A wealthy American, a wealthy Canadian, a wealthy Mexican, a poor American, a poor Canadian and a poor Mexican are sitting in a room together. You honestly think they will gravitate to each other based on their nationality?
Canada more democratic than the U.S.?
- Thread starter Sublime
- Start date
A wealthy American, a wealthy Canadian, a wealthy Mexican, a poor American, a poor Canadian and a poor Mexican are sitting in a room together. You honestly think they will gravitate to each other based on their nationality?
Seeing how right-wing I'd turned out in the test, I'd like to know how you'd classify the folliwng (right/left, libertarian/authoritarian):
Free movement of labour.
Shared military force along with reduced military spending.
Strict respect for international law.
Shared common currency.
Common citizenship.
Easier access to immigration.
recognition of the equality of all languages before the law, with the use of an international auxiliary language for international communication.
None of these were dealt with directly in the test. But I'm wondering how you figure they would have influenced the final score if they were included.
Free movement of labour.
Shared military force along with reduced military spending.
Strict respect for international law.
Shared common currency.
Common citizenship.
Easier access to immigration.
recognition of the equality of all languages before the law, with the use of an international auxiliary language for international communication.
None of these were dealt with directly in the test. But I'm wondering how you figure they would have influenced the final score if they were included.
I believe your body is yours and you should be able to do with it as you choose. I don't need your protection nor do I want it.
Depends. if we difine nationality along ethnic lines, then if the Canadians are English Canadians, and the Americans too, they'd likely gravitate towards one another just because they could communicate with one another. Of course the wealthy Mexican might be better educated and know English, in which case he might gravitate into that group too. The poor Mexican is likely to be left out unless the wealthy Mexian decides to hang out with him. If the Canadians are French Canadians who barely speak English, they'll likely create their own group.
So over all, I would say that nationality is more likely to trump class than the other way around. Though granted this is based on the assuption that nationality and ethnic boundaries more or less overlap.
Upon checking back I've found you are quite right, I did post something very similar. You'll find as you age you can never predict just exactly when these Alzheimers attacks are going to occur. :lol::lol:
But again is it about money or social values..
The question is simple..
You cannot be moral without being religious.
Even if you look at it from a money perspective, how many huslers are out there taking money from the poor in the name of the Lord ? Do they have morals ?
You may not want it. But if I see you lying on the street begging for your next shot of Heroin, if it is in my power, I would take away your freedom to have access to it until you are free from it, and only then let you go free again.
THe question is how you interpret religious. To me, an athiest who has a higher belief in justice is religious, just as the hypocritical preacher isn't.
What about bringing drinking what to areas where water is either polluted ( hurricane ) or just dried up ? That is the way I viewed my answer..
Seeing how right-wing I'd turned out in the test, I'd like to know how you'd classify the folliwng (right/left, libertarian/authoritarian):
Free movement of labour. RIGHT/LIBERTARIAN
Interesting. Why right? I would have thought of it as counter-nationalist. After all, the left does not recommend restrictions on movement of labour between provinces, so why would it be neither left nor right within Canada but right between countries? Libertarian I can agree with.
Shared military force along with reduced military spending. LIBERTARIAN/RIGHT
Again, reduced military spending could be seen as libertarian, but I would have thought demilitarization to be more of a left-leaning thing. The NDP tends to oppose it while Libs and Cons support it more.
Strict respect for international law. AUTHORITARIAN
That I can agree with. That's my authoritarian side.
Shared common currency. RIGHT
Shared common currency would eliminate the mibddle men who get rich doing nothing but buy and sell money. You'd think the NDP would be jumping with joy at something like this. Again, I don't see why it would be a right-leaning thing necessarily.
Common citizenship. - RIGHT
Even the left supports common citizenship within Canada. And seeing that we usually attribute nationalism to the right, I would have thought that common citizenship, which would essentially give freedom of movement to all on earth, would appeal to the left which supports easier immigration, no?
Easier access to immigration. - LIBERTARIAN
Isn't easier access to immigration just a milder form of common world citizenship? So if this one is libertarian, why is the other right?
recognition of the equality of all languages before the law, with the use of an international auxiliary language for international communication. - LIBERTARIAN
That's a tough one. Equality of all languages? Libertarian. A common auxiliary language? Authoritarian? So I suppose they'd just couerbalance one another like ying and yang?
Free movement of labour. RIGHT/LIBERTARIAN
Interesting. Why right? I would have thought of it as counter-nationalist. After all, the left does not recommend restrictions on movement of labour between provinces, so why would it be neither left nor right within Canada but right between countries? Libertarian I can agree with.
Shared military force along with reduced military spending. LIBERTARIAN/RIGHT
Again, reduced military spending could be seen as libertarian, but I would have thought demilitarization to be more of a left-leaning thing. The NDP tends to oppose it while Libs and Cons support it more.
Strict respect for international law. AUTHORITARIAN
That I can agree with. That's my authoritarian side.
Shared common currency. RIGHT
Shared common currency would eliminate the mibddle men who get rich doing nothing but buy and sell money. You'd think the NDP would be jumping with joy at something like this. Again, I don't see why it would be a right-leaning thing necessarily.
Common citizenship. - RIGHT
Even the left supports common citizenship within Canada. And seeing that we usually attribute nationalism to the right, I would have thought that common citizenship, which would essentially give freedom of movement to all on earth, would appeal to the left which supports easier immigration, no?
Easier access to immigration. - LIBERTARIAN
Isn't easier access to immigration just a milder form of common world citizenship? So if this one is libertarian, why is the other right?
recognition of the equality of all languages before the law, with the use of an international auxiliary language for international communication. - LIBERTARIAN
That's a tough one. Equality of all languages? Libertarian. A common auxiliary language? Authoritarian? So I suppose they'd just couerbalance one another like ying and yang?
Last edited:
Say what.. You been smoking that stuff you want illegal :lol::lol::lol::lol:
Serioulsy though.. An Athiest is an Athiest in a test.. A religious person is religious.. You cannot change the meaning to suit your needs.. You are either Moral or not..
I'd understood it similarly. We can have tap water at home, but what if I'm going cycling for the day. I could fill up at home before leaving. But what if I'm gone for many days? I might not want to carry so much water and prefer to buy some on the way. Though granted we could agrue that free water must always be available. Fine. Water fountain at the local libarry. But if you go out of civilization into the forest, then you're on your own. So it woud seem we both 'read too much' into the quesiton.
But that'sthe questioners' fault. They shold have made each quesiton so christal clear that error ould be impossible.
Fine. Then I should have voted 'disagree' if we insist on that interpretation.
I still can't beleive that the ideas that I'd presented above Canuck considers more right than left. I'd always thought of them as more left-leaning.
