CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26153
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:13 am
 


Title: Spiteful Liberals burying Canadian history
Category: History
Posted By: N_Fiddledog
Date: 2016-03-20 10:01:56
Canadian


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10930
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:13 am
 


This should make certain members of our forum extremely happy since they, much like the Liberals believe that if it isn't talked about it didn't happen and then, you have a clean slate to craft your own version of history more suited to your political delusion. :roll:


Well either that, or the rest of the herd is as unbelievably ignorant about Canadian historical matters as John McCallum.


Online
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8869
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:24 am
 


Please clarify which forum members because I'm not aware of any anti military types here.

And jus for the record, this article is an editorial not a news article. I know you guys have difficulty distinguishing fact from opinion which explains a lot about you, but this should have needed posted directly into the forum not the news section.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15190
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:31 am
 


Gosh Beave, you mean all those Neil MacDonald had a feeling type pieces your fellows regressives post 2 or 3 times a week here sometimes are the Progressive/Regressive version of facts now or something?

Or are you saying it's different when the editorial concerns Canadian military history.

In which case I can answer this question for you.

BeaverFever wrote:
Please clarify which forum members because I'm not aware of any anti military types here.


The answer is you.

(Because I don't hear you complaining about Neil's blathering.)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30037
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:50 am
 


No surprise.

Anything military goes against his hugbox we all multiculti oh my we so progressive and tolerant narrative.

I'll bet Sweden does exactly the same.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8955
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:09 am
 


My version of Canadian peace keeping..... :twisted: :twisted:


Attachments:
Canadian Peace Keepers.jpg
Canadian Peace Keepers.jpg [ 167.62 KiB | Viewed 559 times ]
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6699
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:13 am
 


Liberals hate the Military just like their dear leader.


Attachments:
TRUDEAU F182.jpg
TRUDEAU F182.jpg [ 127.42 KiB | Viewed 559 times ]
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10930
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:35 am
 


BeaverFever wrote:
Please clarify which forum members because I'm not aware of any anti military types here.

And jus for the record, this article is an editorial not a news article. I know you guys have difficulty distinguishing fact from opinion which explains a lot about you, but this should have needed posted directly into the forum not the news section.


No names, no pack drill but, I can name at least 2 that if you'd taken the time to reflect about, you'd have remembered given their blatant anti military bias during certain discussions we've had on this forum.

But here's a question. Is it an opinion when a Liberal Minister of Veterans Affairs is so fucking dense he admits he didn't know about anything about a place called Dieppe and then compares it Vichy? To me things like that show a definite lack of respect for the people he and his party were supposed to be taking care of.

Quote:
John McCallum drew guffaws and gasps of disbelief in 2002 when he confessed, while serving as Canada’s defence minister, that he had never heard of the country’s bloodiest military debacle, the Battle of Dieppe.

McCallum followed up that monumental display of ignorance with a damage-control letter to the National Post in which he compared Dieppe to, oops, Vichy, capital of collaborationist France during the Nazi years, rather than Vimy Ridge, site of Canada’s epic First World War victory.


But then again given the Liberal Party of Canada's strange insistence on the dumbing down of Canadian Military history in an attempt to, what can only be described as an attempt not to offend any of our new residents nothing surprises me anymore.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20387
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 12:20 pm
 


N_Fiddledog wrote:
...you mean all those Neil MacDonald had a feeling type pieces your fellows regressives post 2 or 3 times a week here...

Are you bitching about the posting habits of other users with a straight face, Fiddle? Don't you have another witless YouTube douchebag to inundate us with? Or something something muslims something abortion something something progpodpeople conspiracy?


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
Profile
Posts: 795
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:08 pm
 


The 30th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms passed in 2012. It was an important historic moment for our country, the moment that Canada's constitution was finally formally separated from Britain, with the rights and freedoms of all Canadians formally established.

2015 marked the 50th anniversary of the Maple Leaf flag, adopted by the Pearson government to replace the old Red Ensign. Symbolically, it was an important indication of how we had grown as a country with our identity, history and outlook, rather than just an appendage of Great Britain.

...And how much recognition did either of these iconic moments get from the Harper government, again?

For that matter, how much have the Treaties or the Royal Proclamation gotten in terms of attention, either from the Liberals or the Conservatives?

The Harper Conservatives were just as active in playing up certain elements of our history over others:

Jocelyn Letourneau:

Quote:

Much has been said about the Harper government’s decision to restore certain symbols of the monarchy and to tie them anew to the emblematic figure of Canada. Its decision to transform the War of 1812 into a decisive event in the creation of the country has also been contested. In Quebec, as well as the rest of Canada, many pundits are resisting what they have called a step backward in the production of national symbols and a hijacking of the past for political purposes in the present. How should we interpret the Prime Minister’s actions?

This “royalization” of the national symbolic landscape and recasting of Canada’s historical experience can be linked to the exhaustion of the paradigm that has formed the heart of the Canadian project for the past 40 years: multiculturalism.

...

The “rest of Canada” also needed to re-establish its historical authenticity. But around what meaningful symbols and ideas? It appears that reclaiming Canada’s elemental Britishness and distancing the country from rampant Americanization is the option the government has chosen so far.

It is clear in these circumstances that the restoration of royal symbols (central to British heritage in Canada as a constitutional monarchy) and the importance given to the War of 1812 (presented as a pivotal moment of resistance to American invasion and the preservation of the country’s distinctiveness) are not the expression of a foolish plan on the part of a disconnected government. These initiatives are contributing to the reconstruction of Canadian identity at a time when the country is looking for a new symbolic basis for its current reality.



John Geddes:

Quote:

McKay charges Stephen Harper’s government with promoting a narrow, war-obsessed version of Canadian history, a slant he traces largely to the writings of prominent historians like Jack Granatstein and David Bercuson. Granatstein, in particular, is an inspiration for the Harper government’s approach to history. James Moore, who as heritage minister from the fall of 2008 until this month’s cabinet shuffle, which saw him become minister of industry, spearheaded the government’s history offensive. Moore often mentions “Jack” in speeches and, in an interview with Maclean’s, Granatstein is the sole historian he refers to by name.

And the book Moore cites is Who Killed Canadian History?, the polemical 1998 bestseller in which Granatstein framed his side of the debate that’s still raging. He complained that political and military history had been all but banished from Canada’s classrooms in favour of social themes, especially trendy topics such as regional and ethnic history. In danger of being lost, Granatstein wrote, was the shared military, political and economic history that undergirds “the larger national and pan-Canadian identity.”



An academic discussion of the Harper government's actions on history:

Quote:

Panelists highlighted numerous examples of federal initiatives under Harper’s government that have reshaped Canadians’ understanding of our history and therefore our identity. While the consensus seemed to be that Stephen Harper is not the first Prime Minister to do so—Trudeau’s national policies similarly rewrote Canadian identity—there is still concern that Harper is doing so to a more explicit and accelerated extent.

As well, several panelists voiced concern that certain narratives of Canadian history are being emphasized while others are excluded. The Harper government has focused on Canada’s military history, seen in commemorations of Vimy Ridge on the new $20 bill and those for the War of 1812.

“What we can see with the Harper conservatives is a pattern in which military and patriotic history is being valorized over social history and multicultural citizenship,” says Yasmeen Abu-Laban.

Kiera Ladner spoke about how Harper’s recasting of history has denied indigenous sovereignty. She argued that important events like the 1763 Royal Proclamation have been ignored, as has the ongoing colonialism that forgets Canada is a settler society.

One after another, panelists argued that Harper’s “history of nostalgia” (to use Veronica Strong-Boag’s wording) has similarly excluded other groups such as women, ethnic minorities and Quebeckers.

At the same time that the Harper government focuses on a militaristic, British narration of Canadian history, it pushes initiatives that weaken academic and scientific institutions, another central theme throughout the micro-lecture session.



So both Liberal and Conservative governments are emphasizing the parts of our history they like more than the others.

But the debate kind of misses the forest for the trees, in my view.

Where is it written that we can't take pride in the Charter of Rights and our success at the 1972 Summit Series?

Who says we can't take pride in our tradition of multilateral diplomacy, and our kicking ass in the World Wars?

There's nothing that says we can't appreciate the achievements of someone like Margurite Atwood and Sir Arthur Currie.

We can take pride in bilingualism and the success of the War of 1812.

As Canadians, we've been fighters, and we've been diplomats. We've been artists, and we've been athletes. We've been intellectuals, and we've been entrepreneurs.

Individual people can take more pride in some parts of our history than others-that's their choice. But as a country, we can and should be celebrating all our successes, whatever form they take.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15190
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:43 pm
 


Public_Domain wrote:
N_Fiddledog wrote:
...you mean all those Neil MacDonald had a feeling type pieces your fellows regressives post 2 or 3 times a week here...

Are you bitching about the posting habits of other users with a straight face, Fiddle?


No Peedee. I'm responding to one of your fellow regressive's bitches.

Watch, I'll show you how it works.

You post your dumb humorless insult:

Quote:
Don't you have another witless YouTube douchebag to inundate us with?


I respond in kind:

"No I'm too busy reading the book length of propo spam concerning the decrepit old Commie in your "Bernie is sooooo dreamy" thread.

See the way that works, Comrade.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7106
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:51 pm
 


JaredMilne wrote:
The 30th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms passed in 2012. It was an important historic moment for our country, the moment that Canada's constitution was finally formally separated from Britain, with the rights and freedoms of all Canadians formally established.

2015 marked the 50th anniversary of the Maple Leaf flag, adopted by the Pearson government to replace the old Red Ensign. Symbolically, it was an important indication of how we had grown as a country with our identity, history and outlook, rather than just an appendage of Great Britain.

...And how much recognition did either of these iconic moments get from the Harper government, again?

For that matter, how much have the Treaties or the Royal Proclamation gotten in terms of attention, either from the Liberals or the Conservatives?

The Harper Conservatives were just as active in playing up certain elements of our history over others:

Jocelyn Letourneau:

Quote:

Much has been said about the Harper government’s decision to restore certain symbols of the monarchy and to tie them anew to the emblematic figure of Canada. Its decision to transform the War of 1812 into a decisive event in the creation of the country has also been contested. In Quebec, as well as the rest of Canada, many pundits are resisting what they have called a step backward in the production of national symbols and a hijacking of the past for political purposes in the present. How should we interpret the Prime Minister’s actions?

This “royalization” of the national symbolic landscape and recasting of Canada’s historical experience can be linked to the exhaustion of the paradigm that has formed the heart of the Canadian project for the past 40 years: multiculturalism.

...

The “rest of Canada” also needed to re-establish its historical authenticity. But around what meaningful symbols and ideas? It appears that reclaiming Canada’s elemental Britishness and distancing the country from rampant Americanization is the option the government has chosen so far.

It is clear in these circumstances that the restoration of royal symbols (central to British heritage in Canada as a constitutional monarchy) and the importance given to the War of 1812 (presented as a pivotal moment of resistance to American invasion and the preservation of the country’s distinctiveness) are not the expression of a foolish plan on the part of a disconnected government. These initiatives are contributing to the reconstruction of Canadian identity at a time when the country is looking for a new symbolic basis for its current reality.


Well said!
John Geddes:

Quote:

McKay charges Stephen Harper’s government with promoting a narrow, war-obsessed version of Canadian history, a slant he traces largely to the writings of prominent historians like Jack Granatstein and David Bercuson. Granatstein, in particular, is an inspiration for the Harper government’s approach to history. James Moore, who as heritage minister from the fall of 2008 until this month’s cabinet shuffle, which saw him become minister of industry, spearheaded the government’s history offensive. Moore often mentions “Jack” in speeches and, in an interview with Maclean’s, Granatstein is the sole historian he refers to by name.

And the book Moore cites is Who Killed Canadian History?, the polemical 1998 bestseller in which Granatstein framed his side of the debate that’s still raging. He complained that political and military history had been all but banished from Canada’s classrooms in favour of social themes, especially trendy topics such as regional and ethnic history. In danger of being lost, Granatstein wrote, was the shared military, political and economic history that undergirds “the larger national and pan-Canadian identity.”



An academic discussion of the Harper government's actions on history:

Quote:

Panelists highlighted numerous examples of federal initiatives under Harper’s government that have reshaped Canadians’ understanding of our history and therefore our identity. While the consensus seemed to be that Stephen Harper is not the first Prime Minister to do so—Trudeau’s national policies similarly rewrote Canadian identity—there is still concern that Harper is doing so to a more explicit and accelerated extent.

As well, several panelists voiced concern that certain narratives of Canadian history are being emphasized while others are excluded. The Harper government has focused on Canada’s military history, seen in commemorations of Vimy Ridge on the new $20 bill and those for the War of 1812.

“What we can see with the Harper conservatives is a pattern in which military and patriotic history is being valorized over social history and multicultural citizenship,” says Yasmeen Abu-Laban.

Kiera Ladner spoke about how Harper’s recasting of history has denied indigenous sovereignty. She argued that important events like the 1763 Royal Proclamation have been ignored, as has the ongoing colonialism that forgets Canada is a settler society.

One after another, panelists argued that Harper’s “history of nostalgia” (to use Veronica Strong-Boag’s wording) has similarly excluded other groups such as women, ethnic minorities and Quebeckers.

At the same time that the Harper government focuses on a militaristic, British narration of Canadian history, it pushes initiatives that weaken academic and scientific institutions, another central theme throughout the micro-lecture session.



So both Liberal and Conservative governments are emphasizing the parts of our history they like more than the others.

But the debate kind of misses the forest for the trees, in my view.

Where is it written that we can't take pride in the Charter of Rights and our success at the 1972 Summit Series?

Who says we can't take pride in our tradition of multilateral diplomacy, and our kicking ass in the World Wars?


There's nothing that says we can't appreciate the achievements of someone like Margurite Atwood and Sir Arthur Currie.

We can take pride in bilingualism and the success of the War of 1812.

As Canadians, we've been fighters, and we've been diplomats. We've been artists, and we've been athletes. We've been intellectuals, and we've been entrepreneurs.

Individual people can take more pride in some parts of our history than others-that's their choice. But as a country, we can and should be celebrating all our successes, whatever form they take.


Well said!


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10717
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:29 pm
 


Public_Domain wrote:
N_Fiddledog wrote:
...you mean all those Neil MacDonald had a feeling type pieces your fellows regressives post 2 or 3 times a week here...

Are you bitching about the posting habits of other users with a straight face, Fiddle? Don't you have another witless YouTube douchebag to inundate us with? Or something something muslims something abortion something something progpodpeople conspiracy?


He's a bitter old man with half a brain. What do you expect?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10930
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 4:19 pm
 


JaredMilne wrote:
As Canadians, we've been fighters, and we've been diplomats. We've been artists, and we've been athletes. We've been intellectuals, and we've been entrepreneurs.

Individual people can take more pride in some parts of our history than others-that's their choice. But as a country, we can and should be celebrating all our successes, whatever form they take.


Great let's celebrate all Canadian history both good and bad but, let's not bury nor change any of it for political gain and correctness because to do so is disrespectful, hurtful and completely disingenuous. [cheer]

Although, I do find it amusing that you would actually use a former Conservative Gov't to show that what the Liberals are doing with military history is perfectly normal because, it simply flies in the face of 11 years worth of complaining by the left about those same Conservatives using the previous Liberal Governments inexcusable actions as an excuse for their idiotic decisions. :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15190
PostPosted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:51 pm
 


OnTheIce wrote:

He's a bitter old man with half a brain. What do you expect?


If you say so, then by all means Grasshopper, do inform us on the superior path. If you believe you know it, that is.

Except you don't, do yo? You have some pouty, little insults, but after that nothin'.

Right? Nothing.

Image


Last edited by N_Fiddledog on Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:11 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.