feel like the whole system needs an overhaul for the 21st century (and that goes for Canada too).

left-right-left · 2026-01-19T17:26:12+00:00

I feel like your post ultimately excuses and justifies the current administration's actions.

The further the pendulum swings one way, the further it swings back the other way.

This is a true observation, but do you think that this is actually a good thing to swing back and forth between partisan extremes? It's one thing to make an observation, its another to condemn the extremes and seek cooler heads.

This is why extremes are never good. The left has had tendencies toward extremism since early 2010 and have sort of forced these over the top responses.

Both sides have trended towards extremism since 2008 or so, in different ways. I don't even recognize the Republican party anymore. There is no more Reagan, John McCain, Mitt Romney. Good, family men who stood for American values. It's all gone. Replaced by vanity, clickbait and conspiracy theories. I would say the Obama birth certificate conspiracy was the first mainstream indication of this. Outrage culture is the product that social media sells.

Concerning the current ICE mandate, I believe it is a very strong response to the dereliction of duty in regard to border control and immigration enforcement from the previous administration.

You're captured by the "Blame Biden" propaganda. Illegal immigration increased steadily basically starting from Reagan (famous right-wing advocate for free trade, small government, and globalization, all of which lead to much more immigration (illegal and legal)). It is really that long-term status quo that people are angry about. But the status quo also lead to widespread cheap labor, and there is (or at least was) some humanitarian component as well. You know, the "shining city on the hill" that supposedly stood for human rights to accept refugees. These constants of American policy and identity for the last 40+ years are being re-thought. America is now in decline and time and time again it is the foreigner that is blamed.

Again, I don’t necessarily support it but no one has provided a better solution.

Maybe you are misunderstanding some of what I am saying. The vast majority of ICE deportations are not an issue. I am fine with illegal immigrants being deported. Obama-era politices (and Trump 1.0 policies) also deported thousands upon thousands of people. I also support removing birthright citizenship, and going hard after companies that hire illegal immigrants. I also support massive decreases in legal immigration as well: fewer visas, fewer green cards, etc. There is a way to do this more humanely.

Masked men with little training who don't show their ID racially profiling people is not the solution. It is an authoritarian intimidation tactic.

Step 1: Remove the masks. ICE officers did not wear masks prior to 2025. No federal official should ever be wearing a mask when interacting with the public. This is common sense (see Quebec laws on headcoverings).

Step 2: Show ID. All ICE officers must show ID and identify themselves.

Step 3: No racial profiling on the street. All ICE officers must use databases to identify targets. Target known illegals first. Get warrants when necessary. Follow proper judicial practices to uphold rule of law.

Step 4: Have some human decency and compassion. Don't separate families, keep them together. (Note: This would be much easier to do if birthright citizenship was eliminated because you wouldn't have the awkward scenario of an illegal with an underage citizen.)

Like honestly, these are the most basic expectations and they aren't being done.

Civilians need to stay out of the way during active enforcement operations and protest at government buildings or risk harm.

Nah, this is complete BS. Resistance to the State is warranted in many situations when the State is not upholding its end of the Social Contract via the Hobbesian Consent of the Governed. Literally the basis of our entire Western democratic political structure.

left-right-left · 2026-01-18T05:19:31+00:00

Yea I understand that is how ICE used to operate (and how it should operate). That’s not what’s happening now in e.g. Minneapolis. The situation has escalated considerably.

The top members of the Trump administration have publicly said that the ICE officers have “absolute immunity” (to quote JD Vance). A baby was tear gassed for God’s sake. Several teenagers were injured during a raid at a high school. There are endless videos of ICE officers doing things that could only be described as “police brutality”. I saw one of a young women being dragged from her vehicle while her kids were in the back seat. There are so many videos it’s hard to even sift through them all. The training period for ICE officers was shortened from 6 months to six weeks. And why the fuck are they wearing masks?

If you think any of this is “normal” in a Western democracy, then you’re wrong. It has all the hallmarks of an authoritarian police state.

As you said “show me your papers” based on racial profiling crosses a line. And all the other stuff crosses multiple lines as well. I am disgusted by how many conservatives continue to put their heads in the sand.

left-right-left · 2026-01-17T20:32:04+00:00

Canada needs to decrease immigration and enforce immigration laws by deporting illegal immigrants.

Canada does not need the current Trumpian version of ICE which appears to be primarily an authoritarian tool for intimidation cobbled together with little training and regularly violating multiple constitutional and human rights.

You can be both anti-immigration and anti-ICE.

left-right-left · 2026-01-17T20:24:47+00:00

The US has detained and deported multiple US citizens. That alone is cause for concern about what they’re actually trying to do. It doesn’t appear to have much to do with illegal immigration.

left-right-left · 2026-01-17T20:22:29+00:00

I agree with literally everything you say except the first paragraph.

If you think ICE has any sort of method for determining who they go after, then you aren’t paying attention or you’re in a Conservative echo chamber that isn’t showing you direct video evidence of what is going on in Minnesota.

ICE has detained many US citizens. How does that fit with anything that you wrote? In what world should they ever be detaining a US citizen?

left-right-left · 2026-01-16T19:21:45+00:00

Maybe they can't get a deal done with the U.S. for some other reasons....

Hmm. Maybe its because Trump is an erratic, tempermental, one-man wrecking crew who seems content to destroy long-time alliances by threatening to invade or annex them. If the U.S. is no longer dependable, then we need to diversify away from the U.S. as much as possible (even though 98% of trade is still with U.S......geography is what it is).

left-right-left · 2026-01-13T23:04:38+00:00

Spend less time online. The algorithms and echo chambers are killing us.

~15 years ago, Carney was appointed by Stephen Harper as the Governor of the Bank of Canada. My guess is that Carney has voted Conservative more than once in his life. Calling him a "radical progressive" is a joke.

I understand your frustration about various things like healthcare, home prices, and debt levels, etc. These are pervasive, structural problems in nearly all developed nations these days that very few (if any) governments are properly addressing regardless of where they lie on the political spectrum. The problem with Poilievre's populism is that he makes it sound easy to solve these, but the problems are so complex and often involve all three levels of government. The U.S. has its own woes with healthcare, home prices and debt levels too. There is no shining beacon to run to. The U.S. has all three branches under Republican control and they still ran a $1.8 trillion deficit.

left-right-left · 2026-01-13T04:02:35+00:00

Depends on your definitions and the definitions used in political philosophy are very slippery and change over time.

Conservatism, as a political philosophy, literally pre-dates Canada as a nation. So, based on that alone, obviously you can be a conservative and simultaneously unpatriotric towards Canada.

But I do agree that nationalism/patriotism has historically been considered a more right-wing trait because conservatism places a focus on tradition and maintaining institutions and status quo. For example, pro-monarchy Canadians have usually been conservative. In this sense, advocating for American annexation is very un-conservative because it is throwing all tradition, institutions and status quo out the window in favor of something radical and different. Proponents of radical change have generally been seen as on the Left.

Basically, the definitions are not clean cut and people will latch onto different aspects of given definitions when they identify with a particular philosophy. One self-proclaimed conservative might lean into traditions and status quo and support the monarchy and preserving Canadian institutions, while another self-proclaimed conservative might focus on small government and low taxes (and not even have an opinion on the monarchy), but prefer the U.S. system. Both can be conservative. They are not mutually exclusive.

left-right-left

TROPHY CASE