Is Mark Carney sliding towards Fascism?

[Tciso]

Before the flame wars start, it's a serious question. Trudeau and Carney have been taking methodical steps that in my opinion are definitely fall into the definition of Fascism.

Here is AI's definition, and it matches others I have read/studied in Poly Sci classes

Fascism is an ultranationalist, authoritarian political ideology characterized by a dictatorial leader, a centralized government, and the forcible suppression of opposition. It places the nation or a racial group above the individual, combining elements of a strong military, economic self-sufficiency, and strict social and economic control. This system is opposed to individual rights, equality, democracy, liberalism, and socialism.

Key characteristics of fascism :
Authoritarian leadership: A single, powerful, dictatorial leader is at the head of the government.
Militarism: A strong emphasis is placed on the military, and militarism is often glorified.
Nationalism: The ideology is highly nationalistic, often exalting the nation or a specific race above all else.
Totalitarian control: The government exerts extensive control over social and economic life, and political opposition is not allowed.
Subordination of the individual: Individual interests are considered less important than the perceived interests of the nation or race.
Suppression of opposition: Dissent and opposition are met with severe and often violent suppression.
Hierarchical structure: Fascism believes in a natural social hierarchy where some are leaders and others are followers.

Individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy

When we look at Carney, he is pushing many aspects of fascism. He is doing his 'elbows up' anti - trump fearmongering to boost our nationalism (Hitler used the jews). He runs an authoritarian government with little to no transparency. He is allowing rampant crime to flourish to sow fear and dissent in the population. He has already floated the idea of military training for 300,000 public servants. He is exerting almost total control over the economy and industry with his government selected list of approved projects and unachievable approval processes, instead of allowing free markets. Our social programs and debt are forcing reliance of millions on the government. He suppresses opposition through $1.75 billion in subsidies to the legacy media. He uses the Supreme Court as a tool to selectively push his social agenda. His solutin to every govrnment created problem is more governmnet, and more government control.

I am not saying Canada is a Fascist State, but, Carney and the Liberals are definitely implementing many of the key tennants of Fascism.

[JelloPuddingPop]

Nope.

Elbows Up isn't "fear mongering" - its trying to create a more unified face in front of a trade partner that is trying to reduce Canada's economic strength. The Provinces/Territories have long been separated, and its time trade barriers were removed, and they rely on their neighbours for economic support.

Not sure how you see the Canadian government as Authoritarian. At least compared to an AI list (your reference source, not mine):
Afghanistan, Belarus, China, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia etc. etc. etc. Canada is not even close to any of these countries. That is hyperbole at it's very finest sir.

Allowing rampant crime? This is usually a Municipality/Provincial/Territorial jurisdiction. Not a Federal one, unless you are talking about Federal Laws, or Correction Facilities, which have been in place for decades prior to Carney's government. Maybe I'm missing your point here though?

Many "Socialist" countries have military training, which would be as far from Fascism as one could get. Just look at Finland, Sweden(?) etc.

By exerting total control over the economy, I assume you mean by policies he has enacted? As the government? With power over the economy? Hard to see how those might, or might not play out with a minority government.

Legacy media, meaning the CBC? Without this entity, a lot of rural Canada wouldn't have news/TV/media. Same thing as Canada Post, I for example only have a PO Box. This is a very big city centric view. Nationally subsidized media broadcasters also support a lot of arts, local news, and many other venues for creative outlet.

Using the Supreme Court to push a social agenda. No idea what this is about. Will have to leave it alone.

I think I hit on most of your points. But honestly, even if you don't agree with the finer points - you have to see that we are about as far from Fascist, as the Canucks are from winning a Cup. Anything is possible... but really? Probably not.

[5thhorseman]

Yeah, I don't see it either. Where are we lacking transparency where it existed before?

[donlever]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

[BCExpat]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I'm well past that point, so put me down for "I don't care". But honestly, I don't think it makes much difference. Anyone who started planning at a younger age, should be able to retire at 65 (assuming you didn't work your entire life at a job paying near a minimum wage). And if you can't retire at 65 due to financial circumstances, I really doubt that working until 67 is going to matter much.

[donlever]

Yeah, I am in basic agreement Expat, your response forms a portion of their platform as well, just asking the group for their opinion overall.

I imagine most here see it your way as well.

[Tciso]

Sorry for shortening your responses as i respond, but if I don't, it'll be an unreadable mess (it still might be)

Nope.

Elbows Up isn't "fear mongering" - its trying to create a more unified face in front of a trade partner that is trying to reduce Canada's economic strength.

That would have been fine if he had actually taken the stance he said he would, instead of initially putting in counter tariffs that broke the USMCA agreement (Trump only targeted the exempt 15%, and specific industries like steel/aluminum,). Then he followed up with dropping random tariffs and taxes without announcing most till well after the fact. All the while, pumping the 15st state as an existential threat to Canada, which short of a military invasion, there is no legal framework for it.

Not sure how you see the Canadian government as Authoritarian.

While he was Trudeau's advisor, Trudeau tried to push through a bill allowing totally uncontrolled government spending, without oversight, as if that is what would protect us from Covid. He was there in lock step with that one. In addition, by driving up the debt, and competing with industry he is extending control over the economy. Fascism isn't government ownership, it is government control through puppet ownership, where the government is the parents who grant approval in the relationship

Allowing rampant crime?

His government has repeatedly ignored the rise in crime (his new legislation is not much more than lip service), and recently, they decided to side with the Supreme Court when the SC deemed a 1 year mandatory sentence for child porn as unreasonable. the Constitution is to protect our Rights, but the SC is creating new 'rights', and his government is OK with that. They are still allowing 2 tiered justice with judges using immigration status as a reason to lower both the severity of the charges and the sentence so the crime will not interfere with an immigrant's chances of being a citizen.

Many "Socialist" countries have military training, which would be as far from Fascism as one could get. Just look at Finland, Sweden(?) etc.

Yes, if you mean military service. And, I strongly support that service. Carney has floated having 300,000 federal civil servants taking weapons training. We have about 370,000 civil servants, so, pardon me if I don't believe that the vast majority are extremely unfit for service

By exerting total control over the economy, I assume you mean by policies he has enacted? As the government? With power over the economy?

No. I mean the list of 32 projects the government has deemed 'fit' to be potentially approved and fast tracked. This is a good start to ensuring business and industry go 'knees down' on the government to have a snowballs chance in hell of being approved. Picking favorites, winners, and losers is absolutely a move to control individual companies and industries.

Legacy media, meaning the CBC?

Don't forget the extra $346 million for all of the other media outlets, including the other major news networks. And, their coverage shows they know who is paying the bills.

Using the Supreme Court to push a social agenda.

Its also a part of issues like being OK when the SC over turns legislation like the child porn minimum sentences.

I think I hit on most of your points. But honestly, even if you don't agree with the finer points - you have to see that we are about as far from Fascist, as the Canucks are from winning a Cup. Anything is possible... but really? Probably not.

The almost total lack of transparency is also astounding. Documents that are legally ordered by committees are not produced, or redacted beyond recognition. Committees are shut down before they can fulfil their mandates. He is trying to baffle the average voter with his splitting of the budget into 2 sets of books (and his definition of 'capital investment' doesn't fit with any reasonable definition used by other democracies, or even our own PBO). He used a loophole to keep his investments secret after he became Prime Minister but before he placed everything in a blind trust (btw, he still knows what stock options he has, as if they are triggered, it would be made public, so we know he isn't blind) - that feeds into the authoritarianism as he is funding/granting major projects to companies he still owns

I am not saying we are in a Fascist state, just that many of the government's actions are trending that way.

[Tciso]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I haven't seen anything about this from any of the news feeds I follow (mainstream, Cdn Taxpayer's, Rebel News, Northern Perspective, etc), or by the NDP. If this is true, I would expect the NDP to bring down the government, as they have been trying to force even higher payments for OAS (they got a small boost for those over 75). This was initially implemented by Harper, and then reversed by Trudeau. But, Harper had a 10 year transition period to allow people to prepare. I don't see a transition period with this article. Personally, I support delaying it by 2 years, as all you damned Boomers are already costing us too way too much Btw, I am still a decade away from collecting OAS, so it would definitely affect me and Mrs Tciso, who is a few years younger than me.

[5thhorseman]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I'd be delaying taking pension till 70 to get the maximum amount anyways, so delaying till 72 is no biggie. The whole point of the pension is not how soon you get it, but rather that it's a fallback for your later years (eg should you live to 100, say) when other funds run out.

[Carl Yagro]

At this rate, as Canucks' followers, we'd all have to live well past 100...

[rats19]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I'd be delaying taking pension till 70 to get the maximum amount anyways, so delaying till 72 is no biggie. The whole point of the pension is not how soon you get it, but rather that it's a fallback for your later years (eg should you live to 100, say) when other funds run out.

There is math to do….

[Ronning's Ghost]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

Yeah, this would have been unwelcome news for me, but

I haven't seen anything about this from any of the news feeds I follow...

And I can't find anything with a targeted search, including on the government (Canada.ca) website.

(Admittedly, my Google-Fu is weak, but something like this would have been major news.)

Meanwhile, inclusionwestman seems kind of suspect. A general search returns

"a community organization in the Westman region that promotes inclusion for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and other support needs"

but the linked site doesn't seem to have much to do with that.

When I specifically asked about a news website, some self-described scam detectors reported
"As the site has a very low trust score, we don't label it a safe website."

https://www.scam-detector.com/validator ... ca-review/

Caveat emptor, I guess.

[5thhorseman]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I'd be delaying taking pension till 70 to get the maximum amount anyways, so delaying till 72 is no biggie. The whole point of the pension is not how soon you get it, but rather that it's a fallback for your later years (eg should you live to 100, say) when other funds run out.

There is math to do….

I hope you're not having to do a lot of math these days Rats.

Sending good vibes your way

[2Fingers]

CPP and OAS accounts for about 20%-25% of my funds in retirement. I have much better work pensions that accounts for the rest and some RRSP.

I will probably still retire at 65 regardless.

[rats19]

...does anyone here care (or are you adverlsey hampered by/plans changed due to) the 67 y/o retirement package...

https://inclusionwestman.ca/canada-ends ... ent-at-65/

I'd be delaying taking pension till 70 to get the maximum amount anyways, so delaying till 72 is no biggie. The whole point of the pension is not how soon you get it, but rather that it's a fallback for your later years (eg should you live to 100, say) when other funds run out.

There is math to do….

I hope you're not having to do a lot of math these days Rats.

Sending good vibes your way

Thnx fifth

All the math has been done..