Whereas abandoning climate targets is apparently unifying?

Not to me, any of you all feel that way?

Apparently “unity” means we just do what the O&G industry wants.

That would be good indeed, but isn’t really an aspect of secularism.

I would say it’s an aspect of secularism when done in a sane way.

I think that wouldn’t make it a theocracy, as it’s more of a philosophy or way of life rather than a belief in a higher being that has a strict set of rules that a state could enforce. But I don’t really know that much about buddhism, so I might be wrong.

Well, I would say that ultimately all theocracies are that. In my view there aren’t any deities, so all theocracies which claim to base their legitimacy on a supreme being are, well, wrong. They are really enforcers of cultural norms that just happen to have a belief in a particular deity as one of those norms.

Which good parts of secularism do you think are missing here?

The part where you have enough social liberty that you don’t have government officials telling you how to dress.

And “secular theocracy” is an oxymoron. Theocracies require the belief in at least one deity as a supreme ruling authority to guide the state, which is not the case at all here, completely the opposite even. So what makes you think that it’s a “secular theocracy”?

Putting aside that ‘secular theocracy’ is wordplay making fun of their attempts to secularize in such a way that they take on features of a theocracy, such as dress codes. I don’t agree with your definition of theocracy. You could presumably have a Buddhist theocracy without any sort of belief in a supreme ruling deity.

“I want secularism but I still want overbearing authority figures telling people what to wear” is the silliest version of secularism.

Congratulations on creating a secular theocracy, Quebec and France. Really valuable contribution.

That sucks. Guess I won’t be renewing.

Right, reasonable adults are instead doing their best to look like a vassal state.

Yeah, I disagree. I think it makes us look like spineless weasels who can’t be relied upon if the US makes any demands of us.

Does this cost us nothing? I thought we were trying to pivot away from the US. How does it make us look to the rest of the world when our leadership practically sprints to support the US in violating international law?

Choice 3: Carney shuts the fuck up and doesn’t look like a stupid asshole. That would have been a good one. The guy absolutely didn’t have to fall over himself to support this dumbass war, multiple times.

When Trump first attacked Iran Carney practically ran to the nearest microphone to tell us all how he thought it was just dandy. The guy has repeatedly expressed support for the war because that’s how he feels.

Yeah, I think any Moroun business in Canada ought to be dealing with a lot of red tape until that bridge opens.

Poilievre figured he looked a little too good after Carney and Eby handed him a free opportunity to criticize them both from the left and had to tone that down a little.

One of the two things the Carney government is up to that I do like is the concept of a middle power alliance as a counterweight to the larger powers. Also I’m a fan of Sheinbaum and the things she and her government have been up to in Mexico. Which is all to say that this sounds good to me.

The ground is so saturated that it looks like if you were to dare step off a sidewalk you’d slip right into a mud pit.

Thanks for the heads up. I will show up in Edmonton.

Eby was competitive for most popular premier in the country at one point. Back when he was attacking AirBNB and making municipalities open up to infill, or otherwise delivering for his base. Since, he’s fallen into the trap of chasing your opponent’s voters instead of keeping his own base engaged with policy wins, and his approval has followed suit.

I do privilege Canadian products but my philosophy has been more, “Don’t buy American.”

I’m sorry…Ford Fest? This guy throws himself his own annual festival?

I guess I can see why he thought he’d get away with buying himself an airplane with government money.

On the other hand, Jill Atkey, the head of the B.C. Non-Profit Housing Association, slammed the B.C. government for the plan to help developers — just months after it axed the Community Housing Fund, a decision she said put thousands of affordable rental units in jeopardy.

[…]

B.C. Green Party Leader Emily Lowan called it a corporate bait and switch.

“The B.C. NDP axed their $3 billion affordable housing program and left thousands of low-income units half-built. Then they announce a $3 billion handout to the corporations who profit off the housing crisis,” she said.

There goes David Eby kicking himself in the nuts again.