CaptainTrouble
Based Member
I've met too many people that ought to be my ally but aren't because they've been misled by leftism as to what they should be fighting against. The end result is non-leftists in-fighting among themselves for issues that ultimately won't benefit non-leftists.
My format is simple. I'll first mention the FAKE ISSUE then I'll add - and explain the REAL ISSUE one should focus their attacks on. I will explain the reasons why each other ought to be fought the way I suggest rather than the way many non-leftists are tricked into fighting.
- Dual Citizenship. - Whether someone has a dual citizenship or not has no barring on their loyalty to Canada and the Canadian people holding all else constant. That last line: "holding all else constant" is the kicker. The reason anyone cares about "dual citizenship" is because they perceive a secondary motive behavior this dual citizenship other than promoting the interests of Canadians. This "idea" is promoted far more in American politics but I see it in Canadian politics from time-to-time as well. The issue isn't dual NATIONALITY. The issue is non-Germanic races. A dual German-Canada citizenship is nothing, just like how a dual UK-Canada citizenship is hardly anything. The issue is when you start to get into dual middle-eastern-Canada, jewish-Canada and Chinese-Canada citizenship. It's not the dual citizenship that's truly the problem and quite frankly I'd trust far more dual American-Canadian citizens than pure Canadian citizens themselves. Non-Leftists need to stop beating around the bush here and go back to pre-1960s policy. Only dual citizens from Western Civilization (UK, France, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland, Poland, Norway, Finland, Sweden, USA, NZ, Australian and South Africa; sorry for whoever I forgot) are allowed to vote and in Canadian politics. If we want to truly cement this in the proper manner then only people who are racially from a Germanic Tribe or Mediterranean White (White Greeks/Italians including Northern Africa/Middle-Eastern where our ancient ancestors conquered) are allowed to vote or run for office. A dual-citizen American and Canadian who is of a Germanic Race is far superior to a Canadian from India in all respects.
- Academic Institution teaches X (where X equals whatever your grievance is). Academic institutions are actually obsolete already. No one having children and especially in the non-leftist camp should be sending their child to an academic institution. Have 1 parent stay-home (preferably the woman) and home-school the children while managing the household. This is a far better outcome for the children's sake, both spouse's sake and society as a whole. The energy toward trying to control the institutions is completely misguided. The energy should be toward controlling the household education and eliminating the government's tax for education then reallocation toward education. This is an area many "conservatives" fail in. If you knew anything about the Bolsheviks (especially Trotsky), you'd know that academic institutions are paramount to usurping the influence of the family. Regardless, the children, mother, father and society as a whole are better off when we stop taxing people to pay for education. Home-schooling is a significantly better method than academic institutions. The people who are arguing for trying to control the institutions are losing here. Completely remove children from the institutions; remove all educational spending from the government and cut taxes.
- Doctors advocate for X procedure (where X equals any procedure I disagree with). - Doctors are individuals who should be allowed to practice whatever medicine they promote so long as a consumer exists for said medicine and the doctors do not misrepresent themselves. What I am saying is that if a doctor thinks your son needs testosterone blockers then that is his diagnosis and there's nothing wrong with it. If you disagree with it, you ought to enlist another doctor. Trying to control what doctors are or are not allowed to prescribe is archaic. It's a fast-track to medical obsolescence. The government can never keep up with the latest trends. That's not its job and shouldn't be. That's your job. Your healthcare is your responsibility, not your doctors or the government's. People on the non-leftist side trying to restrict what doctors can and cannot do are wrong; plain and simple. The reality here is that people need the ability to choose their own healthcare. Having government protected healthcare professionals that pass a government controlled approval process (MD designation) such that the government can influence the kinds of people who get admitted to the MD programs and pass the MD programs is where the real problem lies. What we need is the complete deregulation of the MD designation such that any academic institution can offer an MD then let the "free market" determine the schools where such a designation means anything or not. Then allow MDs to prescribe and treat people however they want. People need to do their own research and make their own decisions for their own healthcare instead of relying on government approved MDs. MDs or the government should never be able to override the will of the parents even if that leads to the death of the child due to "malpractice". Ultimately, the problem isn't that doctors are allowed to prescribe X, it's that parents have very little choice (more free market healthcare needed) and that sometimes a doctor's opinion is taken in the legal system as the end-all-be-all. A doctor should have no more strength to influence a parent than a bum on the street. Parents must be the ultimate decider for children than "experts" even if that means more deaths of children.
- Term limits on political positions. - A lot of right wingers think that having term limits on political positions will solve the problem but it wont do jack shit. The lifetime politicians aren't the problem, it's the lifetime non-elected people in government that are the problem. In actuality, if you limit an elected official to say 10 years being in power in Canada, you disarm this politician from being able to combat a general who can stay in his position for 20+ years, or a powerful CSIS officer who can stay in his position for 20 years as well. The more you limit the term of an elected official the more powerful you make the non-elected officials in our government. This holds true for the American government (and is a bigger deal over there, tbh). The key is the PATRONAGE SYSTEM. You must allow the Prime Minister (President in the USA), 100% full power over firing and hiring all non-elected officials. This is the real key that right wingers are missing. Once you allow the head of government to fire and hire WHOEVER he wants WHENEVER he wants for all non-elected positions (as it ought to be, including justices) then you can implement term limits but frankly, they aren't needed. If the time of term is a problem then the issue isn't a lack of term limits, the issue is democracy itself. Do you believe in democracy or not? If you do then why do you need term limits for elected officials? The only real reason to implement this is one doesn't believe in democracy (which is fine) but then tackle the real underlying problem which is democracy, not term limits.
- Low birth rates. - Every single member of our Western Elite (jews and their goyim) that has any experience with AI is saying unemployment is going to go up because AI will replace a lot of jobs that people won't be able to quickly reskill from. Low Birth Rates aren't actually a problem; they are a feature. We need less people in society, not more. As even the most stupid of our people are able to contribute more thanks to technology, we really don't need lots of stupid labor. We need less people overall. The fact every educated society reduces populaton is because as one becomes educated it becomes clear we don't need more people. The problem isn't low birth rates. The problem is immigration. As our own people make the responsible choice to have less children, our corrupt and deplorable governments bring foreign invaders to counter the impact our lower population from lower birth rates is supposed to have. We need a total ban on immigration for 100 years. Immigration should NEVER EVER EVER EVER be a tool to increase the total population. Immigration should be something we allow for a very select few (top 1% of their industry or family situations involving domestic Canadian not foreigners bringing their family over after getting a visa for getting a masters in social program scamming. Immigration should be so low that immigration it iself could never determine population one way or another. Domestic population growth should always be the strongest and only factor in which way the total population goes. Western societies need to abolish Social Secuirty (CPP) in the way they currently manage it. I propose they don't manage it at all but in the case of the government still managing it, the payout people receive from it must be irrespective of population growth otherwise it becomes a ponzi scheme (what it is now) which encourages governments to continualously bring in more and more people no matter how detrimental these people are to the overall society because they can't let the old people money ponzi scheme fail. This is hugely deterimental to society because it takes all value away from young people and gives it to old people which hurts the real economy (real production) and reallaocated value from labor to capital which works for a time but then eventually collapses. We're running into this problem now. Conservatives are tupidly focuses on the birth rates trying to enact some archaic Christian value or worse, bachelor taxes (which actually lead to the opposite impact than what they are intended for because people are too stupid to realize how birth rates work). The low birth rates aren't the problem. Immigration and retirement benefits are the real problems that need to be dealth with.
- Expensive housing. - It's a problem but you don't fix it in any of the ways most right-wingers think. There's two main ways that it should be combated. Lower immigration (reduced supply) and higher wages (lower immigration and more nationalist capital controls along with lower taxes, lower government spending and less government regulation) will solve. Too many conservative are pushing the "need more supply narrative". That's the wrong narrative. If you're in Canada and your city is in the mountains by a lake with 20k population and right now your lake is a little busy but not too busy, you don't need "more supply". A lot of areas in Canada don'ty need more supply. We don't want Indian infested territories full of thousands of shitskins because we increased the supply to house them. The problem isn't a lack of housing, it's that we have too many people. Conservatives need to ensure they aren't falling for the "build more" globalist strategy. Most places in Canada don't need more people, they need less, if anything.
- Sovereignty. - Canada has no sovereignty without nuclear weapons and everyone, conservatives included, need to know this. We are a vassal-state of the USA that is allowed A LOT of freedom thanks to the USA but the moment their patience tuns thin, we're toast. Everyone needs to be made aware of this. Pretending we're anything but this is a huge detriment to Canada. It's entirely misguided and misguided so fully, it's dangerous. Ukraine thought it had sovereignty. It literally had a treaty from the USA and Russia ensuring its secuirty and now it's gone. THERE IS NO SOVEREINGTY WITHOUT NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Canada has two choices: Emrbace its vassal-state position with the USA or secretly gain nuclear weapons. My own personal opinion is that Canada isn't significantly different enough from the USA where real sovereignty matters to the Canadian people. I would rather we embrace or vassal-state stutus and combine with the USA to be another state. This would be immsensly better for Canada than fake-sovereignty or trying to attain real-soveriengty. But make no mistake, without nukes, Canada has 0 real sovereignty. Trying to assert this sovereignty hurts us more than imbracing our lack of sovereignty.
- Quality of Life. - More government never leads to higher Quality Of Life. The least amount of government possible to maizximize QOL is always preferably. Canadians, even the non-Leftists, wants way too much government in Canada and then complain their QOL is falling behind countries like the Netherlands and the USA. Canada is projected to have the worst (by far) GDP Per Capita (PPP Adjusted) Growth of all G7 countries for the next 5 years and we were bottom of the barrel for the last 10 yars (under the Trudeau era). This can be corrected for by non-Leftists needs to focus on the right issues. Some Liberal staffer paying $1000 at a part for oysters, wine, hookers and blow isn't the problem yet non-Leftists will rally around an outcry about this sort of thing. If you know about it, it's because the liberals want you to and they want that guy gone too. You won't improve your Quality Of Life picking such pointless battles. There's only 3 things that will improve the Quality of Life of Canadians. Lower taxes (on a permanent basis), lower government spending toward resource reallocation spending (social programs) and less government regulation. This must makeup the entire core bulkwork of any non-Leftist's political views. Everything else doesn't matter... well, exception immigration.
If you are a non-lefist then this must be all that you care about politically: Lower Taxes. Less Government Sending, especially toward Social Programs. Less Government Regulation. No new Immigrants (unless they are Germanic/Mediterranean Whites). This is literally all that matters. Everything else doesn't matter or if it does, it falls into place if you advocate for those 4 things.
Improving the Quality of Life of Canadians is not actually difficult. It's a solved problem. Anyone with the will to do so can have Canada match the USA in 5-10 years and overtake the USA in economic output in 10-15 years. This isn't some "optimistic idea'. It's a factual idea. Economics is a solved problem. If I was Prime Minister of Canada, you'd see the largest Quality of Life gain in 10 years time in our whole history. Economics is a solved problem. The only reason we aren't improving your quality of life is because our country is run by corrupt criminals that don't give a shit. The fact Carney is a PhD in economics is even more credence to the testament that he's a corrupt SOB that hates Canadians because, as I said before, improving Canada's economic (Quality Of Life) conditions is not tricky: it's a 100% solved problem.
My format is simple. I'll first mention the FAKE ISSUE then I'll add - and explain the REAL ISSUE one should focus their attacks on. I will explain the reasons why each other ought to be fought the way I suggest rather than the way many non-leftists are tricked into fighting.
- Dual Citizenship. - Whether someone has a dual citizenship or not has no barring on their loyalty to Canada and the Canadian people holding all else constant. That last line: "holding all else constant" is the kicker. The reason anyone cares about "dual citizenship" is because they perceive a secondary motive behavior this dual citizenship other than promoting the interests of Canadians. This "idea" is promoted far more in American politics but I see it in Canadian politics from time-to-time as well. The issue isn't dual NATIONALITY. The issue is non-Germanic races. A dual German-Canada citizenship is nothing, just like how a dual UK-Canada citizenship is hardly anything. The issue is when you start to get into dual middle-eastern-Canada, jewish-Canada and Chinese-Canada citizenship. It's not the dual citizenship that's truly the problem and quite frankly I'd trust far more dual American-Canadian citizens than pure Canadian citizens themselves. Non-Leftists need to stop beating around the bush here and go back to pre-1960s policy. Only dual citizens from Western Civilization (UK, France, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland, Poland, Norway, Finland, Sweden, USA, NZ, Australian and South Africa; sorry for whoever I forgot) are allowed to vote and in Canadian politics. If we want to truly cement this in the proper manner then only people who are racially from a Germanic Tribe or Mediterranean White (White Greeks/Italians including Northern Africa/Middle-Eastern where our ancient ancestors conquered) are allowed to vote or run for office. A dual-citizen American and Canadian who is of a Germanic Race is far superior to a Canadian from India in all respects.
- Academic Institution teaches X (where X equals whatever your grievance is). Academic institutions are actually obsolete already. No one having children and especially in the non-leftist camp should be sending their child to an academic institution. Have 1 parent stay-home (preferably the woman) and home-school the children while managing the household. This is a far better outcome for the children's sake, both spouse's sake and society as a whole. The energy toward trying to control the institutions is completely misguided. The energy should be toward controlling the household education and eliminating the government's tax for education then reallocation toward education. This is an area many "conservatives" fail in. If you knew anything about the Bolsheviks (especially Trotsky), you'd know that academic institutions are paramount to usurping the influence of the family. Regardless, the children, mother, father and society as a whole are better off when we stop taxing people to pay for education. Home-schooling is a significantly better method than academic institutions. The people who are arguing for trying to control the institutions are losing here. Completely remove children from the institutions; remove all educational spending from the government and cut taxes.
- Doctors advocate for X procedure (where X equals any procedure I disagree with). - Doctors are individuals who should be allowed to practice whatever medicine they promote so long as a consumer exists for said medicine and the doctors do not misrepresent themselves. What I am saying is that if a doctor thinks your son needs testosterone blockers then that is his diagnosis and there's nothing wrong with it. If you disagree with it, you ought to enlist another doctor. Trying to control what doctors are or are not allowed to prescribe is archaic. It's a fast-track to medical obsolescence. The government can never keep up with the latest trends. That's not its job and shouldn't be. That's your job. Your healthcare is your responsibility, not your doctors or the government's. People on the non-leftist side trying to restrict what doctors can and cannot do are wrong; plain and simple. The reality here is that people need the ability to choose their own healthcare. Having government protected healthcare professionals that pass a government controlled approval process (MD designation) such that the government can influence the kinds of people who get admitted to the MD programs and pass the MD programs is where the real problem lies. What we need is the complete deregulation of the MD designation such that any academic institution can offer an MD then let the "free market" determine the schools where such a designation means anything or not. Then allow MDs to prescribe and treat people however they want. People need to do their own research and make their own decisions for their own healthcare instead of relying on government approved MDs. MDs or the government should never be able to override the will of the parents even if that leads to the death of the child due to "malpractice". Ultimately, the problem isn't that doctors are allowed to prescribe X, it's that parents have very little choice (more free market healthcare needed) and that sometimes a doctor's opinion is taken in the legal system as the end-all-be-all. A doctor should have no more strength to influence a parent than a bum on the street. Parents must be the ultimate decider for children than "experts" even if that means more deaths of children.
- Term limits on political positions. - A lot of right wingers think that having term limits on political positions will solve the problem but it wont do jack shit. The lifetime politicians aren't the problem, it's the lifetime non-elected people in government that are the problem. In actuality, if you limit an elected official to say 10 years being in power in Canada, you disarm this politician from being able to combat a general who can stay in his position for 20+ years, or a powerful CSIS officer who can stay in his position for 20 years as well. The more you limit the term of an elected official the more powerful you make the non-elected officials in our government. This holds true for the American government (and is a bigger deal over there, tbh). The key is the PATRONAGE SYSTEM. You must allow the Prime Minister (President in the USA), 100% full power over firing and hiring all non-elected officials. This is the real key that right wingers are missing. Once you allow the head of government to fire and hire WHOEVER he wants WHENEVER he wants for all non-elected positions (as it ought to be, including justices) then you can implement term limits but frankly, they aren't needed. If the time of term is a problem then the issue isn't a lack of term limits, the issue is democracy itself. Do you believe in democracy or not? If you do then why do you need term limits for elected officials? The only real reason to implement this is one doesn't believe in democracy (which is fine) but then tackle the real underlying problem which is democracy, not term limits.
- Low birth rates. - Every single member of our Western Elite (jews and their goyim) that has any experience with AI is saying unemployment is going to go up because AI will replace a lot of jobs that people won't be able to quickly reskill from. Low Birth Rates aren't actually a problem; they are a feature. We need less people in society, not more. As even the most stupid of our people are able to contribute more thanks to technology, we really don't need lots of stupid labor. We need less people overall. The fact every educated society reduces populaton is because as one becomes educated it becomes clear we don't need more people. The problem isn't low birth rates. The problem is immigration. As our own people make the responsible choice to have less children, our corrupt and deplorable governments bring foreign invaders to counter the impact our lower population from lower birth rates is supposed to have. We need a total ban on immigration for 100 years. Immigration should NEVER EVER EVER EVER be a tool to increase the total population. Immigration should be something we allow for a very select few (top 1% of their industry or family situations involving domestic Canadian not foreigners bringing their family over after getting a visa for getting a masters in social program scamming. Immigration should be so low that immigration it iself could never determine population one way or another. Domestic population growth should always be the strongest and only factor in which way the total population goes. Western societies need to abolish Social Secuirty (CPP) in the way they currently manage it. I propose they don't manage it at all but in the case of the government still managing it, the payout people receive from it must be irrespective of population growth otherwise it becomes a ponzi scheme (what it is now) which encourages governments to continualously bring in more and more people no matter how detrimental these people are to the overall society because they can't let the old people money ponzi scheme fail. This is hugely deterimental to society because it takes all value away from young people and gives it to old people which hurts the real economy (real production) and reallaocated value from labor to capital which works for a time but then eventually collapses. We're running into this problem now. Conservatives are tupidly focuses on the birth rates trying to enact some archaic Christian value or worse, bachelor taxes (which actually lead to the opposite impact than what they are intended for because people are too stupid to realize how birth rates work). The low birth rates aren't the problem. Immigration and retirement benefits are the real problems that need to be dealth with.
- Expensive housing. - It's a problem but you don't fix it in any of the ways most right-wingers think. There's two main ways that it should be combated. Lower immigration (reduced supply) and higher wages (lower immigration and more nationalist capital controls along with lower taxes, lower government spending and less government regulation) will solve. Too many conservative are pushing the "need more supply narrative". That's the wrong narrative. If you're in Canada and your city is in the mountains by a lake with 20k population and right now your lake is a little busy but not too busy, you don't need "more supply". A lot of areas in Canada don'ty need more supply. We don't want Indian infested territories full of thousands of shitskins because we increased the supply to house them. The problem isn't a lack of housing, it's that we have too many people. Conservatives need to ensure they aren't falling for the "build more" globalist strategy. Most places in Canada don't need more people, they need less, if anything.
- Sovereignty. - Canada has no sovereignty without nuclear weapons and everyone, conservatives included, need to know this. We are a vassal-state of the USA that is allowed A LOT of freedom thanks to the USA but the moment their patience tuns thin, we're toast. Everyone needs to be made aware of this. Pretending we're anything but this is a huge detriment to Canada. It's entirely misguided and misguided so fully, it's dangerous. Ukraine thought it had sovereignty. It literally had a treaty from the USA and Russia ensuring its secuirty and now it's gone. THERE IS NO SOVEREINGTY WITHOUT NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Canada has two choices: Emrbace its vassal-state position with the USA or secretly gain nuclear weapons. My own personal opinion is that Canada isn't significantly different enough from the USA where real sovereignty matters to the Canadian people. I would rather we embrace or vassal-state stutus and combine with the USA to be another state. This would be immsensly better for Canada than fake-sovereignty or trying to attain real-soveriengty. But make no mistake, without nukes, Canada has 0 real sovereignty. Trying to assert this sovereignty hurts us more than imbracing our lack of sovereignty.
- Quality of Life. - More government never leads to higher Quality Of Life. The least amount of government possible to maizximize QOL is always preferably. Canadians, even the non-Leftists, wants way too much government in Canada and then complain their QOL is falling behind countries like the Netherlands and the USA. Canada is projected to have the worst (by far) GDP Per Capita (PPP Adjusted) Growth of all G7 countries for the next 5 years and we were bottom of the barrel for the last 10 yars (under the Trudeau era). This can be corrected for by non-Leftists needs to focus on the right issues. Some Liberal staffer paying $1000 at a part for oysters, wine, hookers and blow isn't the problem yet non-Leftists will rally around an outcry about this sort of thing. If you know about it, it's because the liberals want you to and they want that guy gone too. You won't improve your Quality Of Life picking such pointless battles. There's only 3 things that will improve the Quality of Life of Canadians. Lower taxes (on a permanent basis), lower government spending toward resource reallocation spending (social programs) and less government regulation. This must makeup the entire core bulkwork of any non-Leftist's political views. Everything else doesn't matter... well, exception immigration.
If you are a non-lefist then this must be all that you care about politically: Lower Taxes. Less Government Sending, especially toward Social Programs. Less Government Regulation. No new Immigrants (unless they are Germanic/Mediterranean Whites). This is literally all that matters. Everything else doesn't matter or if it does, it falls into place if you advocate for those 4 things.
Improving the Quality of Life of Canadians is not actually difficult. It's a solved problem. Anyone with the will to do so can have Canada match the USA in 5-10 years and overtake the USA in economic output in 10-15 years. This isn't some "optimistic idea'. It's a factual idea. Economics is a solved problem. If I was Prime Minister of Canada, you'd see the largest Quality of Life gain in 10 years time in our whole history. Economics is a solved problem. The only reason we aren't improving your quality of life is because our country is run by corrupt criminals that don't give a shit. The fact Carney is a PhD in economics is even more credence to the testament that he's a corrupt SOB that hates Canadians because, as I said before, improving Canada's economic (Quality Of Life) conditions is not tricky: it's a 100% solved problem.
Last edited:
Upvote
1