HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Hurtig's New Party
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: can
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 08:22:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.011157.4529@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>In article <17620@mindlink.bc.ca> Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian) writes:
>>The Globe this morning reports that Mel Hurtig is planning to launch a new
>>political party advocating Canadian economic nationalism and an end to free
>>trade. Can anyone supply more information on what this party's plans are?
>>(Those lacking such information can still supply opinions, I'm sure.)
>>
>
>Although I disagree with Hurtig's economics, (it is rather naive to
>believe that Canada can dictate the rules of international trade to
>Japan, Germany, and the USA), this is a good development, because
>Hurtig has infinitely more intelligence and integrity than most
>NDP'ers and Liberals.
>

if he is so intelligent, why does he believe in his isolationist tactics
that would send foreign investors running for cover, while the majoity
of Canadians would suffer from all the business and investment that would
bail out of Canada? His policies would encourage a fire sale of Canadian
resources (which he would deplore) as ordinary Canadians sought ways
to maintain what's left of their lifestyle.

Above all, I think his conspiracy theories show either paranoia or studidity

>The reality is that we have to play on a playing field ultimately
>designed and marked by the economic superpowers, and the economic
>nationalists fail to realize this, but Hurtig will at least make
>the economic nationalist case in a much more coherent way, and
>he is a democrat bent on democratizing our government more than
>it is already, and I wholeheartedly support that...even if I
>disagree with his economics.

And hopefully the people of Canada will recognize pandering when they see it.
One wonders if he'll give himself sweeping powers and suspend the consitution
if elected, in order to deal with the traitors and CIA agents and multinationals
he thinks are running the country.

>
>Gerald
>


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian)
Subject: Hurtig's New Party
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:00:36 GMT

The Globe this morning reports that Mel Hurtig is planning to launch a new
political party advocating Canadian economic nationalism and an end to free
trade. Can anyone supply more information on what this party's plans are?
(Those lacking such information can still supply opinions, I'm sure.)

--
Crawford Kilian   Communications Department   Capilano College
North Vancouver BC Canada V7J 3H5
Usenet: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca
Internet: ckilian@first.etc.bc.ca

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Subject: Re: Definition of/d'un "Quebecois"
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:51:44 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1939

From article <13542@audetf>, by audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet):
> In article <1992Nov17.093351.13288@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>>Many 'anglophones' consider themselves to be "quebecers" (which, i suppose
>>could be linguistically translated to "quebecois" ?) - but you won't find
>>many of them taking to the streets screaming "Le Quebec au quebecois!" on
>>Jean Baptiste Day. :-)
> 
> That doesn't mean they are less quebecois.
> A franco-ontarian is not less ontarian than a anglo-ontarian because
> he doesn't burn Quebec flag as a hobby, or go to see the Queen when
> she visits the colony.  :-)
> 
> The "Le Quebec aux quebecois" slogan is rather stupid. Technically, it
> is accurate and simply reflects a revendication of Quebec's autonomny
> (i.e., let the citizen of Quebec decide of their own destiny,
> inlcuding everyone who is a citizen of Quebec). However, there is a
> portion of the people shouting the slogan who have a more "selective"
> (i.e. descriminating) view of what it actualy means. France's infamous
> LePen uses a slogan similar to this. Sure, I've seen some idiots
> shouting the slogan and complaining about "foreigners", etc. It still
> doesn't reflect the overall atmosphere at the St-Jean Baptiste.
> 
> PS: I never liked the sound of "quebecker", not because it is english,
> but because the terminaison seems rather strange. Furthermore, most of
> the times I've heard it was by people bitching abaout quebec. I can't
> think of any other cases of terminating a nationality with "er". Much
> like saying "canadeux" or "ontareux".

I agree with Francois.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach)
Subject: Re: Reform Party
Originator: labach@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 17:01:19 GMT
Organization: The Bobby Jurasin Fan Club

In article <1992Nov22.202155.25456@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>
tony@nexus.yorku.ca (Anthony Wallis) writes: 

> The "Conservative" (full name "Progressive Conservative" - whatever
> that means) party, and the other two mainline parties, named the
> "Liberals" and the "New Social Democratic Activist Party" (NSDAP),
                                                             ^^^^^

An asinine and misleading cheap shot.  If you don't like the NDP, feel
free to insult us for being RadLesbianPeacenikCommiePinkos, but calling
us Nazis is entirely unreasonable.

> or something, all believe in taxes, appeasement of special interest
> groups, and offering taxpayers' money as propitiation to angry modern
> secular gods.

- terry -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is our duty to attack unsparingly the miserable system which would
 make all civilization end in a society of rich and poor, of slaves and
 slave-owners."
 - William Morris
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca
Subject: Re: Toronto Sun: another case of paranoia???
Organization: McGill University
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:38:32 GMT

Discussion of an anti-Quebec (?) comic strip in the Toronto Sun
deleted.

What nobody seems to have mentioned in this thread is that the
Toronto Sun is a scurrilous rag whose contents deserve only scorn.
At least that was my impression of the paper when I lived in
Toronto (pre-1986).  Has it changed?  If not, why are we devoting
bandwidth to this garbage?

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

Xref: sparky can.politics:9936 soc.culture.canada:8785
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Virginie's TV violence petition
Date: 23 Nov 92 20:37:15 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1896

From article <1992Nov20.222744.1@uwovax.uwo.ca>, by 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque):
> In article <1992Nov20.110332.4393@spxtech.qc.ca>, steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
> 
> (I quote myself)
>>>      Have any of you guys seen the petition from a little girl named
>>> Virginie[?]
> 
> (Steve "English education" Potter)
>  
>> Yes, I signed it.
>> 
>> Does anybody want the text posted?
>> 
> 
> Sure, Steve.
> 

OK - Coming soon.

> [me:-]
>> Am I a moron because I believe there is too much gratuitous violence
>> on TV - and I believe studies that have linked it to violence in
>> society to one degree or another?
> 
> [John/Jean:-]
> Yeah, and they used to say that Jazz and Rock and Roll made black men want
> to rape white women! And that Hallowe'en is Satanic too. .....

and "immigrant" kids going to English is a threat to the French language?

> ..... BTW you are a moron!
> 

oh.

>> I'd like to see less stylised violence and commercialism in kid's
>> cartoons too.
> 
> I'd like to shoot Strawberry Short cake and My Little Pony... Wile E kicks
> their day anyday. 
> 
>> I'd also like to see permanent world peace.
>> Am I dreaming? :-)
> 
> Yeah, very much. BTW banning things is the ULTIMATE form of violence, taking
> away consent from people and interfering in their lives. THAT is why we will
> never have World Peace... blah blah blah
> 
> By the way, give me Liberty or give me death (and kill Brian Mulroney and 
> Bou-bou)
> 

I wonder what an experienced psychiatrist would make of M. LaRocque's
postings (?)

They are certainly entertaining. :-)
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: svanegmo@mobius09.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond)
Subject: Re: Jean Chretien
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:43:28 GMT

> Should I vote for
> the Reform Party? I don't think so! 

What reasons do you have why you shouldn't vote for the Reform Party?  I have seen comments like this, and have asked this question dozens of times, but have yet to get a single response.  What is it about the Reform Party's positions that you do not like?  Or did you actually believe Audrey McLaughlin when she said Preston Manning was Canada's David Duke?
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui)
Subject: Reform party vs. Progressive Conservative party
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 01:52:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.010426.3934@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>Hmmm, the Reform Party should siphon off PC votes, and the NoWayFreeTrade
>Party should siphon off NDP votes

I think the Reform party's existance actually helps to increase votes
for the PC, since all the undesirable and simply plain wrong platform
issues has been covered by Reform, and has drawn all the people supporting
that platform to Reform, thus leaving PC squeaky clean, and thus electable.

Before anyone of you try to use Jesse Jackson's argument in reverse, I
remind you that the Rev. Jackson was talking about quite different things
when he said the following:

         "It's better to have a clean heart and dirty hands,
          than clean hands and a dirty heart."

But I'll use Rev. Jackson's argument anyway: the PC's have dirty hands
and a clean heart, since they do truly believe in their brand of
ideology with unwavering commitment, and enact legislation in exactly
that spirit, so you get exactly what you voted for. The Reform party
has a rather dirty heart and so far, still clean hands.

A party with a dirty heart is unelectable. I hope Preston Manning
remains the leader of the Reform party for the rest of that party's lifetime.
-- 
Michael MY Hui  ~{~}  myhui@bnr.ca  Ottawa Canada
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: svanegmo@mobius09.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond)
Subject: Re: Deception
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:12:26 GMT

Bonjour Pierre!

In article <1992Nov16.184039.15536@cerberus.ulaval.ca>, plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca (Pierre Lahaie) writes:
> MAUDIT que je suis decu de ce pays qu'est le Canada. Si ce que j'ai lu aujourd'hui
> dans ce groupe (can.politics) est representatif des gens qui l'habitent.  Cela est
> terrible, certains ne peuvent comprendre que le francais doit etre protege et 
> que les quebecois ont peur de se voir assimiler.  Certains proferent des menaces
> advenant l'independance du Quebec, ces menaces ressemblent etrangement aux 
> divers discours de justifications des genocides qui ont eu lieu dans divers 
> endroits du monde en certaines annees ce siecle.

> Il est malheureux que le Canada qui semble vouloir faire la promotion de la paix 
> dans le monde comporte certains citoyens peu enclins a tolerer les differences,
> la justice et la liberte d'expression a l'interieur de ses frontieres.  Ceci semble
> etre quelque chose "la liberte d'expression est bonne pour moi, mais les autres 
> n'en ont pas besoin lorsqu'ils veulent me critiquer".  Cet etat de chose va a 
> l'encontre des droits de l'homme et des droits individuels.  La liberte de dire 
> ce que l'on pense possede une limite et cette limite s'approche lorsque des menaces 
> et des discours haineux sont proferes et lances.
> 


J'aimerais vous demander quelque chose: vous indiques la dans votre article que vous pensez que le francais doit etre protege ici dans le Canada.  Mais, je vous demande, a quel cout?   Vous dites aussi que le Canada et les Canadiens (dont les Quebecois sont une partie des deux, jusqu'a date) doivent etre inclines vers la tolerance des differencesm, la justice, et la _liberte_d'expression_.

Alors, est-ce que vous trouvez que des lois (tel #101) ont une place dans le Canada?  N'est-ce pas que la liberte d'expression comprend TOUTES les formes d'expression?  Dans la langage de son choix, francais, italien, ukranien, anglais, ou autre?  N'est-ce pas l'idee des droits de l'individuel qu'il puisse parler dans la langue de son choix, et qu'il s'en fiche de ce que la majorite veut a cet egard-la?

Jusqu'a date, l'idee de la protection du francais dans le Quebec est compris de lois qui sont contre la tolerance, et contre la liberte d'expression.  Il se peut qu'il y ait des idees quelque part qui protegent le francais et aussi qui assurent la liberte d'expression, mais moi je n'en ai pas vu, jusqu'a date.

Et quand vous parlez de genocides, je vous demande de vous rappeler le chant des nationalistes: "Le Quebec pour les Quebecois!"

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Van Egmond (Power Station)        svanegmond@descartes.uwaterloo.ca
| "Important to remember when dealing with people: it's `I think, therefore
|  I am,' and not `I am, therefore I think.'"



Newsgroups: can.politics
From: bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross)
Subject: Re: Thank You Mr. Clark was Re: The partition of Quebec (from an APEC pamphlet)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Brock University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:44:40 GMT

grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
: In article <1992Nov14.012007.9802@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA> bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross) writes:
: >grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
: >: 
: >: The object of the Charlottetown Accord and the constitutional miasma that
: >: led up to it was to recognize diversity by producing a 
: >: "Community of Communities"
: >: 
: >: From the evidence of this thread (which is accurately summarized by
: >: the quotation above), the process has worked. Canada is now a
: >: "Community of Communities". Unfortunately there is nothing to hold
: >: these communities together but the mutual ignorance and suspicion generated by
: >: a process which pitted region against cultural group against national
: >: vision.
: >: 
: >: Welcome to the new Canada. [...]
: >: 
: >: Thank you Mr. Clark
: >
: >Don't be ridiculous. The failed accord didn't create this bigotry. It
: 
: I'll be as ridiculous as I please.

Of course you will.

: >has been fermenting in Canada for eons. There has been anti-Quebec 
: >sentiments in TROC for decades, the aboriginals have suffered for 
: >generations, and Trudeau fuelled western alienation and didn't give 
: >a damn whether Quebec endorsed his ego-motivated repatriation. 
: 
: Clark and Mulroney exploited the divisions in the country. Mulroney for
: his ego and as for Clark, well he proved his competence in 1979
: (counting over 100 is difficult isn't it). Now we see the result of their
: efforts. Did Clark succeed in producing his beloved "Community of
: Communities"? Yes he succeeded. We are now seeing the result.

Nah, they just took the reigns from Pierre, the real culprit.
Giving Mulroney and Clark credit for the current situation is
revisionist fantasy.

: -- 
: i.sinature

Yep.

-- 
Brian Ross                         "How do we arrange lures in our tackle box?
bross@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca     From left to right, according to size and 
                                    frequency of use." -- Anal-Retentive Chef.
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 12:20:17 EST
From: John G. Spragge <SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Senate Interrogation
Distribution: can
 <schuck.721165680@sfu.ca> <LABACH.92Nov9083820@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>
 <92316.135417SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <schuck.721543654@sfu.ca>
 <92317.121200SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <schuck.721608394@sfu.ca>
 <92318.143616SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <schuck.721767010@sfu.ca>
 <92319.191414SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <jstewart.721797022@cunews>

In article <jstewart.721797022@cunews>, jstewart@alfred.carleton.ca (John
Stewart) says:

>The reason German war production increased towards the end of the war is
>because the economy was not fully mobilized towards the production of
>armaments until after Germanys first serious military defeats in 1942.
>For example, production of private automobiles was continued until early in
>1943.

Absolutely right. And after the 1940 victories in france, they froze the
R&D activities on tanks until they encountered the Russian T-34 and KV-1
in mid to late 1944. I would point out, however, that the existence of
this excess industrial capacity reduced the effect of the bombing.

I would also point out that this reinforces a point I made earlier:
that scattering bombs randomly on an industrial complex actually
frees resources for military production by wiping out civilian
business which may compete for them.

Your culture will adapt to service ours - Columbus to Natives, 1492
Your culture will adapt to service ours - Borg to Captain Picard, 24th C.

standard disclaimers apply ----------------------- John G. Spragge
From: riese@litsun.epfl.ch (Marc Riese)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Tories blame Liberals for economy
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:47:26 GMT


Radio Canada showed a clip of a Tory money raising dinner held in
Toronto Thursday (or Wednesday). While addressing the audience,
Mulroney made some claim to the effect that the majority of the blame
for Canada's current economic mess should go to the Liberal party.

In the very same edition, the CBC showed that the Tories have yet
again managed to have a budget deficit above $30 billion, and that
this year it is more than $3 billion worse than planned.
What irks me is that despite the record of the Progressive Conservative
party, some people still believe that they are particularly good at managing
the economy. One begins to think that a ten year-old could do better.

Who will pay for this irresponsability?
Voter should not accept this.

Marc Riese
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
Suisse
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: viking@bnr.ca (Harold Henrikson)
Subject: Re: Anyone want to buy a used country?
Reply-To: viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Fibre Systems Development
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 20:58:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.180951.21978@mks.com>, chris@mks.com (Chris Retterath) writes:

|> 
|> We have expected so much and bitched so loudly at every cut, that we can't
|> affort new spending. A country that, after a 30 year experiment with
|> socialized medicine, with the costs spiralling out of control, decides
|> it should be part of the constitution 'so noone will be able to take it away'.
|> No wonder we're in trouble.
|> 

Methinks you miss the gist of the original post.  The Tories are taking money away 
from social programs but that doesn't mean the money is 'saved'.  If that were the
case one might reasonably expect the deficit to be declining.  The big problem is
that the cuts are eating into the productive capacity of the country by driving jobs
away or reducing the ability to sustain the jobs that exist.  This causes an increased
demand for the social services you say we can't afford.  Perhaps we cannot afford these
policies but are you assuming social disintegration is without cost?

As far as expecting so much, you may be right except that you must remember that most
of these programs originated as insurance or pension schemes.  Is it the average citizen's
fault the various governments called them general revenue and pillaged them for political
gain?  I will be glad to forgo any old age pension from the government - just stop taking
deductions from my salary and give me back what I've given in.  I will accept government
cutbacks - but let's see the politicians take a wage freeze.  I will accept no money for
education - but we can't afford a constitutional referendum either.

Seems to me the last thing we can afford is the current crop of politicians and the last
thing we need are those who feel social programs are an extravagance in the face of
widespread economic desolation.  

--
Harold Henriksen                    Bell-Northern Research
email: viking@bmerh694.bnr.ca       Ottawa,Ontario,Canada 

Pillaging and plundering were more fun than programming!
(Opinions are not my employer's and sometimes not mine)
Newsgroups: can.politics