(Part 2) Best products from r/CanadaPolitics

First Nation? Second Thoughts by Tom Flanagan is probably the most representative book on the conservative (small c) view of Indigenous issues; I know some people have a negative opinion towards Flanagan, but this work is great by most academic standards and I think it's a must read for anyone interested in Indigenous issues.

Citizens Plus: Aboriginal Peoples and the Canadian State by Alan Cairns. This was Cairns response to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal's people. Again, I think it's a must read to learn more about the various perspectives about Indigenous issues.

Wasase: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom by Taiaiake Alfred. Alfred is probably the most "extreme" in terms of his vision for Indigenous peoples in Canada, but he's a must read.

Unjust Society by Harold Cardinal. This book provides the greatest insight into why the White Paper was met with opposition from Indigenous peoples and to Indigenous issues in general (it's a little older, but if you were to read one book out of all the ones I recommended this would be it)

Governing from the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics by Donald Savoie. I haven't read this one yet (I hope to soon) so I can't speak to how it is, but I've been told it's a great book. It basically looks at how the federal government has become increasingly centralized into the PMO

EDIT: If you go to university/college and have free access to academic journals you should look in those. There are so many interesting articles and are less time consuming than books. Here's a directory of open access journals, but keep in mind not all of these journals are of "top quality"

>I have heard some people wonder though how far along we are in technological and medical progress to know what will be possible in the near or distant future.

I really urge you to take a moment when approaching this topic and maybe educate yourself (not meant to sound arrogant or like I am talking down to you – you say you do not know much about this topic, and there is a lot to learn)

Why?

Quick... my degree was "Sign Language Peoples studies" (like European studies or Indigenous studies). Sign Language Peoples break down into three broad categories: Deaf peoples, signing Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous signing peoples. The last one is best exemplified in Martha's Vineyard after the expulsion of Wôpanâak resulted in the settle culture becoming bimodal where Everybody [There] Spoke Sign Language (I recommend reading this book! Fun and easy and enlightening!). Since everyone was bimodal, there was no concern about deafness akin to the lack of concern around handedness (left- vs right-handed): non-Indigenous signing culture

Then there are the signing Indigenous cultures like Blackfoot, Navajo, Cree, Crow, Anishinaabek who all speak variants of the same language "Hand Talk." Navajo actually have a family clan who speak a totally different language unrelated to Hand Talk/a language isolate all alongside Diné bizaad. There is also Secwépemc a historically signing people, Ktunaxa a contemporarily signing population and possibly other Cascadian plateau signers. Then there are Inuit who speak a totally unrelated language Atgangmuurngniq and Keresan Pueblo people(s) who also speak a totally different language.

Finally, there are the Deaf cultures. There are four to my knowledge across Canada. Deaf cultures are interesting because they parallel Indigenous cultures, but they are a bit opposite compared to Indigenous cultures. Whereas Indigenous cultures share the pan-Indigenous culture that was created, there is much more emphasis on individual nation and culture. In Deaf cultures, there are individual cultures/nations, but they all subscribe to the worldwide pan-Deaf culture encompassing Deafhood (in case you want to read more). As such, saying there are four Deaf cultures in Canada is slightly disingenuous

That being said, they are: ASL Deaf, LSQ Deaf, Atlantic Deaf (where they speak and/or a mix of ASL, LSQ and MSL) and DeafBlind. They each have different languages, different cultural customs, different traditions, different histories, but are all tied together by Deafhood

So, back to the urging...

Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please try to not medicalise d/Deaf folks. Yeah, deafness can be a struggle and is actively disabled by society, but deafness is inherently not a deficit like left-handedness is not. It is just a different human experience.

Medicalising d/Deaf involves treating a trait that is extremely valued in multiple cultures as a primary trait wished to be passed on as something needing to be fixed. Again, seeking to fix and/or eradicate a culture's primary trait. Not a great way at approaching cultural relations. Something like 95+% of Deaf seek Deaf marriages, and over 90% of Deaf families asked say they want deaf children. Note: Deaf with a capital 'D' means culturally attached to Deafhood and deaf with a small 'd' means the trait of deafness. Not all Deaf are deaf and not all deaf are Deaf.

>I don't actually know what caused Esperanto to fail, but you seem to know your stuff. Might it have been caused by the tensions/competition of people's heritage languages and Esperanto itself?

It failed because it sought to be an world-bridging language while only deriving its system from Indo-European or similar languages, and it is an oral language which is inherently difficult to bridge linguistic barriers. Sign languages–gesturing–is a standard human way of bridging those language gaps, and oral languages just kinda fail at making that bridge. Esperanto failed for a bunch of reasons, these being just the surface level. But, importantly, International Sign is actively here, useful and not failing where Esperanto has

IS works because it is not a language, but a communication system. It establishes who is the audience and what languages they speak and adjusts the content to match the group being interpreted to. It simplifies languages, it uses classifiers heavily, it relies on international or more symbolic cues and overall is an extremely useful tool, one that I see no one aside Deaf talking about, which is a massive shame!

A new universal language is just a bid to make another world language amongst the 8000 others. International Sign is not a language, again, it is a communication system that bridges the gaps between languages, so try to pressure you and your friends to look into it and its applications! International Sign is not only a solution to a multilingual, highly connected world, but it is the solution (alongside, well, decolonisation geographically and linguistically)

edit: There will always be a need for gesture-based speaking. English and French use gestures extensively, casual conversation does as well as does every oral language. No matter what advancements or changes, there will always be a need for gesture-based communication. "Curing deafness" whatever that means will not erase the desire for us to give a thumbsup or okay-sign, tsé?

Thanks for the question. Glad to see interest from across the pond! The UK plays a cameo role in my project, because as you may know, Trudeau briefly started a Phd at the LSE under Harold Laski's supervision, but never really got it off the ground.

The book should be available in the UK right now digitally, and the paperback should be out around the same time there that it is here. See this link! (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Constant-Liberal-Organized-Canadian-Democratic/dp/0774837144/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=)

Onto your question:

1: I do see myself as an intellectual historian/political thought who has a focus on labour and the left. As such, much of my work focuses on the writings of the people I study, and most of my work is also biographical or in that general vein. For instance, my next book project is on A.R. Mosher, who was a pioneering Canadian labour leader from the 1900s to the 1950s.

This affects my methodology by the sources I use. I really utilize personal files and writings as opposed to formalized documents because the former often give better insight into a person's intellectual approach. I also don't do too much in the way of quantitative analysis because I focus on how ideas were forged, debated, and altered given the surrounding contexts.

In this way, you might say my book on Trudeau is in part a book on the interplay between liberalism and socialism in postwar Canada.

***

2: I do my best to maintain a certain wall between my research and activism, but this isn't always possible. Indeed, many Trudeau biographers have their own political ties, and I think that because political historians have such an interest in politics, many of us can't stay out of the game.

I would say my research informs my activism largely via my hope that we can apply our historical lessons to our current struggles. Namely, as I read the CCF-NDPers and labour intellectuals of the past, I see much that we've lost in our approach to critiquing capitalism and promoting democracy broadly defined.

My activism informs my research in terms of what I am interested in. Because of this, I tend to gravitate toward people and issues that have floated around these sorts of debates around economic democracy over the years.

For novel readers and fantasy lovers out there, Guy Gavriel Kay has a new book, Children of Earth and Sky coming out next week.

If you're unfamiliar with GGK, he is one of my favourite living authors today (easily my favourite Canadian author), and I cannot recommend his works highly enough. Don't let the term 'fantasy' turn you away, Kay's works read very differently from most other works in the genre (excepting his three rather mediocre works from the 1980's). There are no dwarves or elves or white walkers, and very little magic or fantastical events (some books more than others). In fact, most of his works are as much historical fiction as they are fantasy, as Kay's settings often parallel historical settings and time-periods, from medieval Spain, Constantinople and dynastic China, and many of his characters and important plot points draw from major historical figures and events. To the extent that his works are fantasy, Kay allows himself greater freedom than other works of historical fiction, making the characters his own, adapting the setting and events to suit his own purposes, and dabbling just occasionally with magic when it suits the story. This gives the best of both worlds, combining the realism of history with the freedom of speculative fiction.

More importantly, Kay's works are not particularly plot-driven (unlike most fantasy works), but have a tremendous emotional impact through development of his characters and settings. His characters are all nuanced and eminently relatable, and Kay knows how to make his reader sympathize with everyone, including antagonists and minor side characters. His settings are simply a labour of love, and his wonderful writing enables readers to visualize them perfectly in their mind. The emotional impact comes from him putting these characters and settings through one or two major events, and because of the connection that he forms with the reader they bring an inexplicably moving response from the reader. If any of this interests you, I recommend checking out either Tigana (if you don't mind a bit more fantasy elements), or A Song for Arbonne (very little fantasy) to start.

P.S. No I'm not his publicist, just a fan of the author :)

1. My perception is that companies tend to place a much greater value on experience than schooling. The government does what it can to encourage businesses to hire inexperienced graduates, but it is up to industry to actually hire and train these people. Which is why I said it is hard to blame the govt. for the perceived skills shortage (which I think would more accurately labeled an experience shortage.) Taxes pay for schools because schools are a public good. There is far more to universities than simply skills training.
   
   
2. I wouldn't be able to comment on how accurately the market values skills. I can agree that people with power and influence will probably overvalue the fields they came from.
   
   
3. I would probably rank refugee, family, economic, investor. I put more value on family because it makes Canada an attractive place to immigrate to. If you trust the analysis in The Big Shift than there may be strong competition for immigrants in the future. If this were true then Canada would do well to remain known as an excellent country to move to. On the other hand, mass automation may reduce the need for immigrants so who really knows.
   
   
4. I was thinking more along the lines of the salary and hours quoted not being sustainable over an entire career.

Ms Wilkins is not exactly a distinguished economist, however her background certainly merits respect when she discusses issues she is well practiced in. I think you have done to her words what you do to classical economics: you cherry picked the bits that support you narrative and ignore the rest. Ms Wilkins' opinion on this subject is fairly standard and well in line with my sentiments (and not yours). She understands that short term labour disruption is inevitable but that long term gains are what will follow. This has been happening since the steam engine. Specifically, in the statement you've put forward she specifically notes:

>In a speech in Toronto, Senior Deputy Governor Carolyn Wilkins said Tuesday innovations like artificial intelligence and robotics are expected to help re-energize underwhelming productivity in advanced economies like Canada. Over the longer haul, she added that new technologies should eventually create more jobs than they replace.

>"Innovation is always a process of creative destruction, with some jobs being destroyed and, over time, even more jobs being created," said Wilkins, who added that what will change is the type of workers in demand. "We've seen this process in action throughout history."

Source

I would be so impressed if you admitted you're in over your head and that perhaps you have misunderstood the fundamentals of what is going on here. Even more impressive would be if you took me up on my recommendation and learned how classical economics really works.. As a science, it really is fascinating and well worth the time to investigate.

Being an Ontarian myself, I'm not as familiar with East Coast artists but I love Hey Rosetta!, Great Big Sea, and Rick Mercer.

I'm honoured to say that I read a book at a young age that described the heroic sacrifice of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment. Their sacrifices to King and Country will never be forgotten in my books.

Here's an interesting book on the referendum that decided Newfoundland's place in Confederation: Don't Tell the Newfoundlanders: The True Story of Newfoundland's Confederation with Canada

In Defence of Aristocracy, by Peregrine Worsthorne.

Writing with all the polish of a veteran Telegraph editor, Worsthorne makes a compelling case for the important role played by the aristocracy in the success of Britain over the past millennium -- by vigorously defending their own rights against the crown, they not only established many of the constitutional rights which we hold most dear, but also ensured that people were able to invest their time and wealth into long-term projects without fear of confiscation, thereby setting the stage for Britain's rise from being the rural backwater of Europe to being one of its leading economic powers. As important as the economic history is, Worsthorne is hardly the first to point it out (although few have done so as eloquently); having settled the economic history however, Worsthorne moves on to discuss the sociology of an aristocracy raised from birth to consider the needs of society, since meeting their own personal needs was never in doubt. This born-to-wealth, Oxbridge-educated civil service did much of the running of Britain for several centuries, and thanks to their upbringing did so with a degree of civility and honour which is hardly known in modern politics.

Prior to reading this book, I was a democrat who begrudged MPs every dollar they earned; after reading this book, I wished we selected babies at random, placed $10M in trust for them (so they would never need to worry about working) and raised them to fill pre-determined positions as MPs from age 30 onwards.

How Government Works

• The Canada Guide section on Government gives a pretty good overview about how the our system of government functions, the constitution, elections etc.
  
  • Also an overview of the main political parties in Canada
    
    Political History
    
    
• More a history documentary, but Canada a People's History gives a pretty good overview of major historical and political events that shaped the country. The most relevant parts are probably Confederation in 1867 to the modern day, and more important in explaining modern politics would be about WWII onward. You can order the DVDs on Amazon (or use the internet freebie version).
  
  News Sources
  
  
• I find CBC and CTV News have among the most easily navigable websites of major Canadian news sources.
  
  • They also have decent political analysis shows if you want TV news and politcal interviews, Power and Politics on CBC and CTV's Power Play.
    
• National Newswatch is a website that links to news stories, mainly on politics, from most major Canadian news sources. It is a good way to get a sense of what is going on, and to get mainstream news from across the political spectrum without visiting 6 or 7 different news websites on a daily basis.

The depressing thing about this sort of stuff is it’s completely drowned out by crowing over tax competitiveness with the US.

Backing “we must lower taxes” as the One True Way to improve Canadian competitiveness and economic success is lazy, facile Reaganite pablum.

We should really be thinking about labour productivity and encouraging our businesses to scale up and become globally competitive. Tax incentives like SR&ED taper off really quickly and mostly just subsidize small business.

High labour productivity is good for everyone (and is often driven by large firms who can benefit from economies of scale), and Canada is just mediocre. In 2017 we came in just below Spain/Italy, and more than 20% lower than Germany/Netherlands/France.

And we should open up our small, sleepy local markets to international competition and give ourselves an incentive to achieve (e-commerce and telecom would be good places to start). This would be good for consumers immediately, and though it might be tough for legacy businesses to adapt, it would leave them and the entire market better off in the long term.

But here we are, in 2018, having barely even willed ourselves into a single domestic market on account of embarrassment over CETA. And those who purport to be friends of business just beg for lower taxes.

I’d encourage anyone interested in Canadian competitiveness to read https://www.amazon.ca/How-We-Can-Win-Happens/dp/073527259X. It’s pretty sobering.

Concurred.




Even though the entirety of my extended family doesn't fully acknowledge it as valid, I am glad that the law, my mosque and my husband's church DO acknowledge our inter-faith, inter-racial same-sex marriage as valid and I would love if the law keeps acknowledging it as valid forever and centres my family values and that of the church he goes to and the mosque I go to over that of Conservatives' or right-wing Christians.



Not all Christians are homophobes. In fact I've found more support in my husband's church than anywhere else IMHO.




But religion should not govern the validity of marriage IMHO especially bad misrepresentations of the Bible text that are based off of inaccurate translations of malakoi and arsenkoitai (for further information read: “The Bible does not condemn ‘homosexuality.’ Seriously, it doesn’t.” by adam nicholas phillips https://link.medium.com/pu6zfl8LhZ ) or manipulation of the Quran to condemn homosexuality when it's actually condemning the practice of having a beard-wife (this is from Siraj Al-Haqq Kugle's seminal work available on Amazon here: "Homosexuality in Islam: Critical Reflection on Gay, Lesbian, and Transgender Muslims" https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1851687017/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_YbUwDbGMTXC73 ).





Regardless I believe that my family values that "Love is love and it should not matter who someone loves as love is a God-given gift and not controllable by humans and that every consenting adult should be allowed to marry any other consenting adult, regardless of gender (or lack thereof), sexuality (or lack thereof), ability to procreate (or lack thereof), race/ethnicity/culture/nationality" should trump those of social conservatives that couch and hide their desire to manipulate other people's lives in nefarious and sadistic ways in the terms "family values/pro-life/religious basis for country" etc.

Right now, I don't see a viable alternative. I'd say I fall into a small void between the Liberals and Conservatives, but if the election was called tomorrow, I'd be voting Conservative.

1. My local MP. I've met him a number of times, and each time he's struck me as a reasonable red tory, similar to me. He's also served in the Armed Forces, in the Balkans and Afghanistan, retiring after 22 years of service. I really like that about him and want him to continue to represent me.
   
   
2. Firearms. I want the Common Sense Firearms Act (aka Bill C-42) passed. It's a reasonable rebalancing of the Firearms Act, after it being slanted against firearms owners for the past 20 years. I hunt, sport shoot and collect firearms. I have a vested interest in this matter.
   
   
3. I like the Foreign Policy of the CPC. I'm finding the UN more and more ineffectual. Kissinger actually explains this in his book World Order, in regards to Iran's nuclear program. I highly recommend this book as well. Anyways, I find the UN is slowly loosing it's teeth. Then there are farcical examples as well, such as Durban II which I believe Canada was correct in withdrawing from. I just with other countries had the balls to stand up and call a spade a spade in situations like this.
   
   
4. Handling of the economy. I like what Harper's done.
   
   
5. Trudeau really hasn't said anything concrete. I'm unimpressed by him, and the flash is starting to wear off.
   
   
6. Mulcair and I don't see eye to eye on anything.
   
   There are a number of issues with the CPC, which I've enumerated previously. But currently they best represent me.

I'm not saying it's the definitive book or anything but I enjoyed Hébert's The Morning After: The 1995 Quebec Referendum and the Day that Almost Was If you want a backrooms retrospective on the referendum, it's pretty interesting to read the perspectives of a lot of the key players...

Also, if you are interested in browsing some essays about the politics of BC over the years, BC Studies journal has a lot of content for free online.

For information about government institutions:

Protecting Canadian Democracy: the Senate You Never Knew---a compilation of papers on the Senate, on upper houses in general, and on Senate reform. Put together by Senator Serge Joyal.

Governing from the Bench: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Judicial Role---by Emmett MacFarlane, a very good analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada and its role in modern lawmaking.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice---also known as O'Brien & Bosc after its editors, the House of Commons procedural reference manual and roughly the Canadian equivalent of the seminal Erskine May. The manual includes a comprehensive coverage of the institutions of government, especially as they relate to Parliament and lawmaking, and good coverage of parliamentary privilege. Don't dismiss it out of hand for being a procedural manual; the parts on the structure of the government are surprisingly accessible.

So I've finally decided to get serious about my beer brewing after making a half dozen or so more-or-less successful batches in my basement over the past 3 or 4 years. (Partial mash style for now, all-grain will come later.)

I picked up this book which seems to be a fantastic resource; I knew what all the steps were, but that book really cleared up why each step is necessary. And now I finally know what the actual difference between an ale and a lager is!

So now I'm planning on converting my propane-fueled outside burner to natural gas and to pick up a used chest freezer so that I can use it as a fermenting fridge. This is turning into an expensive hobby... but that should be the last of the capital equipment expenses (except for that really, really sweet looking conical fermenter).

Mark my words: I will master Pilsner.

Ultimately, I'd really like to compete in Beau's Oktoberfest homebrew competition. The winner gets to make a batch of their recipe at a commercial scale at Beau's facility and then they'll actually sell it in store alongside their own!

The Big Shift - John Ibbitson and Darrel Bricker