I’ve also heard some “running it offline avoids all the Chinese biasing and spying” anecdotes. Though I haven’t seen any first hand evidence of this. Needs testing, imo.

Your best bet is to be in a lot of instances. My experiences so far is that basically any singular instance has its bias’, and while some unapologetically ban users for disagreeing with them, the ones that don’t still down vote for disagreeing with them.

While one of these forms of censorship is worse than the other, it’s all censorship, and the only way to see a variety of views is to stay in the varying instances.

Let’s be real: it’s about control. They want sex on their terms, and paying for it doesn’t put them in control. They say things like “genuine human connection,” while desperately wanting a traditional, subservient woman that they can use to satisfy their needs.

This thread is discussing Trump’s comments that joining the States would result in better health care for Canadians. Posting in a thread discussing this topic with a comment that does nothing but talk about the perceived failings of the Canadian health care system is implying that the American system is better because of the context in which the statements were made.

If you are “not talking about the US at all,” then what are you talking about? That’s the conversation: Canadian vs US health care.

Tired of this lie, tbh.

The waits are probably, on average, a little longer, sure. The “someone is waiting an absurd amount of time with an obvious visible problem and they’ve died while waiting” is pure privatization propaganda fueled by people going to the hospital for things like prescription refills and being shocked when they’re pushed to the bottom of the list over and over again while people come in with genuine, time sensitive problems.

I don’t have TikTok, but if you do, isn’t this easily verifiable? Just go try searching one of the relevant terms.

Eh, I suspect most of those Russia/China fascism lovers posing as “leftists” are mid-30s white dudes, and as a mid 30s white dude, my grandmother was alive during WWII.

The options remain the same, though.

I’d be pretty okay with a Conservative minority. In fact, it might be ideal. It’d give Poilievre the time to soak the blame without the power necessary to work towards dismantling freedom of speech.

I’m sure the environment would still suffer as a result, but that’d probably happen in any size of Liberal or Conservative government.

Thanks, I hate it. That entire premise made me retch a little.

Man, I wish that were true, but let’s be real: he’s set up to be the next PM if he can just walk it in. We should probably take him seriously.

While that’s true, where are all of Poilievre’s statements in the Trump anexation comments? I’ve seen a ton of responses from a ton of politicians but none from him?

Genuine question, though. I’m not on a lot of social media, and of course my interests have a bias, but I still find it strange that I’ve seen clear statements from so many politicians across the spectrum and none worth putting on the front page from Polievere? Did the CPC PR team just suddenly take a break when this happened? Where’s all the fervent, “Canada first” rhetoric when Trump is making claims on Canadian soil?

I understand, facing the truth is scary when you’ve attached your ego to lies. I’m sure whatever Internet safe space you found your way here from can help you feel justified. Have a good one.

We 1000% can.

Destroying the only widespread source of information that isn’t centralized in the hands of American ogliarchs is immediately worse, and that’s literally just the beginning.

I mean, there you have it. Your options are currently the American owned PostMedia, or the CBC. Meanwhile, Poilievere targets literally the only remaining Canada owned media company nation wide, while claiming to put Canada first.

The hypocrisy is naked and shameless, yet we’re looking at a CPC majority under his leadership? There has got to be a better option.

I’m always interested in conversations about opinions contradictory to my own, but I do not need to suffer direct insults to my character.

I’m not obligated to go backwards through your entire post history, particularly if it’s filled with the kind of vitriol present in this conversation. I don’t need to sift through intellectually void shit in the misguided belief that maybe, there’s a nugget of gold in there. If you feel like you made a clear, succinct statement in post to someone else, in some other thread, a two second copy paste of something you know you said, or a link as I usually do, is all that’s necessary. If you don’t want to do that, not responding, or saying you’re too exhausted by and/or don’t care about this conversation is plenty.

Your desire to continually speak with such disdain towards anyone who disagrees with you, and your unwillingness to approach conversation with civility says a lot more than your words. Either you don’t want to be understood and this conversation isn’t in good faith, or you have no idea what actually upsets you. You’re just repeating the same baseless, vapid talking points you’ve been spoon-fed, and I’ve begun to suspect that the goal here is just to spread hate.

If I wanted repitition, I’d be plenty satisfied by now. Hilariously, and ironically, despising politicians with no true understanding of what they’ve done or why is a very uniquely Canadian position, so I’d argue that our culture is alive and well.

With every bit of respect as a human being, and none as a thinker, please take your misinformed, poorly reasoned opinion back into whatever safe-space echo chamber allowed it to ferment in the first place. Or, recognize that most people will not share your identical thoughts, and you might have to figure out how to treat others with respect as you work to understand each other. Your pick.

I’m not talking about weed, though. It’s been traditionally over policed but that doesn’t mean we should stop policing all drugs. There’s hardly any sense in saying that severely addictive drugs with visible negative effects on the human body should be sold for recreational use for profit. The majority of opiods are a good example of this.

But more to the point, giving moral purchase to profit justifies the abuse of the consumer. I can’t say for certain whether the TikTok ban is government overreach, as I’m not knowledgeable enough on the topic to speak with any authority, but “it makes money, so it’s fine” really shouldn’t be the end of the conversation.

A platform should be allowed to function if it can. If it’s horribly made, or supremely unprofitable it’ll find its own way out.

I mean, this doesn’t allow for any form of ethical analysis, though. Should every drug be legalized? How about gambling?

I’m not saying I am for the TikTok ban persay, but if the only conditionals for whether a product or service should exist are “is it ‘well made’ and does it make money,” we are setting ourselves up to achieve a corporate dystopia rather quickly.

They government should consider what parts of TikTok make it not okay, and target those forms and functions with well reasoned laws. Unfortunately, as you said, I suspect they’ll target things that are good and users like, while pretending that the issue is entirely about one small portion of the complete law. Ie, stress that the issue is one of security, and then write a law saying that all social media in the US must be willing to submit it’s data to the American government. (To be clear, I have no idea what the actual law they wrote is, but this is the kind of shit I expect them to get up to )

When you’ve built your entire political personality around being “not that guy” and that guy drops out of the race.

I guess I just assume you’re a troll and move on with my life. At least I can say I tried to understand. Have a good one.

You certainly have not explained anything beyond showing a vague hatred for the government, and a deeply held belief that they’re somehow responsible for killing any sense of a national body. Perhaps you’ve explained yourself in detail in another conversation, but I was certainly not aware of it.

Maybe I can ask more directly: What do you think makes Canada uniquely Canada? Ignoring the whos, whys and hows, what do you believe we have lost, culturally speaking?