quote:

---

The thought behind this etymological bastard is based on a sentiment held by some on the right that Canada's flirtation with socialism -- most prominently in their nationalized medical programs -- some how lessens their integrity and allegiance to the cause. Proof that the rabid fear of the Red Menace still holds reason at bay in many on the conservative side of the coin.

---

There's your "excessive socialism," eh, minigun?

I don't understand this exaggerated fear of communism. No, sorry, I don't. I'm not arguing that Stalinism and Maoism were anything but horrible, but there's a huge difference between those experiments and European/Canadian-style social democracy.

Personally, I don't understand why we're even called a "socialist" country by FOX and so on. I mean, we have socialised medicine (which cannot be demonstrated to cost us much more than the semi-socialised American system, anyway) and cheap drugs, and no private universities. Other than that, do we really subsidise anything significant that the Americans don't?

Hell, isn't the Toronto Transit Commission the least subsidised urban transit system in North America? I mean, I know that doesn't prove anything general or conclusive, but it does throw a spanner into the whole "Canada is sooooooooooooo socialist" argument.

[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: Smith ]

Still... I dunno, call me (Anglo-) Canadian or something -- Molly Ivins says our national motto is "now, let's not all get excited." But I can't get overly excited about such silly little outcroppings. They hardly add up to a major current of thought (admittedly, there's not much thought involved at all).

I should be used to it by now, but when Americans start frothing at the mouth about how "socialist" Canada is, I just sort of nod pleasantly (figuratively speaking) and wait for them to blow a gasket over Sweden, all the while remaining rather flabbergasted.

It's kind of nice to be mistaken for a real socialist nation once in a while, although the pleasure is more illusory than real.

quote:

---

Just when you think Americans have a semi-sane perspective about other nations, along comes something to blow that idea straight out of the water.

---

The USA, being the most religious-oriented industrialized nation, made the best use of religion as a weapon in the Cold War. Those red commies are atheists. They don't beleive in God, and as Ronald Reagan said, he personally can't trust someone who doesn't believe that their life is in service to a higher power.

McCarthyism left its toll on more than just making the early 50s an attack on "Communists", it stretched into making opposition to ANY form of "socialism" (be it civil rights, national health care, fair immigration law etc.) the test if you were sufficiently patrotic enough. The press gleefully jumped into this. I would go on but just leave it at "McCarthy's impact was more than just immediate repression".

Thirdly, propaganda. You've probably seen them, but US school books are generally pretty absurd when it comes to Communism. Now to be sure, some are probably less nasty than others, but some aren't. One US History book I had made it alter history basically to where every world event was about the USA being the world's savior. Every military action was fought to protect democracy and fight Communism, Communism always being the aggressor. Many books focus unduly on the Romanov family, going into detail about how nice and earthly the Tzar really was, and how nasty and evil the bloodletting Communists were in their overthrow. The same book even went as far as to say the Mai Lai incident never took place, it was "an example of Communist propaganda, designed to tug at the heartstrings of people who aren't informed enough about history to know the true threat of Communism. Even though many innocent people may have died during the Vietnam conflict, many more lives were saved by the actions of the US Army, to allow many anti-Communist Vietnamese to escape and for other nations that were Communist to take note - no actions to expand Communism by force would be accepted by the international community". Or something like that.

It also goes with the "slippery slope" theory, so to speak. Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" makes it much clearer. Any small bit of "socialism" only makes it more legitimate, and you begin on the path of ruin. Therefore, when other nations implement them, they're loyalty to the cause of anti-Communism must be questioned. The US can explain it's aspects of "socialism" by appealing to the hardcore conservative base, it's just those peace-loving hippy Liberal communist Democrats who are doing it all, not the Real Americans. And anything that was socialist in nature was explicitly pointed out as "doing the right thing" and "is no no way against the free market or capitalism, instead, we seek to strengthen capitalism by protecting it from its own excesses and possible structural problems arising from popular discontent and mismanagement".

[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: Adam Smith ]

quote:

---

Bomb Canada
By Jonah Goldberg

Canada is, quite simply, not a serious country anymore. It has internalized the assumptions of U.N.-ology: not just anti-Americanism but also the belief that Western nations don't need military might. As a consequence, they are simply unarmed. If al-Qaeda launched a September 11-style attack from Canadian soil, we would have only two choices: ask Canada to take charge, or take charge ourselves. The predictable — and necessary — U.S. action would spark outrage. We certainly don't need the burden of turning "the world's longest undefended border" into one of the world's longest defended ones. And that's why a little invasion is precisely what Canada needs. In the past, Canada has responded to real threats with courage and conviction (some say more Canadians went south to enlist for war in Vietnam than Americans went north to dodge it). If the U.S. were to launch a quick raid, blow up some symbolic but unoccupied structure — Toronto's CN Tower, or an empty hockey stadium — Canada would rearm overnight.

---

quote:

---

If the U.S. were to launch a quick raid, blow up some symbolic but unoccupied structure — Toronto's CN Tower, or an empty hockey stadium — Canada would rearm overnight.

---

Because that wouldn't be terrorism.