Nothing here that seems outrageous to me, and at least some of the electrical program Carney seems to be on board with, although implemention will take a while. Some of these energy plans might collide with others' ideas of what is urgent to protect, I imagine, requiring deliberation and consultation. Creating children as a national service--would that be in lieu of that year of another kind of unforced but encourage labour? I like the idea of a required gap year of service for high school graduates. Everyone would benefit from mixing our lives up in this way and instilling some national experience and pride. Some of course will want to travel to other places, but a year spent contributing to their home country would provide them with something to more to bring to the world at large. Meanwhile, sadly, Alberta seems to be in the process of distancing from the federation, if not outright pulling out, which would move them--and sadly us I fear-- closer to the south. All the more reason to strengthen our resolve, remember our values and identity, and implement your coherent platform--or at least work as hard as possible towards it. I wonder what you consider to be the most contentious part of your platform? Perhaps the direct pipeline to the east? I certainly favour way more legislation limiting and controling urban sprawl, the heartbreaking degradation of our river systems and the associated health of our cities. Living Cities require living water and space for all its plentiful attendant life. We have so many resources in this area, which we don't take care of the way we must. Thanks for the opportunity to think about some of this. I hope your platform gets out to the political world.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I would agree that probably the pipeline to the east is the most contentious issue, with Quebec likely resisting any such development, though freezing immigration is another candidate. The debate around immigration has unfortunately been flattened so that an anti-immigration position is taken as xenophobic or racist, when that's clearly an absurdity since the country is already extremely diverse. I resist such efforts to flatten the discourse, holding that control over the borders is a fundamental aspect of sovereignty. Currently we're being told that we have no choice for economic reasons (supporting pensions, growing the economy, etc), and when we question this, slandered.
As for having children as a national service, I chose that language over the language of duty, which I felt would be too strong for most. The idea is to rehabilitate the idea that having children as something that serves the community, and so something that is venerable, a kind of service to the country.
Nothing here that seems outrageous to me, and at least some of the electrical program Carney seems to be on board with, although implemention will take a while. Some of these energy plans might collide with others' ideas of what is urgent to protect, I imagine, requiring deliberation and consultation. Creating children as a national service--would that be in lieu of that year of another kind of unforced but encourage labour? I like the idea of a required gap year of service for high school graduates. Everyone would benefit from mixing our lives up in this way and instilling some national experience and pride. Some of course will want to travel to other places, but a year spent contributing to their home country would provide them with something to more to bring to the world at large. Meanwhile, sadly, Alberta seems to be in the process of distancing from the federation, if not outright pulling out, which would move them--and sadly us I fear-- closer to the south. All the more reason to strengthen our resolve, remember our values and identity, and implement your coherent platform--or at least work as hard as possible towards it. I wonder what you consider to be the most contentious part of your platform? Perhaps the direct pipeline to the east? I certainly favour way more legislation limiting and controling urban sprawl, the heartbreaking degradation of our river systems and the associated health of our cities. Living Cities require living water and space for all its plentiful attendant life. We have so many resources in this area, which we don't take care of the way we must. Thanks for the opportunity to think about some of this. I hope your platform gets out to the political world.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I would agree that probably the pipeline to the east is the most contentious issue, with Quebec likely resisting any such development, though freezing immigration is another candidate. The debate around immigration has unfortunately been flattened so that an anti-immigration position is taken as xenophobic or racist, when that's clearly an absurdity since the country is already extremely diverse. I resist such efforts to flatten the discourse, holding that control over the borders is a fundamental aspect of sovereignty. Currently we're being told that we have no choice for economic reasons (supporting pensions, growing the economy, etc), and when we question this, slandered.
As for having children as a national service, I chose that language over the language of duty, which I felt would be too strong for most. The idea is to rehabilitate the idea that having children as something that serves the community, and so something that is venerable, a kind of service to the country.
I hope that is somewhat clarifying.
Lots of interesting ideas - many of which are new to me and in domains I haven't thought about!