Koch brothers already funds most center right think tanks in Canada. like Fraser Institute and institut économique de Montréal .
Because they’re white people, and their backers are rich.
That’s all you need to know. The far-right is allowed more latitude because, at least for now, they’re useful idiots for the wealthy who can use their votes to further the agenda of tax cuts and deregulation. The problem is of the “riding the tiger” variety: at some point, the rabble will get out of control, and some of the wealthy will have their Fritz Thyssen moment.
Because that would mean acknowledging we’re very vulnerable to this type of thing and in Canada we like to pretend bad stuff just isn’t happening. It’s easier that way for our politicians to focus the ire of Canadians on bike lanes than to face this kind of stuff head on. Example: news is no longer talking about ~corporate price gouging~ inflation as if it suddenly isn’t happening anymore. We need something else to be outraged about! Argh!
The simple answer to this is that our democracy has degraded to finding problems rather than finding solutions. Problems are easy, while solutions are hard… but problems get clicks. Maybe it’s a good thing that Google and Meta banned Canadian journalism because it means that we can go back to more in-depth journalism?
Americans have money, and there is plenty of money in taking part in the grift…
Even the US supreme court has become a mockery of its former self, and is reflective of their system as a whole. By the rich, for the rich.
There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how different governments operate in different countries. China’s government operates from the top down (from Xi Jinping down to the national, province, and municipality level). Russia’s government operates through state-linked enterprises that are definitely not government-owned. America’s government operates from the bottom up (from PACs and lobbying groups up to the federal government). American state-sponsored electoral interference is an inherently different problem than Chinese or Russian interference because there are many American actors at play. These include those American PACs and SIGs and other lobbying groups looking to use their billions of dollars in funding to push their ideals around the world by directly and indirectly interfering with foreign elections.
At the end of the day, foreign interference is anything that leads to Canada pursuing activities not in its own best interest from anyone that isn’t Canadian (if we want to fuck ourselves up, we have that right) and funded with non-Canadian money. This has clearly happened from Chinese, Russian, AND American sources and it needs to stop if we want to protect our democracy.
Many of us do consider it foreign interference.
However the people who complain the loudest at the current government about foreign interference seems to have hitched their wagon to the same ideas as these particular foreign interfereers.
Let’s not pretend that racist or xenophobic people don’t exist in Canada. Ignoring them would be a very dangerous thing to do, Canadians don’t need external influence to be racist.
The external influence sure helps galvanize people though.
Of course, but this is true for any political movement, even if it’s the one you’re rooting for. It’s a bit far fetched, but would you say that leftist people in Canada are strongly getting influenced by people like Bernie Sanders and AOC and that it should be considered foreign interference?
I mean, I would make the argument that Canadian media isn’t being bought by leftist ownership groups from the US in the same way as, for example, Postmedia has almost monopolized Canadian newspapers through American right wing ownership. Major media seems like a more direct and present form of political influence than a more natural spread through observation like what I believe you’re describing.
True, but having that fringe minority amplified by louder and better funded outside influences isn’t improving the situation.
Part of the problem is that the Conservatives welcome it because they see it will help them in elections.
Oh, for sure. All the more reason for electoral reform.
TL;DR - you should. We collectively need to reassess how we tackle this kind of behaviour.
We have weird partitions for things. It’s sort of clear the division isn’t really state v. state or country v. country, it’s urban pockets versus rural spreads. You can make inferences regarding accesses to resources, education, meaningful work, etc. as you will.
The political delta between Northern/Southern California, Eastern/Western Colorado+Washington, Upstate/Downstate New York, is FAR more significant than USA/Canada.
Alberta would slot in easily into the US Southeast. Ontario would slot in easily into the US Northeast/Northwest.
I worry for Canada (and the US, and many countries), because people are more or less the same everywhere (despite their grandest objections), and are quite susceptible to the same rhetoric and influential activity across the board.
I think that’s what I’m most worried about. While the urban/rural divide is everywhere, the US just has so much more resources to dump into Canadian elections.
Yeah, k, but how would you even start to combat grassroots interference like that? At least with China there is an organization that you can monitor and counteract. A far as I can see, with this type of “interference” we’re stuck chasing ghosts and battleing hydras.
Long term, by growing our population.
How would that help?
The same reason it works for the US. A bigger population, all else being equal, means higher economic output and therefore larger political influence internationally relative to other players. If Canada had 1B population, groups in the US would have found it much harder to exert any significant influence over our politics given how much louder than them our voices would be. By voices think all types political voces, individual, collective, etc.
I think there is an underlying assumption that our current situation with the right is largely due to external influences. I’m of the opinion, that while the expression of the ideology is globally crowdsourced, we would have a similar percentage of wingnuts with or without American influence.
It seems to me that the economic disenfranchisement of the average Canadian is the primary force polarizing people politically, which would also explain the simultaneous resurgence of fascism globally (notibly, outside of the anglosphere)
Because we’re their pet.
Yall are America lite, and have many of the same problems. You guys are going to have people forming similar opinions.
Yall are America lite, and have many of the same problems. You guys are going to have people forming similar opinions.
Gun violence? Privatized healthcare? SuperPACs and outsized corporate influence? (Ok maybe that last one). The point is, Canada and the US a have had fairly separate political scenes in the past. That’s changing today.
There’s a clear culture shock when I go to the US, even the first one being that we acknowledge the difference between America and the United States of America 😉 Many other Canadians don’t realize the difference, and for some reason, they tend to be on the right side of the political compass. Culturally speaking, we’re closer to the Brits, but with an American lifestyle.
This. It’s very British influenced. Even the music and television culture, I hadn’t heard of half this stuff people grew up with here. Now I am the proud owner of a North American house hippo.
While I love to make this same joke, it’s just not true. I immigrated to Canada from the US, the cultural differences are a bit dramatic. Living in rural US not recycling is “acceptable” because it’s impossible to manage and there’s no trash pickup etc. Whereas in rural Canada I’ve been scolded by my in laws for not throwing a piece of an olive into green bin vs the trash. Also don’t get them started on gun violence in American schools, or wearing shoes in the house.
