this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2023
337 points (96.4% liked)

Canada

7489 readers
1375 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how different governments operate in different countries. China’s government operates from the top down (from Xi Jinping down to the national, province, and municipality level). Russia’s government operates through state-linked enterprises that are definitely not government-owned. America’s government operates from the bottom up (from PACs and lobbying groups up to the federal government). American state-sponsored electoral interference is an inherently different problem than Chinese or Russian interference because there are many American actors at play. These include those American PACs and SIGs and other lobbying groups looking to use their billions of dollars in funding to push their ideals around the world by directly and indirectly interfering with foreign elections.

At the end of the day, foreign interference is anything that leads to Canada pursuing activities not in its own best interest from anyone that isn’t Canadian (if we want to fuck ourselves up, we have that right) and funded with non-Canadian money. This has clearly happened from Chinese, Russian, AND American sources and it needs to stop if we want to protect our democracy.

[–] pieplot 48 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Let’s not pretend that racist or xenophobic people don’t exist in Canada. Ignoring them would be a very dangerous thing to do, Canadians don’t need external influence to be racist.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The external influence sure helps galvanize people though.

[–] pieplot 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Of course, but this is true for any political movement, even if it’s the one you’re rooting for. It’s a bit far fetched, but would you say that leftist people in Canada are strongly getting influenced by people like Bernie Sanders and AOC and that it should be considered foreign interference?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I mean, I would make the argument that Canadian media isn't being bought by leftist ownership groups from the US in the same way as, for example, Postmedia has almost monopolized Canadian newspapers through American right wing ownership. Major media seems like a more direct and present form of political influence than a more natural spread through observation like what I believe you're describing.

[–] pieplot 4 points 2 years ago

Yep I can agree on this point, you’re right.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

...would you say that leftist people in Canada are strongly getting influenced by people like Bernie Sanders and AOC and that it should be considered foreign interference?

No, because Sanders and Cortez would be centrists to mildly leftist in Canada. Half the Liberal party, most of the Bloc and all of the NDP are well to the left of Sanders.

Only in the US, where the Overton window is from "mildly corporatist neoliberalism" to "full-throated fascism" do people like Sanders seem at all radical.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

True, but having that fringe minority amplified by louder and better funded outside influences isn't improving the situation.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Sure, but at least then it can be internal.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because that would mean acknowledging we’re very vulnerable to this type of thing and in Canada we like to pretend bad stuff just isn’t happening. It’s easier that way for our politicians to focus the ire of Canadians on bike lanes than to face this kind of stuff head on. Example: news is no longer talking about ~corporate price gouging~ inflation as if it suddenly isn’t happening anymore. We need something else to be outraged about! Argh!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The simple answer to this is that our democracy has degraded to finding problems rather than finding solutions. Problems are easy, while solutions are hard… but problems get clicks. Maybe it’s a good thing that Google and Meta banned Canadian journalism because it means that we can go back to more in-depth journalism?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don’t think the ban will last though. They caved to Australia after a few days and they’re even smaller than we are.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

We will see…

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

This is a good step.

We need to go back to speaking and reporting more about the weather, geography and its impact in shaping culture. In a “post truth” era it’s a good unifier, harder to manipulate and dads like it.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 years ago

Koch brothers already funds most center right think tanks in Canada. like Fraser Institute and institut économique de Montréal .

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago

Because they're white people, and their backers are rich.

That's all you need to know. The far-right is allowed more latitude because, at least for now, they're useful idiots for the wealthy who can use their votes to further the agenda of tax cuts and deregulation. The problem is of the "riding the tiger" variety: at some point, the rabble will get out of control, and some of the wealthy will have their Fritz Thyssen moment.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago

Many of us do consider it foreign interference.

However the people who complain the loudest at the current government about foreign interference seems to have hitched their wagon to the same ideas as these particular foreign interfereers.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Americans have money, and there is plenty of money in taking part in the grift...

Even the US supreme court has become a mockery of its former self, and is reflective of their system as a whole. By the rich, for the rich.

[–] bricks 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

TL;DR - you should. We collectively need to reassess how we tackle this kind of behaviour.

We have weird partitions for things. It’s sort of clear the division isn’t really state v. state or country v. country, it’s urban pockets versus rural spreads. You can make inferences regarding accesses to resources, education, meaningful work, etc. as you will.

The political delta between Northern/Southern California, Eastern/Western Colorado+Washington, Upstate/Downstate New York, is FAR more significant than USA/Canada.

Alberta would slot in easily into the US Southeast. Ontario would slot in easily into the US Northeast/Northwest.

I worry for Canada (and the US, and many countries), because people are more or less the same everywhere (despite their grandest objections), and are quite susceptible to the same rhetoric and influential activity across the board.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

I think that’s what I’m most worried about. While the urban/rural divide is everywhere, the US just has so much more resources to dump into Canadian elections.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Part of the problem is that the Conservatives welcome it because they see it will help them in elections.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Oh, for sure. All the more reason for electoral reform.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yeah, k, but how would you even start to combat grassroots interference like that? At least with China there is an organization that you can monitor and counteract. aA far as I can see, with this type of "interference" we're stuck chasing ghosts and battleing hydras.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Long term, by growing our population.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The same reason it works for the US. A bigger population, all else being equal, means higher economic output and therefore larger political influence internationally relative to other players. If Canada had 1B population, groups in the US would have found it much harder to exert any significant influence over our politics given how much louder than them our voices would be. By voices think all types political voces, individual, collective, etc.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I think there is an underlying assumption that our current situation with the right is largely due to external influences. I'm of the opinion, that while the expression of the ideology is globally crowdsourced, we would have a similar percentage of wingnuts with or without American influence.

It seems to me that the economic disenfranchisement of the average Canadian is the primary force polarizing people politically, which would also explain the simultaneous resurgence of fascism globally (notibly, outside of the anglosphere)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Because we're their pet.

load more comments
view more: next ›