Sometimes, the majority is false because it only includes those with power. Sometimes the majority is not just wrong but actively selfish and maybe just a little evil.
Good point. I mean, look at the Australian referendum on giving Indigenous people a voice in that country.
If human rights were based on majority rule we’d still have slavery.
We bear witness. But CBC News does not itself designate specific groups as terrorists, or specific acts as terrorism, regardless of the region or the events, because these words are so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism.
Surely there are objective examples that require no attribution though. The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center is a good example.
As well, I don’t think there’s any argument that the Hamas attack on Israel could be anything other than a terrorist attack (without attribution) because they targeted civilians with the specific intent to kidnap. It wasn’t a country invading another country, or a case of a resistance force pushing out an occupier. Had Hamas attacked only military targets only the hard liners would call it a terrorist attack. But what Hamas committed was terrorist atrocities.
On the flip side, one could argue that Israel’s retaliations are state-sanctioned reprisals that ostensibly act as a means of terror to the Palestinian population. However, since Israel as a nation is condoning the military action I don’t think it could strictly be said it’s terrorism.
I think the bizarre thing is that unions are negotiating 3% wage increases and it’s like… that’s below inflation.
It’s a shame the pole won’t be in Scotland where it could serve as an education piece both about colonialism and Indigenous culture in British Columbia, but I do understand the desire from the Nisga’a to bring back something they feel belongs to their Nation.
I still call anyone who is infatuated with a topic of interest a nerd, but usually tongue in cheek because the likelihood is I’m also interested
Of interest, in Canada’s 2011 federal election the Conservative party with Stephen Harper won by painting Michael Ignatieff as a book nerd professor from Harvard University.
They ran ads with taglines such as “Just visiting,” “Just in it for himself,” and, most notoriously, “He Didn’t Come Back For You.” These all suggested he was an erudite professor from the USA who wanted to run Canada for his own self-aggrandizement and mocked his intelligence and academic bona fides.
They are among the best at it, you have to admit
I feel this is highly inaccurate because it would imply these faults are on the slave and not on the system. It’s not about the job, it’s about the slavery itself.
I found through personal experience that the prestigiousness of the job is highly irrelevant; it’s the working that sucks. It’s the mandatory devotion to literally anything that sucks one’s soul from one’s body. And yes, that does become repetitive, and leads to some of the symptoms described above.
But much of the above list are based on factors that are forced upon all of us:
It’s about the system, not the slaves.
Sorry, you misunderstand slightly.
I don’t mean investors in the sense of speculative parasitic humans who are devaluing life by overvaluing housing.
I mean, people like me who have worked from the age of 15-49 and now own a very modest sized apartment that is grotesquely overpriced and has quite literally enslaved me to mortgage payments for years to come.
If we devalue my apartment, why did I spend decades of sweat and toil to purchase it? Then it feels like I was playing the stock market.
And this isn’t the same argument as the “why should people get free school when I had to pay student loans” since one doesn’t affect the other. In this situation, if the value of homes come down too significantly, it’s literally devaluing my work.
I didn’t create the horrible dystopian system we live in but I do unfortunately have to abide by its rules. And now that I have a tiny piece (on paper but owned by the bank) I am hoping (like most Canadians) to take that piece and cash out to retire on in 10-15 years time.
What I’d really like to see is some kind of national housing strategy that guaranteed people basic housing regardless of their income (even if it’s “zero”). That housing wouldn’t impact the market but it could slow down the unhealthy growth of the valuation of housing.
If we could totally slow housing valuation growth to the normal 2% inflation, while also creating affordable housing for lower income/no income earners, then the system could adjust and that could be a true win win.
Homes will never again be affordable because the system is completely broken (and not broken in the Millhouse expression, but rather in a normal definition). We made housing a commodity rather than a necessity of life and it ended with predictable results.
Now we have the unpleasant decision of diluting the investment of millions of Canadians or continuing to allow millions of Canadians to never own a home.
I find cashier lines to be too slow because of the socialization so I always go to the self checkouts.
A lot of old ladies will go to cashiers and have ridiculous questions and requests and you’re standing there with your 3 items dying inside.
COVID-19 is now endemic, like influenza. However, we do have vaccines so every 6-12 months when we get a booster shot we can get a bivalent vaccine that contains some of the latest variant to help prevent serious illness. This allows us to recover much more easily, reduce transmission, and ultimately eliminate the clogging of hospitals.
The real danger is from people who refuse to vaccinate because they’re going to be more susceptible to the endemic virus and its subvariants.
Send death threats, get locked up. Seems to make sense.