GTA handed Conservatives their majority

[archanfel]

Political correctness has done more to kill off free speech than anything else. Who's responsible for that crap?!

That's a very bold thing to say, although I can't say I 100% disagree.

The question is really whether verbal abuses count as attack on somebody's freedom. Freedom is never absolute even for liberals since one person's freedom might infringe on another person's freedom. For example, while hurting somebody is a personal choice, I am not sure liberalism would protect that (although hurting yourself should be protected). Some judgement calls have to be made on verbal injury. I personally find certain comments to be extremely hurtful, but I question the needs and feasibility of our current political correctness culture.

Rest assured, it would pain a true liberal to support political correctness even if it's absolute necessary. However, both conservatives and progressives support political correctness (very selectively) based on their own ideologies.

 

[toraerach]

Political correctness has done more to kill off free speech than anything else. Who's responsible for that crap?!

Political correctness, as a concept, was invented by conservative American commentators in the 80s in their bid to establish a culture war mentality. Personally, I think one should show consideration and sensitivity to everyone regardless of whether you have a right not to. Hate speech legislation does require a very high threshold for what is deemed hateful (inciting genocide, etc.), and generally nothing any even remotely reasonable person would say would qualify for prosecution. If you're running for office in Canada, however, you will probably need to censor your own right to free speech in order to attract votes from a diverse population that is generally turned off by overt displays of intolerance. Essentially, what you call political correctness is actually a standard of decency the Canadian public expects from those living public lives.

And rememeber, the poltical correctness vs. free speech thing doesn't line up at all with the left/right divide. For an example, just look at the Pride defunding debate.

Basically, I think everyone cherishes their right to freedom of speech, but there really is no right of being heard to go with that. If you're going to spout off stuff that's deemed socially unacceptable, you should be prepared to be challenged if not outright marginalized to the fringes of society.

 

[doady]

the 905 is delusional... the reality is that the rising gas prices are going to kill them... And the worst part is that the cons wont be very quick to add extra transit like GO to solve the issue.. All the areas in Toronto that went Conservative minue Scarborough are all well off areas. People on Avenue Road or in forest hill or at yonge and Sheppard dont have to worry about transit.. They can afford to drive if they want to.. So their issue was someone that was going to tax them less... If you look at 5 of the areas where Cons won in Toronto they won by 1000 ppl each... Not a HUGE win but it all still makes a difference...

Most people in the 905 voted either Liberal, NDP or Green yesterday. It's the people blaming suburbanites in this thread that are delusional. Don't forget it was the 905 that prevented the Conservatives from getting majority in the last election.

 

[Earth Heals Herself]

Political correctness, as a concept, was invented by conservative American commentators in the 80s in their bid to establish a culture war mentality. Personally, I think one should show consideration and sensitivity to everyone regardless of whether you have a right not to. Hate speech legislation does require a very high threshold for what is deemed hateful (inciting genocide, etc.), and generally nothing any even remotely reasonable person would say would qualify for prosecution. If you're running for office in Canada, however, you will probably need to censor your own right to free speech in order to attract votes from a diverse population that is generally turned off by overt displays of intolerance. Essentially, what you call political correctness is actually a standard of decency the Canadian public expects from those living public lives.

And rememeber, the poltical correctness vs. free speech thing doesn't line up at all with the left/right divide. For an example, just look at the Pride defunding debate.

Basically, I think everyone cherishes their right to freedom of speech, but there really is no right of being heard to go with that. If you're going to spout off stuff that's deemed socially unacceptable, you should be prepared to be challenged if not outright marginalized to the fringes of society.

The question we need to ask ourselves is why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings, unless you're very young perhaps. Anybody could say whatever they want about me and I would just find it humourous, no matter how calous it is. If the attacker notices that you're unphased by their words or actions then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably leave you alone because they won't get any satisfaction if they don't get an angry or sad reaction out of you.

 

[adma]

The question we need to ask ourselves is why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings, unless you're very young perhaps. Anybody could say whatever they want about me and I would just find it humourous, no matter how calous it is. If the attacker notices that you're unphased by their words or actions then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably leave you alone because they won't get any satisfaction if they don't get an angry or sad reaction out of you.

This is Urban Toronto. This isn't just a forum about political discussion; a (may I say primary) lot of the issues deal with architecture, urbanism, built form etc. Keeping that in mind, it's like addressing any architectural or built-environment criticism, even of a Chris Hume/Lisa Rochon sort, with "why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings".

Come to think of it, maybe I should waltz into City Hall and into the Council Chamber and take a good, long dump on the Mayor's desk. And if anyone objects, "why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings". (NB: note that I said "Mayor's desk". I didn't say "Mayor Ford's desk." Trying to make things generic here.)

Just pointing out slippery slopes here.

 

[archanfel]

The question we need to ask ourselves is why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings, unless you're very young perhaps. Anybody could say whatever they want about me and I would just find it humourous, no matter how calous it is. If the attacker notices that you're unphased by their words or actions then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably leave you alone because they won't get any satisfaction if they don't get an angry or sad reaction out of you.

That's a hard argument to make. By the same logic, if you are strong enough, when the street thug notices that you are unfazed by their punches then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably not only leave you alone, but run from you. If you are strong enough, when the rapist notices that you are not moaning then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably lose interests in you because they won't get any satisfaction. Should I continue? Unless you want to legalize assault and rape, I think it's dangerous to say political correctness is unnecessary in all cases.

Having said that, wikipedia define political correctness as "a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, religious belief, disability, and age-relaed contexts, and doing so to an excessive extent. ". Therefore, it's very much a judgement call and I think we should error on the side of freedom of speech. Only malicious verbal abuse should be limited.

Luckily, as human, we can make judgement calls. Read Asimov's 'Liar!' for a funny counter example.

 

[Earth Heals Herself]

This is Urban Toronto. This isn't just a forum about political discussion; a (may I say primary) lot of the issues deal with architecture, urbanism, built form etc. Keeping that in mind, it's like addressing any architectural or built-environment criticism, even of a Chris Hume/Lisa Rochon sort, with "why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings".

Come to think of it, maybe I should waltz into City Hall and into the Council Chamber and take a good, long dump on the Mayor's desk. And if anyone objects, "why people are so touchy? Only insecure people get offended. If you're self confident, nothing should hurt your feelings". (NB: note that I said "Mayor's desk". I didn't say "Mayor Ford's desk." Trying to make things generic here.)

Just pointing out slippery slopes here.

That's a good one Adma. You legitamately made me chuckle with that dump comment.

 

[Earth Heals Herself]

That's a hard argument to make. By the same logic, if you are strong enough, when the street thug notices that you are unfazed by their punches then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably not only leave you alone, but run from you. If you are strong enough, when the rapist notices that you are not moaning then they're going to become flustered and confused and will probably lose interests in you because they won't get any satisfaction. Should I continue? Unless you want to legalize assault and rape, I think it's dangerous to say political correctness is unnecessary in all cases.

Having said that, wikipedia define political correctness as "a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, religious belief, disability, and age-relaed contexts, and doing so to an excessive extent. ". Therefore, it's very much a judgement call and I think we should error on the side of freedom of speech. Only malicious verbal abuse should be limited.

Luckily, as human, we can make judgement calls. Read Asimov's 'Liar!' for a funny counter example.

I should have omitted the word, 'actions.' In a merely verbal context, nobody should really get offended. Jean Chretien said it best, "Sticks and bones may break my stones but hurt will never name me."

 

[archanfel]

I should have omitted the word, 'actions.' In a merely verbal context, nobody should really get offended. Jean Chretien said it best, "Sticks and bones may break my stones but hurt will never name me."

Unless you are a victim, how can you tell somebody whether they should or should not get offended? And it's not just a matter of getting offended, what if I spread libels about you and cause you harm? Can I defend myself saying I did it in a mere verbal context? What if I falsely (and maliciously) tell you your loved ones are dead, should I get away with it because it's only psychological harm?

Also political incorrectness rarely cause any legal punishment without a court order anyway. It's a matter of peer pressure that stifles free speech. It could be completely verbal or even simply inaction. While I think some laws do go too far, it's the culture of political correctness that worries me more.

"Should" is a very strong word. As individuals we can express our opinions, worst case I disagree with you. However, letting the state decide whether you "should" or "should not" get offended is a slippery slop. For liberalism, the only thing you shouldn't do is harming or infringing on somebody else's freedom. For example, I see no problem with prostitution as long as it's a willing act, but I am against forcing women into prostitution. Unfortunately, "forcing" is a hard term to define too. That's where liberalism, IMHO, strayed.

 

[PCC]

PCC, I'm trying to understand the response you made commenting on my post and what that had to do with previous Liberal governments?

My point is that Harper was voted into power by Southern Ontario and that voters were motivated by economic considerations. Furthermore I suspect that these economic considerations were about either maintaining the status quo or anxiety about near future economic considerations.

I don't think people here appreciate the extent to which average middle-class people are having their disposable incomes squeezed. It is tough to see how these people will react to future economic conditions and what these economic conditions will be? However personally I see no relief on the horizon. My point is that external economic factors that the Federal Government has little control over will have a huge influence over how well people in Southern Ontario do over the next 4 years. And how well they do will translate into either a solidification of Conservative gains or a rejection of their majority status.

Just that Harper was forced into stimulus spending, which precluded a balanced budget.

I totally appreciate the squeezing of the middle class... I'm one of them. Ontario's vote was against McGuinty (IMO) and his policies, namely his war on disposable income. I think the biggest factor to how the Federal CPC's do in Ontario in 4 years will be directly linked to Hudak, whom it would seem may well win a majority in October riding in on the same wave. There is alot that Hudak can do to improve the standing of the average Joe in Ontario independent of external conditions... namely getting hydro rates lower.

But in the end, I still think the Libs will win a majority in 2015.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

A take on our federal election from the UK's The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...arper-american-politics?mobile-redirect=false

 

[kEiThZ]

A lot of those seats that went Conservative actually voted towards the left if you add the NDP and Liberal votes... everyone could see even before the election that the conservatives can't be beat with all the vote splitting going on by the left.
The reason the conservatives are so successful now is because they are the only right wing party.. they merged their parties years ago and now reap the rewards. Are the left of centre parties too stubborn to do the same? Probably.

Look at Malvern and Scarborough-Rouge River. Your theory is not quite accurate. The NDP has never placed higher than 3rd place. Indeed, they were the fourth place party when Reform was on the ballot. And the Liberal incumbent (Derek Lee) usually won by 10 000-20 000 votes (with his lowest margin around 5000 and highest around 25 000). Yet, the NDP won the riding, and the Conservative candidate was actually in a firm second place over the Liberal candidate. It's not all vote splitting. And it's not at all sure that many would not prefer the Conservatives instead of the Liberals if they didn't vote NDP. The situation is more complex than that.

 

[Filip]

A take on our federal election from the UK's The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...arper-american-politics?mobile-redirect=false

She writes for the Star, doesn't she?

"Stephen Harper is our version of George W. Bush, but without the warmth and intellect"??? Is something very wrong with this woman?!?

 

[LAz]

She writes for the Star, doesn't she?

"Stephen Harper is our version of George W. Bush, but without the warmth and intellect"??? Is something very wrong with this woman?!?

It's exactly like that. Harper's an oaf. In many ways he is worse than Bush.


Toronto will get punished badly for chosing this way. Cities always get punished when they pick the far right. Their relations with corporate greed always brings about their downfall.
Reaganomics/Thatcherism simply does not work. It always fails. And it will fail in the Torontoland too. Words can not express how sad I am that the city is doomed. There really is no hope.

 

[LAz]

edit: Double post by accident... browser loaded slow so I clicked the button twice. Delete this message please.