• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trudeau Popularity - or not (various polling, etc.)

Scary, and rings quite true it would seem, but this is a British article and couldn't possibly apply to the Liberals, right? ;)

If I Were a Marxist

If I were a Marxist, my mission would be to infiltrate and transform the very fabric of Great Britain, sowing seeds of discontent and radical ideology aimed at dismantling Capitalism and replacing it with a collectivist mindset. I would wield psychological tactics to instil self-doubt and guilt about personal achievements, reinforcing the toxic belief that success comes at the expense of others.

Education would become a breeding ground for revolutionary thought. Schools and universities would teach that the white, male, capitalist class is inherently imperialist and oppressive. Using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I would empower students via Marxist lecturer drones to organise, mobilise, and challenge authority. Everything would become fluid and questionable, even matters of the obvious like gender and border. Families and faith would be derided; toppling statues would be celebrated, while pronouns would serve as tools of division, encouraging the youth to loathe their own history and thereby themselves. Historical agency would fast be compromised if citizens could praise any culture worldwide, except for Western culture, while also being unable to assign blame to any culture other than Western culture.

In the workplace, relentless unionisation would be my battle cry. I would nurture a sense of victimhood, positioning workers against management while promoting envy and resentment over individual merit. Diversity quotas would dilute corporate power, ensuring that envy triumphs over ambition. I would invent tribunals that almost always find in favour of workers. I would squeeze employers by creating endless red tape and an army of stickybeak state inspectors with clipboards to enforce it. I would invent ‘corporate social responsibility’ and force capitalist firms to offer free money to Marxist charities and causes via guilt trips under the threatening cloud of cancellation.

I would deploy Critical Theory to dismantle established norms, framing every interaction as fuelled by power dynamics. I would equate beauty and charm with ugliness and obesity. Media outlets would become echo chambers for portraying societal structures as unjust, reinforcing identity politics as the new ideological battleground. I would coopt national charities by planting placers and convert them from their core task of conservation into agents of radical change.

Popular culture and social media would glorify revolutionary transformation while deriding tradition. Influencers would amplify the narrative of victimhood, making revolutionary ideals aspirational. I would dominate the national broadcaster and take over the news output, employing fellow travellers as the key presenters and programme makers, making celebrities out of parrots and knaves, ensuring even football commentators blamed football teams’ failures on being too ‘conservative’ or not sufficiently ‘progressive’.

I would tax landowners and force farmers off their land via price and paperwork, celebrating ‘rewilding’ at the expense of food security in the name of a ‘climate emergency.’ The landed gentry would find their pastimes attacked, while fast-reproducing vermin like crows and gulls would be hailed as ‘protected species’ to sow chaos on moors and country (in particular, royal) estates. I would put licenses out of reach to disarm those rural folk of a more independent mindset who happen to require shotguns for their work. I would promote veganism and vegetarianism to impoverish farmers and make national parks of those hills once scattered with cattle.

Mass immigration would be my weapon, presented as a solution to economic woes while destabilising cultural cohesion. I would dilute national identity, branding any dissent as racism or ‘far-right’ terrorism, encouraging students to confront street protesters while masquerading as ‘anti-fascists’ or ‘anti-capitalists.’ Free speech would be curtailed, and new legislation would silence dissent.

An expanding state would be my goal, bloating public services like the NHS into worshipped idols – urging other public sector agencies to become similar, bottomless pits.

Citizens would soon become dependents, lulled by promises of “free services” while drowning in state debt. Transport, energy and utilities would be nationalised. I would seek to control energy by nationalising green fuel, promoting electric vehicles through punitive road tax for petrol and diesel vehicles while choking off oil companies that have so fuelled Capitalism’s success. All immovable problems I would solve with new committees, inquiries and by the creation of yet more quangos staffed by Marxist cronies.

Global governance would replace national sovereignty, with international cooperation positioned as paramount. To quell dissent, remote work would become the norm, and social credit systems would well keep the polloi in line. Technology would serve as a tool for surveillance, creating a populace well-monitored under the guise of social welfare. As the multipolar world becomes technopolar and government power erodes, I would co-opt the large tech firms and ensure that they maintained Silicon Valley’s penchant for deleterious wokeness.

Wealth redistribution would be framed as fairness; the wealthy would be vilified while higher taxes for the successful became celebrated. Public welfare programmes would perpetuate dependency, crippling self-sufficiency. Billionaires would be scorned and state workers lauded, income inequality ever highlighted. Property and unearned income would be taxed to the hilt.

I would stoke divisions – between rich and poor, native-born and immigrant, public sector and private sector – fuelling chaos and conflict. Grassroots movements would demand radical change, ensuring that trust in established institutions erodes.

Ultimately, my aim would be to craft a society where personal ambition is crushed beneath collective ideology and state dependence – marshalled by real-time tech. I would cultivate a landscape where the state reigns supreme, relegating individual dreams to fantasy and plunging society into a narrative of perpetual struggle for state sustenance.


Thanks be to Reason and God, I am no Marxist. I happen to be an Englishman, a Brit, and free – one of those stubborn buggers that the world knows all too well from their history books not to provoke. Being on the end of a Briton’s smile is always preferable to his pitchfork or bayonet.



If I Were a Marxist COUNTRY SQUIRE MAGAZINE
 
You actually can right a sinking ship: That is exactly the whole point of damage control. ;)
I'm not a sailor, but I suspect even a sinking ship can reach a point where even the most aggressive damage control won't save it, no? HMCS Team Red is starting to feel at least approaching - if not (according to some) beyond - that point :)
 
I'm not a sailor, but I suspect even a sinking ship can reach a point where even the most aggressive damage control won't save it, no? HMCS Team Red is starting to feel at least approaching - if not (according to some) beyond - that point :)
I'd say they are at about this stage of sinking....

titanic Underground flooding GIF
 
Scary, and rings quite true it would seem, but this is a British article and couldn't possibly apply to the Liberals, right? ;)

If I Were a Marxist

If I were a Marxist, my mission would be to infiltrate and transform the very fabric of Great Britain, sowing seeds of discontent and radical ideology aimed at dismantling Capitalism and replacing it with a collectivist mindset. I would wield psychological tactics to instil self-doubt and guilt about personal achievements, reinforcing the toxic belief that success comes at the expense of others.

Education would become a breeding ground for revolutionary thought. Schools and universities would teach that the white, male, capitalist class is inherently imperialist and oppressive. Using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I would empower students via Marxist lecturer drones to organise, mobilise, and challenge authority. Everything would become fluid and questionable, even matters of the obvious like gender and border. Families and faith would be derided; toppling statues would be celebrated, while pronouns would serve as tools of division, encouraging the youth to loathe their own history and thereby themselves. Historical agency would fast be compromised if citizens could praise any culture worldwide, except for Western culture, while also being unable to assign blame to any culture other than Western culture.

In the workplace, relentless unionisation would be my battle cry. I would nurture a sense of victimhood, positioning workers against management while promoting envy and resentment over individual merit. Diversity quotas would dilute corporate power, ensuring that envy triumphs over ambition. I would invent tribunals that almost always find in favour of workers. I would squeeze employers by creating endless red tape and an army of stickybeak state inspectors with clipboards to enforce it. I would invent ‘corporate social responsibility’ and force capitalist firms to offer free money to Marxist charities and causes via guilt trips under the threatening cloud of cancellation.

I would deploy Critical Theory to dismantle established norms, framing every interaction as fuelled by power dynamics. I would equate beauty and charm with ugliness and obesity. Media outlets would become echo chambers for portraying societal structures as unjust, reinforcing identity politics as the new ideological battleground. I would coopt national charities by planting placers and convert them from their core task of conservation into agents of radical change.

Popular culture and social media would glorify revolutionary transformation while deriding tradition. Influencers would amplify the narrative of victimhood, making revolutionary ideals aspirational. I would dominate the national broadcaster and take over the news output, employing fellow travellers as the key presenters and programme makers, making celebrities out of parrots and knaves, ensuring even football commentators blamed football teams’ failures on being too ‘conservative’ or not sufficiently ‘progressive’.

I would tax landowners and force farmers off their land via price and paperwork, celebrating ‘rewilding’ at the expense of food security in the name of a ‘climate emergency.’ The landed gentry would find their pastimes attacked, while fast-reproducing vermin like crows and gulls would be hailed as ‘protected species’ to sow chaos on moors and country (in particular, royal) estates. I would put licenses out of reach to disarm those rural folk of a more independent mindset who happen to require shotguns for their work. I would promote veganism and vegetarianism to impoverish farmers and make national parks of those hills once scattered with cattle.

Mass immigration would be my weapon, presented as a solution to economic woes while destabilising cultural cohesion. I would dilute national identity, branding any dissent as racism or ‘far-right’ terrorism, encouraging students to confront street protesters while masquerading as ‘anti-fascists’ or ‘anti-capitalists.’ Free speech would be curtailed, and new legislation would silence dissent.

An expanding state would be my goal, bloating public services like the NHS into worshipped idols – urging other public sector agencies to become similar, bottomless pits.

Citizens would soon become dependents, lulled by promises of “free services” while drowning in state debt. Transport, energy and utilities would be nationalised. I would seek to control energy by nationalising green fuel, promoting electric vehicles through punitive road tax for petrol and diesel vehicles while choking off oil companies that have so fuelled Capitalism’s success. All immovable problems I would solve with new committees, inquiries and by the creation of yet more quangos staffed by Marxist cronies.

Global governance would replace national sovereignty, with international cooperation positioned as paramount. To quell dissent, remote work would become the norm, and social credit systems would well keep the polloi in line. Technology would serve as a tool for surveillance, creating a populace well-monitored under the guise of social welfare. As the multipolar world becomes technopolar and government power erodes, I would co-opt the large tech firms and ensure that they maintained Silicon Valley’s penchant for deleterious wokeness.

Wealth redistribution would be framed as fairness; the wealthy would be vilified while higher taxes for the successful became celebrated. Public welfare programmes would perpetuate dependency, crippling self-sufficiency. Billionaires would be scorned and state workers lauded, income inequality ever highlighted. Property and unearned income would be taxed to the hilt.

I would stoke divisions – between rich and poor, native-born and immigrant, public sector and private sector – fuelling chaos and conflict. Grassroots movements would demand radical change, ensuring that trust in established institutions erodes.

Ultimately, my aim would be to craft a society where personal ambition is crushed beneath collective ideology and state dependence – marshalled by real-time tech. I would cultivate a landscape where the state reigns supreme, relegating individual dreams to fantasy and plunging society into a narrative of perpetual struggle for state sustenance.



Thanks be to Reason and God, I am no Marxist. I happen to be an Englishman, a Brit, and free – one of those stubborn buggers that the world knows all too well from their history books not to provoke. Being on the end of a Briton’s smile is always preferable to his pitchfork or bayonet.



If I Were a Marxist COUNTRY SQUIRE MAGAZINE
You don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone - Joni Mitchell
 
Scary, and rings quite true it would seem, but this is a British article and couldn't possibly apply to the Liberals, right? ;)

If I Were a Marxist

If I were a Marxist, my mission would be to infiltrate and transform the very fabric of Great Britain, sowing seeds of discontent and radical ideology aimed at dismantling Capitalism and replacing it with a collectivist mindset. I would wield psychological tactics to instil self-doubt and guilt about personal achievements, reinforcing the toxic belief that success comes at the expense of others.

Education would become a breeding ground for revolutionary thought. Schools and universities would teach that the white, male, capitalist class is inherently imperialist and oppressive. Using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I would empower students via Marxist lecturer drones to organise, mobilise, and challenge authority. Everything would become fluid and questionable, even matters of the obvious like gender and border. Families and faith would be derided; toppling statues would be celebrated, while pronouns would serve as tools of division, encouraging the youth to loathe their own history and thereby themselves. Historical agency would fast be compromised if citizens could praise any culture worldwide, except for Western culture, while also being unable to assign blame to any culture other than Western culture.

In the workplace, relentless unionisation would be my battle cry. I would nurture a sense of victimhood, positioning workers against management while promoting envy and resentment over individual merit. Diversity quotas would dilute corporate power, ensuring that envy triumphs over ambition. I would invent tribunals that almost always find in favour of workers. I would squeeze employers by creating endless red tape and an army of stickybeak state inspectors with clipboards to enforce it. I would invent ‘corporate social responsibility’ and force capitalist firms to offer free money to Marxist charities and causes via guilt trips under the threatening cloud of cancellation.

I would deploy Critical Theory to dismantle established norms, framing every interaction as fuelled by power dynamics. I would equate beauty and charm with ugliness and obesity. Media outlets would become echo chambers for portraying societal structures as unjust, reinforcing identity politics as the new ideological battleground. I would coopt national charities by planting placers and convert them from their core task of conservation into agents of radical change.

Popular culture and social media would glorify revolutionary transformation while deriding tradition. Influencers would amplify the narrative of victimhood, making revolutionary ideals aspirational. I would dominate the national broadcaster and take over the news output, employing fellow travellers as the key presenters and programme makers, making celebrities out of parrots and knaves, ensuring even football commentators blamed football teams’ failures on being too ‘conservative’ or not sufficiently ‘progressive’.

I would tax landowners and force farmers off their land via price and paperwork, celebrating ‘rewilding’ at the expense of food security in the name of a ‘climate emergency.’ The landed gentry would find their pastimes attacked, while fast-reproducing vermin like crows and gulls would be hailed as ‘protected species’ to sow chaos on moors and country (in particular, royal) estates. I would put licenses out of reach to disarm those rural folk of a more independent mindset who happen to require shotguns for their work. I would promote veganism and vegetarianism to impoverish farmers and make national parks of those hills once scattered with cattle.

Mass immigration would be my weapon, presented as a solution to economic woes while destabilising cultural cohesion. I would dilute national identity, branding any dissent as racism or ‘far-right’ terrorism, encouraging students to confront street protesters while masquerading as ‘anti-fascists’ or ‘anti-capitalists.’ Free speech would be curtailed, and new legislation would silence dissent.

An expanding state would be my goal, bloating public services like the NHS into worshipped idols – urging other public sector agencies to become similar, bottomless pits.

Citizens would soon become dependents, lulled by promises of “free services” while drowning in state debt. Transport, energy and utilities would be nationalised. I would seek to control energy by nationalising green fuel, promoting electric vehicles through punitive road tax for petrol and diesel vehicles while choking off oil companies that have so fuelled Capitalism’s success. All immovable problems I would solve with new committees, inquiries and by the creation of yet more quangos staffed by Marxist cronies.

Global governance would replace national sovereignty, with international cooperation positioned as paramount. To quell dissent, remote work would become the norm, and social credit systems would well keep the polloi in line. Technology would serve as a tool for surveillance, creating a populace well-monitored under the guise of social welfare. As the multipolar world becomes technopolar and government power erodes, I would co-opt the large tech firms and ensure that they maintained Silicon Valley’s penchant for deleterious wokeness.

Wealth redistribution would be framed as fairness; the wealthy would be vilified while higher taxes for the successful became celebrated. Public welfare programmes would perpetuate dependency, crippling self-sufficiency. Billionaires would be scorned and state workers lauded, income inequality ever highlighted. Property and unearned income would be taxed to the hilt.

I would stoke divisions – between rich and poor, native-born and immigrant, public sector and private sector – fuelling chaos and conflict. Grassroots movements would demand radical change, ensuring that trust in established institutions erodes.

Ultimately, my aim would be to craft a society where personal ambition is crushed beneath collective ideology and state dependence – marshalled by real-time tech. I would cultivate a landscape where the state reigns supreme, relegating individual dreams to fantasy and plunging society into a narrative of perpetual struggle for state sustenance.



Thanks be to Reason and God, I am no Marxist. I happen to be an Englishman, a Brit, and free – one of those stubborn buggers that the world knows all too well from their history books not to provoke. Being on the end of a Briton’s smile is always preferable to his pitchfork or bayonet.



If I Were a Marxist COUNTRY SQUIRE MAGAZINE
As has been said in various contexts in this forum, this version of the LPC has been around for 9 years. Why haven’t they done all of that?

Why aren’t all the “F Trudeau” folks rounded up and sent away?
 
As has been said in various contexts in this forum, this version of the LPC has been around for 9 years. Why haven’t they done all of that?

Why aren’t all the “F Trudeau” folks rounded up and sent away?
Well... Doing that in just 9 years would go against the entire premise of a slow undermining of a society...

I mean, did you even read what was posted, or just reflexively post a 'If Trudeau was so bad, how aren't you all dead yet?" post?
 
Scary, and rings quite true it would seem, but this is a British article and couldn't possibly apply to the Liberals, right? ;)

If I Were a Marxist

If I were a Marxist, my mission would be to infiltrate and transform the very fabric of Great Britain, sowing seeds of discontent and radical ideology aimed at dismantling Capitalism and replacing it with a collectivist mindset. I would wield psychological tactics to instil self-doubt and guilt about personal achievements, reinforcing the toxic belief that success comes at the expense of others.

Education would become a breeding ground for revolutionary thought. Schools and universities would teach that the white, male, capitalist class is inherently imperialist and oppressive. Using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I would empower students via Marxist lecturer drones to organise, mobilise, and challenge authority. Everything would become fluid and questionable, even matters of the obvious like gender and border. Families and faith would be derided; toppling statues would be celebrated, while pronouns would serve as tools of division, encouraging the youth to loathe their own history and thereby themselves. Historical agency would fast be compromised if citizens could praise any culture worldwide, except for Western culture, while also being unable to assign blame to any culture other than Western culture.

In the workplace, relentless unionisation would be my battle cry. I would nurture a sense of victimhood, positioning workers against management while promoting envy and resentment over individual merit. Diversity quotas would dilute corporate power, ensuring that envy triumphs over ambition. I would invent tribunals that almost always find in favour of workers. I would squeeze employers by creating endless red tape and an army of stickybeak state inspectors with clipboards to enforce it. I would invent ‘corporate social responsibility’ and force capitalist firms to offer free money to Marxist charities and causes via guilt trips under the threatening cloud of cancellation.

I would deploy Critical Theory to dismantle established norms, framing every interaction as fuelled by power dynamics. I would equate beauty and charm with ugliness and obesity. Media outlets would become echo chambers for portraying societal structures as unjust, reinforcing identity politics as the new ideological battleground. I would coopt national charities by planting placers and convert them from their core task of conservation into agents of radical change.

Popular culture and social media would glorify revolutionary transformation while deriding tradition. Influencers would amplify the narrative of victimhood, making revolutionary ideals aspirational. I would dominate the national broadcaster and take over the news output, employing fellow travellers as the key presenters and programme makers, making celebrities out of parrots and knaves, ensuring even football commentators blamed football teams’ failures on being too ‘conservative’ or not sufficiently ‘progressive’.

I would tax landowners and force farmers off their land via price and paperwork, celebrating ‘rewilding’ at the expense of food security in the name of a ‘climate emergency.’ The landed gentry would find their pastimes attacked, while fast-reproducing vermin like crows and gulls would be hailed as ‘protected species’ to sow chaos on moors and country (in particular, royal) estates. I would put licenses out of reach to disarm those rural folk of a more independent mindset who happen to require shotguns for their work. I would promote veganism and vegetarianism to impoverish farmers and make national parks of those hills once scattered with cattle.

Mass immigration would be my weapon, presented as a solution to economic woes while destabilising cultural cohesion. I would dilute national identity, branding any dissent as racism or ‘far-right’ terrorism, encouraging students to confront street protesters while masquerading as ‘anti-fascists’ or ‘anti-capitalists.’ Free speech would be curtailed, and new legislation would silence dissent.

An expanding state would be my goal, bloating public services like the NHS into worshipped idols – urging other public sector agencies to become similar, bottomless pits.

Citizens would soon become dependents, lulled by promises of “free services” while drowning in state debt. Transport, energy and utilities would be nationalised. I would seek to control energy by nationalising green fuel, promoting electric vehicles through punitive road tax for petrol and diesel vehicles while choking off oil companies that have so fuelled Capitalism’s success. All immovable problems I would solve with new committees, inquiries and by the creation of yet more quangos staffed by Marxist cronies.

Global governance would replace national sovereignty, with international cooperation positioned as paramount. To quell dissent, remote work would become the norm, and social credit systems would well keep the polloi in line. Technology would serve as a tool for surveillance, creating a populace well-monitored under the guise of social welfare. As the multipolar world becomes technopolar and government power erodes, I would co-opt the large tech firms and ensure that they maintained Silicon Valley’s penchant for deleterious wokeness.

Wealth redistribution would be framed as fairness; the wealthy would be vilified while higher taxes for the successful became celebrated. Public welfare programmes would perpetuate dependency, crippling self-sufficiency. Billionaires would be scorned and state workers lauded, income inequality ever highlighted. Property and unearned income would be taxed to the hilt.

I would stoke divisions – between rich and poor, native-born and immigrant, public sector and private sector – fuelling chaos and conflict. Grassroots movements would demand radical change, ensuring that trust in established institutions erodes.

Ultimately, my aim would be to craft a society where personal ambition is crushed beneath collective ideology and state dependence – marshalled by real-time tech. I would cultivate a landscape where the state reigns supreme, relegating individual dreams to fantasy and plunging society into a narrative of perpetual struggle for state sustenance.



Thanks be to Reason and God, I am no Marxist. I happen to be an Englishman, a Brit, and free – one of those stubborn buggers that the world knows all too well from their history books not to provoke. Being on the end of a Briton’s smile is always preferable to his pitchfork or bayonet.



If I Were a Marxist COUNTRY SQUIRE MAGAZINE
See Harold Laski and his influence on PM Justin Trudeau's political hero and father, Pierre.
 
See Harold Laski and his influence on PM Justin Trudeau's political hero and father, Pierre.
Unfortunately, Père Trudeau had the opposite view of PM Attlee, when Attlee essentially told Laski to STFU. The irony isn’t lost on me that Laski was a pluralist of great conviction before the Great Depression, and that his blame of the depression’s cause on capitalism was so strong that he believed Marxism was the only solution over capitalism, notwithstanding the consistently proven lack of effectiveness of a pure implementation of Marxism anywhere on the planet shows the folly of both Trudeau senior and junior, particularly of late when one throws in the salad topper of climate change coercion.
 
Well... Doing that in just 9 years would go against the entire premise of a slow undermining of a society...

I mean, did you even read what was posted, or just reflexively post a 'If Trudeau was so bad, how aren't you all dead yet?" post?
I specifically limited to the 9 years in this LPC govt because south of the border, one of the big GOP points is that Harris could/should have done something in 4 years of the Biden presidency.

But yes, I have read the article. It’s not like the Mulroney, Harper, etc govts were doing the opposite of what was listed there. Were they also complicit in this slow undermining of society?

I must be mistaken in my assumption that a government is supposed to take care of all of its people, not only those who can afford its services.
 
See Harold Laski and his influence on PM Justin Trudeau's political hero and father, Pierre.

Interesting that the follow on article recommended by Encyclopedia Britannica is one about the Fabian Society. Established in London in 1884, its most famous member was George Bernard Shaw and is intimately associated with the creation of both the Labour Party and the London School of Economics.

Fabian Society, socialist society founded in 1884 in London, having as its goal the establishment of a democratic socialist state in Great Britain. The Fabians put their faith in evolutionary socialism rather than in revolution.

The name of the society is derived from the Roman general Fabius Cunctator, whose patient and elusive tactics in avoiding pitched battles secured his ultimate victory over stronger forces.

The Fabians at first attempted to permeate the Liberal and Conservative parties with socialist ideas, but later they helped to organize the separate Labour Representation Committee, which became the Labour Party in 1906. The Fabian Society has since been affiliated with the Labour Party.

The originators of "the long march through the institutions"
 
Where have all the protestants in Britain gone? They joined the Labour Party and became atheists, putting their faith in the Party.
 
I specifically limited to the 9 years in this LPC govt because south of the border, one of the big GOP points is that Harris could/should have done something in 4 years of the Biden presidency.

But yes, I have read the article. It’s not like the Mulroney, Harper, etc govts were doing the opposite of what was listed there. Were they also complicit in this slow undermining of society?

I must be mistaken in my assumption that a government is supposed to take care of all of its people, not only those who can afford its services.
My first question is: Are we more or less united as a nation? Maybe. Under Trudeau Pere there was an active terrorist group (FLQ) who were hell bent on breaking up the nation. While west of the Lakehead the ruling Liberals were reduced to one seat in Manitoba. But there is no doubt that the LPC was the party of Canada.

Today under La Dauphin, the country is watching as disparate groups are tearing apart our historical sinews on the basis of post colonial settling of scores. The LPC is watching and doing very little to fight against these groups.
 
My first question is: Are we more or less united as a nation? Maybe. Under Trudeau Pere there was an active terrorist group (FLQ) who were hell bent on breaking up the nation. While west of the Lakehead the ruling Liberals were reduced to one seat in Manitoba. But there is no doubt that the LPC was the party of Canada.

Today under La Dauphin, the country is watching as disparate groups are tearing apart our historical sinews on the basis of post colonial settling of scores. The LPC is watching and doing very little to fight against these groups.
I would argue that the “democratization of communication” due to social media is a huge factor.

My in-laws are from Vancouver. They hated the Liberal govt (and really Ottawa in general) because in every election, ON/QC calls it before BC polls are even closed - so how much does their vote count? Their family has been in Vancouver for over a century, and I heard her grandparents echo those sentiments.

The reason I say that now is in 1970 or 1990, that anti-Ottawa sentiment wouldn’t have really progressed past the western provinces. Now, put it on X or FB and it’s out there for the entire world to see. So, I’d suggest that we seem less united as a nation because we’re seeing the dissent in real time, instead of back then when the barriers to fast mass communication meant that people didn’t see the underlying problems.

To use another example - is the CAF sexual misconduct now better or worse than before? It may seem worse now because people are reporting it, but historically for a variety of reasons, it was severely under-reported.
 
Trudeau maybe suffering from the symptom of "I'm an indispensable leader"

Myth 1: Leaders are Born, Not Made

One of the oldest leadership myths is the belief that leaders are innately gifted individuals, and you're either born with these qualities or not. However, research and practical experience contradict this myth. A study published in The Leadership Quarterly found that genetic factors account for about 30% of leadership emergence, indicating that about 70% of leadership qualities are acquired through personal development, experiences, and learning.

Leadership skills can be cultivated over time, regardless of your background or innate characteristics. By seeking out opportunities for growth, learning from experiences, and engaging in leadership development activities, such as the ones offered in our Free Preview Course, individuals can significantly enhance their leadership potential.

Myth 2: Leaders Must Be Charismatic
Charisma is often considered a prerequisite for leadership. While charismatic individuals may find it easier to attract followers, charisma doesn't equate to effective leadership. Great leaders are authentic and lead with integrity, displaying consistency between their words and actions.

The concept of authentic leadership underscores the importance of self-awareness, transparency, ethical/moral standards, and focusing on long-term results. Research supports this assertion: a study published in the Leadership & Organization Development Journal in 2016 by Shu-Cheng Steve Chi, titled "Linking Leader Authenticity to Organizational Commitment: The Mediating Role of Trust," showed that leader authenticity could significantly predict organizational commitment and trust. These elements contribute to the overall productivity and positivity of the work environment.

Remember, charisma might win the crowd, but authenticity earns trust. This fosters a positive work environment and enhances team productivity, proving that charisma is not the essential component of effective leadership that it's often believed to be.

Myth 3: Leaders Must Be in Complete Control
The myth that leaders must micromanage everything to ensure success is detrimental to the growth of a team. Micromanagement stifles innovation and creates a stressful work environment, resulting in disengaged and unmotivated employees.

Effective leadership emphasizes delegation and collaboration. By trusting your team members with responsibilities and giving them the autonomy to make decisions, you promote a sense of ownership and empower them to excel in their roles.

Myth 4: Leaders Must Make All the Decisions
While leaders are often the final decision-makers, believing they should make all decisions independently is a common leadership misconception. In reality, effective leaders encourage a participative decision-making process, inviting inputs and ideas from their team members.

When leaders involve their teams in decision-making, they not only add a wealth of diverse perspectives to the process but also foster an atmosphere of inclusion and mutual respect. This approach is reinforced by findings from a 2015 study conducted by Amin Akhavan Tabassi, Rouhollah Bagheri, and Abu Hassan Abu Bakar, titled "The Role of Participative Decision Making in Enhancing Employee Job Satisfaction," published in the International Journal of Business and Management. According to their research, participative decision-making contributes to increased job satisfaction, decreased employee turnover, and improved overall team performance. Thus, far from making all decisions single-handedly, successful leaders lean into the collective wisdom of their teams for optimal results.

Such participative leadership creates an environment where team members feel valued and contribute more effectively, disproving the myth that leaders must make all decisions on their own.

Myth 5: Leaders Must Be Perfect
The myth of infallibility can create unrealistic expectations and set leaders up for failure. Believing that leaders must always be right or have all the answers can discourage them from admitting their mistakes or seeking help when needed.

True leadership involves embracing vulnerability. Recognizing one's limitations and learning from mistakes demonstrates humility, encourages continuous learning, and sets a powerful example for the team.

Myth 6: Leaders Must Work Harder Than Everyone Else
There's a widespread belief that leaders should always be the ones burning the midnight oil, outpacing everyone in terms of work hours. However, this misconception can set a dangerous precedent, leading to burnout and a decline in productivity. It's important to understand that effective leadership isn't about outworking everyone on the team, but about striking a crucial balance between professional responsibilities and personal life.

By setting boundaries and demonstrating that maintaining a healthy work-life balance is not just necessary, but also encouraged, leaders show their teams the importance of individual well-being. This approach doesn't just benefit the leaders themselves, it sets a standard for the entire team. It sends a clear message that stepping back for personal time and self-care is not only acceptable but also integral to a healthy work environment.

Leading by example in promoting work-life balance delivers significant benefits. It creates a culture of respect for personal time and individual needs. This leads to boosted morale, increased job satisfaction, decreased burnout, and overall, a more cohesive and efficient team. Thus, debunking the myth that leaders must always work harder than everyone else, it's about working smarter and fostering a sustainable work-life dynamic.

Conclusion
Leadership is not one-size-fits-all. It requires a careful balance of various qualities and skills, many of which are obscured by common myths. Debunking these myths is essential for a realistic understanding of leadership and its role in enhancing the success of an organization.

Remember, leadership is a journey of continuous learning and development. As we unmask these leadership myths, we uncover the true essence of leadership – one that is centered on growth, inclusivity, and authenticity.

By challenging these misconceptions, we can foster a culture that embraces the realities of leadership, paving the way for an empowered, motivated, and high-performing team. Let’s continue debunking leadership myths for the betterment of our teams, organizations, and society at large.
 
I specifically limited to the 9 years in this LPC govt because south of the border, one of the big GOP points is that Harris could/should have done something in 4 years of the Biden presidency.

But yes, I have read the article. It’s not like the Mulroney, Harper, etc govts were doing the opposite of what was listed there. Were they also complicit in this slow undermining of society?

I must be mistaken in my assumption that a government is supposed to take care of all of its people, not only those who can afford its services.
Harper made significant cuts to the government workforce, reduced the regulatory burden and reduced taxes. Not sure how you feel he contributed to undermining society via the methods mentioned?
 
Back
Top