You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Politics’ tag.
A Canadian Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) could offer significant positives by tackling the perennial issue of bureaucratic bloat. With a mandate to optimize processes, cut waste, and boost accountability, DOGE could save taxpayers billions—think of trimming redundant programs or digitizing outdated paper-based systems. Inspired perhaps by Elon Musk’s and Vivek Ramaswamy’s vision for a U.S. version, it might bring a results-driven ethos to Ottawa, using data analytics and AI to identify inefficiencies, like overlapping agency roles or sluggish service delivery. For a country with a sprawling public sector, this could mean faster disaster relief, shorter healthcare wait times, and a leaner government that actually delivers what citizens need without the usual red tape.
However, the negatives could stack up quickly if DOGE isn’t carefully designed. Critics might fear it becomes a Trojan horse for slashing essential services under the guise of “efficiency”—imagine cuts to social programs or environmental oversight that hit vulnerable Canadians hardest. There’s also the risk of over-centralization: a ministry obsessed with streamlining could steamroll local nuances, like the unique needs of rural provinces versus urban centers, creating one-size-fits-none solutions. And let’s not ignore the irony—if DOGE itself gets bogged down in political infighting or mismanagement, it could end up as another layer of bureaucracy, costing more than it saves while fueling public cynicism about government competence.
The success of a Canadian DOGE would hinge on its ability to balance ambition with pragmatism. Done right, it could be a game-changer, modernizing governance and restoring trust in a system often seen as sluggish and out of touch. Picture a DOGE that collaborates with provinces, respects regional diversity, and prioritizes citizen outcomes over blind cost-cutting—like speeding up infrastructure approvals without gutting safety standards. But if it devolves into a ideological buzzsaw or a toothless paper tiger, it’d just be another acronym in the alphabet soup of government failures. Canada would need clear metrics, transparent oversight, and a willingness to adapt to make DOGE more than a catchy name—it’d have to prove efficiency isn’t just a buzzword, but a promise kept.
The Liberal Party of Canada’s (LPC) strategy of proroguing Parliament, seemingly to bide time for external political currents like Trump Derangement Syndrome to shift public sentiment, is a calculated maneuver that reeks of opportunism. By suspending legislative proceedings, the Liberals create a convenient pause, allowing them to sidestep immediate accountability while waiting for a wave of anti-Trump sentiment to bolster their image as a preferable alternative to the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC). This approach hinges on the hope that Canadians, distracted by U.S. political chaos, will overlook the LPC’s own inconsistencies and rally behind them as a bulwark against perceived extremism. It’s a crafty exploitation of timing, leveraging international headlines to mask domestic shortcomings, but it betrays a cynical reliance on external factors rather than a principled stand.
The LPC’s subsequent pivot to adopt key planks of the CPC platform—eliminating GST on new homes, scrapping the carbon tax, and revoking the capital gains tax—further exposes their strategy as a shameless theft dressed up as pragmatism. These policies, long championed by the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre, were once derided by the Liberals as impractical or regressive, yet now they’re conveniently repackaged as bold, voter-friendly moves under Mark Carney’s leadership. This isn’t adaptation; it’s a bald-faced grab at populist appeal, executed with a sleight of hand that assumes Canadians won’t notice the hypocrisy. The Liberals’ willingness to jettison their own ideological moorings—once centered on progressive taxation and climate action—demonstrates a craftiness that prioritizes electoral success over coherence, revealing a party more devoted to power than to any governing philosophy.
This unctuous display underscores the LPC’s unflinching and unethical commitment to clinging to power at any cost, even if it means sacrificing integrity. Proroguing Parliament to dodge scrutiny, waiting for Trump-related hysteria to tilt the field, and then pilfering their rival’s playbook isn’t just strategic—it’s a slimy betrayal of public trust. It paints the Liberals as a party willing to bend any principle, adopt any stance, and manipulate any situation to avoid losing their grip on Ottawa. While the tactic may prove effective in the short term, especially with polls showing a Liberal surge as of March 22, 2025, it leaves a lingering stench of desperation and dishonesty, suggesting that for the LPC, the ends will always justify the means, no matter how greasy the path.
The decision by the current Liberal Government in Canada to prorogue Parliament is a stark demonstration of political opportunism trumping democratic principles.
By shutting down Parliament, they’ve effectively silenced the legislative body’s ability to hold the government accountable at a crucial juncture, especially with the looming leadership change. This move appears less about a necessary “reset” for government action and more about buying time to manage internal party politics ahead of a potential vote of non-confidence.
It’s particularly egregious given the backdrop of significant national and international issues that demand parliamentary attention, including economic recovery and international relations.
The prorogation not only delays important legislative work but also undermines the democratic process by preventing timely scrutiny of government actions, further eroding public trust in a government that seems more focused on self-preservation than public service. This is not governance; it’s a blatant manipulation of parliamentary procedure for partisan gain.
One of the features of partisan thinking is answering a question with a response meant to incriminate the other side, rather than addressing the substance of the question. Watch and see it on display not once, but several times – having an honest conversation with someone like this is quite frustrating.
1. Compared to what?
2. At what cost?
3. What hard evidence do you have?
Imagine somehow thinking that displaying another nations flag – for Canadian political party – is a good thing. The NDP is lost.
1. Communism is when depraved freaks make it illegal to be normal, and kill all the successful people.
2. Fascism is when normie dullards make it illegal to be weird, and kill all the bright and creative people.
The depraved freaks from #1 think they are the bright and creative people from #2.
They are not.
All those people gyrating half-naked in front of children at pride parades think they are Oscar Wilde, but they aren’t.
When societies become highly permissive, the productive weirdos, the ones who simply can’t fit in because they are creative in useful ways, become surrounded by, outnumbered by, a horde of cargo-cult imitators.
These people imagine themselves to be creative free spirits, because they compete to be as freaky as possible. They do not understand that freaky behavior is not creative talent… it is only a side effect of creative talent.
Often these people are defective and useless, which is why they seek to use freakiness to camouflage themselves as creative, hoping to hide their uselessness.
This progresses until normies get disgusted with them, and start thinking fascism might be a good idea.
Then they kill everyone. This wipes out all the depraved freaks from #1, but it also wipes out Oscar Wilde, Alan Turing, Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso, etc, as described in #2.
Because normie dullards can’t tell the difference, especially when their blood is up.
I understand why a lot of the right is educating itself about Wiemar Germany and re-examining fascism as a response to those conditions.
The impulse makes sense. Disgust is an entirely appropriate emotional response right now.
But they don’t understand that even if it has rational origins, fascism, like communism, is a process that spirals out of control.
Fascism isn’t just an expression of disgust. It is an ever-increasing hypersensitivity to disgust, created by a social and cultural echo chamber. Once it eliminates the original objects of disgust, it moves on to find more mildly disgusting things to target.
Eventually, any deviation from the norm, however trivial and harmless, becomes an object of disgust to be eradicated.
It begins with getting rid of Harvey Weinstein… but it progresses to getting rid of Richard Feynman and Elon Musk.
That sentence may sound strange to you. Feynman? Musk? Really?
But remember that the Gay Race Communism that now become the state religion of the political class progressed the same way. Barack Obama, the 2008 presidential candidate, was against state recognition of homosexual marriages. At the time, that was too much, too far.
Things progressed.
Slopes really are slippery. It isn’t a fallacy at all. The whole reason we characterize things as slopes is that a slope is a thing people tend to fall down. We notice things lead to other things, because the Overton window shifts, and we correctly characterize certain metaphorical terrain as a “slope”.
And just as the political class, Hollywood, and their pet idiots in NYC and LA spiraled into Gay Race Communism, the Middle American normal person backlash carries the risk of spiraling the opposite way.
Remember that fascist societies aren’t actually perfectly healthy cultures that suddenly, for no reason at all, get destroyed by their neighbors. What they do is they attack everyone they can see, once their disgust threshold becomes so low that every other type of society appears to them as nothing but a plague vector that must be wiped out.
So their neighbors are forced to destroy them in self-defense.
We, as a society, are currently in danger of both communism and fascism.
The risk of communism is that it’s what we will get if we do not purge the political class. The risk of fascism is that it’s what we will get if that purge spirals out of control.
Everyone reading this already understands that communism is the worst thing in the known universe… because anyone who doesn’t understand that has muted/blocked/unfollowed me long ago.
But we also need to understand the dangers of our own response.
If we do not use and focus our disgust, we are doomed to a communist future. But we must make that disgust our servant, not our master.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…