×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

@

在ROLIA,我应该属于比较左倾,坚决反对加拿大出兵IRAQ的一类人,可昨天在报纸上的调查是否支持加拿大继续在阿富汗的维和的调查,我还是选择支持,今天看到结果支持的只有33%.61%反对,不知道5%看来大多数加拿大人比我还左.

本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛这才是自由党为什么有腐败丑闻还能获得选民支持甚至上次选举获得连任的原因,其实说到腐败丑闻,早在CHRETIEN时期就有了,MARTIN上一届选举也是在同样的丑闻阴影下,但为什么这次变得那么致命?说穿了,与其说丑闻导致自由党下台,不如说是保守党改变策略往中间靠拢的结果.现在的HARPER至少从表面上已经不是过去那个骂自由党反对出兵IRAQ的国防部长"Idiot"的那个右倾分子了.

我个人不相信HARPER真正变成了不左不右的中间派.他无非是为了获选而改变自己讨好占绝对多数的左派加拿大选民.将来如果保守党上台,是否站得住脚,也取决与现在的保守党是否能够克制住自己内心里往右转的欲望.

目前的四个党,在社会价值观上,最左倾的我觉得是魁独党,从他的党魁在辩论中毫不掩饰对SWINGERS CLUB的支持 就能看出他是自由主义社会价值极端支持者.无论从价值观念,地域观念,保守党和魁独党都不可能有合作的地方,而且从理论上讲支持统一的出身QUEBEC的法裔当总统,比如CHRETIEN是最有希望和能力维持统一的人选.其次是出身QUEBEC的其他族裔当总统,比如说MARTIN.所以保守党上台后,我预感魁独问题将会变得更严重.会不会不久的将来再来一次独立公投呢?

总之保守党上台,加拿大肯定会有一些变化.变化程度大小就要看HARPER对自己党内右倾势力的控制能力.至少在这次选举其间,保守党政客里已经没有一个乱说话的了.以后怎么样,大家拭目以待吧.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / 在ROLIA,我应该属于比较左倾,坚决反对加拿大出兵IRAQ的一类人,可昨天在报纸上的调查是否支持加拿大继续在阿富汗的维和的调查,我还是选择支持,今天看到结果支持的只有33%.61%反对,不知道5%看来大多数加拿大人比我还左.
    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛这才是自由党为什么有腐败丑闻还能获得选民支持甚至上次选举获得连任的原因,其实说到腐败丑闻,早在CHRETIEN时期就有了,MARTIN上一届选举也是在同样的丑闻阴影下,但为什么这次变得那么致命?说穿了,与其说丑闻导致自由党下台,不如说是保守党改变策略往中间靠拢的结果.现在的HARPER至少从表面上已经不是过去那个骂自由党反对出兵IRAQ的国防部长"Idiot"的那个右倾分子了.

    我个人不相信HARPER真正变成了不左不右的中间派.他无非是为了获选而改变自己讨好占绝对多数的左派加拿大选民.将来如果保守党上台,是否站得住脚,也取决与现在的保守党是否能够克制住自己内心里往右转的欲望.

    目前的四个党,在社会价值观上,最左倾的我觉得是魁独党,从他的党魁在辩论中毫不掩饰对SWINGERS CLUB的支持 就能看出他是自由主义社会价值极端支持者.无论从价值观念,地域观念,保守党和魁独党都不可能有合作的地方,而且从理论上讲支持统一的出身QUEBEC的法裔当总统,比如CHRETIEN是最有希望和能力维持统一的人选.其次是出身QUEBEC的其他族裔当总统,比如说MARTIN.所以保守党上台后,我预感魁独问题将会变得更严重.会不会不久的将来再来一次独立公投呢?

    总之保守党上台,加拿大肯定会有一些变化.变化程度大小就要看HARPER对自己党内右倾势力的控制能力.至少在这次选举其间,保守党政客里已经没有一个乱说话的了.以后怎么样,大家拭目以待吧.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • it should have one more option: Let 阿富汗people decide if international troops should stay or not.
    • 这一点我同意:加拿大的主流价值观念是非常左倾的。我这个右派也无可奈何,不过如果这次保守党能上台,倒是意外之喜 :)
      • 我听有说法(未有证实,所以没有什么曲线阿什么的来证明我的说法),就是大多数移民都右倾,就是说主张小政府,低税收,痛恨罢工。所以你这个右派应该不孤独。:-)
        • 也不是这样的。至少在加西论坛,好象大多数大陆移民属于中间偏左的,支持自由党的占绝对优势。 ->
          • 自由党是中间派。支持NDP才是左倾。我无所谓哪个党,左啊右的,但我相信皇帝轮流做,这样才能杜绝腐败。对了,我不接受社会主义,嗯,看来我右倾啊,呵呵。
            • 但自由党少数政府只能和NDP合作,不可能不受其牵制。Martin在台上的时候,离了NDP的支持,马上倒台。
              • 嗯,自由党中间偏左。
            • 呵呵,那我就左倾了。不说发展经济怎么样,反正在价值观上更倾向于NDP.
          • 这可不妙. BC可能是保守党能否执政或大多数政府的关健. 温哥华老中里的小资太多. 可惜BC不是NDP执政.
            • Too much worry. Getting on, attaching more and spreading more rumours, then you would win.
        • 应该不是,只有亚裔右倾,当年美国大选,左倾的CLINTON赢得了除了亚裔以外所有少数族裔的选票.包括犹太人,还有一种说法,教育程度高的人基本上也都左倾,美国的大学教授基本都支持民主党.
          • 是这样的。一般来说,知识分子左倾,中西部小城市市民和农民右倾。俺决定把自己归为编程labor(农)民工。 :)
            • 知识分子左倾?中国知识分子好像不是左倾,要不然怎么是个知识分子就是个右派,小资?
              • 俺是说北美,中国的左右派区分完全不同。
                • 弄了半天,我也是农民。也是,现在是农寸户口。
                • 对了,北美怎么定义左倾右倾?能不能给个标准?记得看过一篇文章,左右是随地域不同而不同,好像是51上看到的。
                  • 转一篇文章,虽然我不同意曹常青的大部分观点,不过他这篇对美国的政情分析还是有道理的.
                    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛美国建国后一直实行总统选举制,以及“选举人制度”(赢者通吃),这导致美国和德国、印度、日本、以色列等实行政党比例制的国家不同,不会产生那么多的小党,而主要是由“左翼民主党”和“右翼共和党”两大政党轮流执政,根本没有其他小党的生存空间。而且近年美国政情的演变趋势是,即使是民主党和共和党两翼外延的极端派,也空间越来越小。例如上次美国总统大选时(布什和戈尔对阵),极左派候选人内德才得到3.5%的选票,极右的布坎南仅拿到1.5%(美国的极左派是极右的两倍多)。美国投票的选民有一亿多,对两大党候选人的支持率几乎是50对50(在“选举人制”统计下,布什最后仅比戈尔多几百张选票)。

                      在这种选举制度下,不管哪个族裔、哪种肤色,都按照两党的理念而主要分成了两大派。无论是西裔、黑人、亚裔,还是犹太人,都分成民主党支持者和共和党支持者,而参与、影响美国的政治。

                      左翼民主党的主要支持者是穷人、黑人、女性、少数族裔。而亚裔从总体上来说,在多数情况下是右翼共和党的支持者。例如,老布什和克林顿竞争总统时,克林顿赢得了除亚裔外所有少数族裔的票。亚裔偏右倾,除了由于他们绝大多数是中产阶级以外,还因为共和党强调的个人勤劳致富、重视子女教育、家庭价值等,更为亚洲人接受。右翼共和党的支持者主要是中产阶级、商界、白人男性、军队、亚裔等。

                      犹太人是个善于经商的、最富有的少数族裔,如按上述划分,他们应属于强调市场经济的共和党,但事实恰恰相反,多数犹太人注册为民主党。上次美国大选时,戈尔得到了81%的犹太人选票,布什只拿到了19%(这和普通美国白人的50对50的比例相差很大)。犹太人为什么偏爱民主党?很主要的一个原因是,犹太人普遍文化水平较高,而多数知识份子,尤其是大学教授、艺术家、新闻记者等,都倾心于平等、均贫富等乌托邦理念,倾向大政府、高福利的社会主义。美国的大学教授中,90%注册为民主党;主要媒体的编辑记者,只有20%注册为共和党。当然,犹太人中也有共和党的支持者,像美国知名的政论刊物《评论》(Commentary)不仅反映右翼保守派的观点,而且属于最坚定、最清晰的一类右翼,但他们属于少数派。

                      在对伊战争问题上,美国两党明显态度不同。布什所属的保守派共和党中,99%支持武力倒萨。而在野的民主党,则严重意见分歧,反战拥战几乎对半。美国参议院以77对23票通过对伊动武决议,其中支持者包括全部51名共和党籍议员以及倒戈的26名民主党籍议员,可见民主党的分裂。作为绝大多数支持民主党的犹太人,在这个问题上的分裂更加严重。因为从以色列的安全利益来看,铲除萨达姆政权对中东和平有利,尤其对以色列的安全有巨大好处。但从党派理念来说,犹太人又不情愿支持布什的共和党。在全国民调中,支持武力倒萨的美国人最高时达78%(反战占20%),但犹太人中支持倒萨的只有52%,低于全国一般民众支持率26个百分点。就连在铲除萨达姆直接有利于以色列安全这样重大的外交政策上,犹太人才勉强超过一半的支持率,可想而知,犹太人不仅不是阿拉伯世界以及法德等国一些知识人所说的“一小撮”主导美国军事打击伊拉克的“阴谋力量”,而且几乎成了布什政府推行强势对外政策的反对者和阻力。因而美国有评论家说,如果以色列不是犹太人的,而是其他人的,尤其是其他白人政权的,那美国的犹太人可能99%支持巴勒斯坦和阿拉法特了。更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
                  • 中国20年前对共产党有意见的是右派,现在支持政府的都是右派,包括中国共产党本身都是在行右派之实。
                • 本质上应该说是一致,个人认为,简单说同情劳工为左,脱离劳工为右. 只能说在中国, 政府名左实右. 知识分子和北美也不同
          • 嗯,中国移民右倾。我不知道其他移民。
          • 怎么在这也相与了?这次我不太同意你的观点:我国内的受教育程度较高,现在职位很低,但我很保守,一直可以追溯到2000年前的价值观。
    • 在发达国家中,从左到右是:欧洲->美国,加拿大出于中间但比较倾向与左派欧洲。对比在泥潭中挣扎的欧洲经济,加拿大可以沾沾自喜一番,但不要忘了这有很大程度是拜石油/资源类价格强劲的厚赐。为了避免成为
      欧洲那种"developed"(发展到尽头的)国家,加拿大需要右转。
      • 如果拿丹麦和美国作为左右参照物的话,加拿大人的理念更接近美国人的。
      • 经济政策仅仅是左右的一个表现形式,真正重要的区别是内在的社会价值观念的区别.
        • 非常同意
    • 喜欢这种中性的讨论. 其实经济政策和社会政策是区分左右的水平和垂直两条轴
    • 所以要想右拉一拉加拿大. I am canadian 可以在广告里show一下. 不过以这个为借口搞经济就是BULLSHIT了.
    • 我才说至少在这次选举其间,保守党政客里已经没有一个乱说话的了.现在就已经有人管不住自己嘴巴了...
      本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Is religious right poised to set Harper's agenda?
      Jan. 20, 2006. 01:00 AM
      SCOTT SIMMIE
      STAFF REPORTER


      Assume, as many now do, that Stephen Harper will become the country's next prime minister.

      If it's a sweep, he may well have one Ontario MP, Rondo Thomas, who believes the definition of marriage should not be tinkered with because it has been in place since Adam and Eve.

      "That's about 6,000 years ago, for those of you who might not be aware," says the Conservative candidate for Ajax-Pickering, in a presentation taped long before the campaign and currently posted at trailervision.com

      Harper could have another MP, David Sweet, who used to head the men's Christian organization Promise Keepers Canada, though that affiliation is absent from his political website. Running in Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, he's quoted as having once said: "There's a particular reason why Jesus called men only. It's not that women aren't co-participators. It's because Jesus knew women would naturally follow."

      And Harper may have a third MP, Harold Albrecht (Kitchener-Conestoga), who once wrote a letter to the editor of his local paper stating "these same-sex marriages would succeed in wiping out an entire society in just one generation." (When reporters tried to question him on those views yesterday, he was hustled away by handlers.)

      Though all three have a right to their religious beliefs, statements like those scare some people, especially those concerned a conservative religious agenda could strip away what they regard as hard-fought freedoms.

      "Egale Canada is concerned that a Conservative majority is a major threat to equality," says Laurie Arron, the gay and lesbian group's director of advocacy. "There are many Conservative candidates who are hiding their true beliefs and backgrounds. We've identified 34 new candidates with extreme social agendas... many of whom oppose not only equal marriage but also abortion, even when the mother's life is in danger."

      At the outset of the campaign, Harper said he would allow a free vote on the issue of same-sex marriage if he took power. When the controversial Civil Marriage Act was passed last year, most Conservative MPs voted against Bill C-38 and a total of 32 Liberal MPs, almost a quarter of Martin's caucus, also voted "No."


      A surf around some conservative religious websites gives a sense that Paul Martin and the Liberals have taken Canada down a path of — as one website describes it — "moral decay." The implication, though not always overtly stated, is that Harper and the Conservatives can reverse that trend, and that it's time for those who hold traditional faith-based values to stand up and be counted.

      "We will influence policy conferences, We will affect nomination meetings, We will decide elections," states the website for Concerned Christians Canada.

      And some of the more prominent players on the Canadian religious scene have waded in.

      "For the first time in many years they (voters) have a choice between the radical agenda of the liberal elite, an agenda that will result in legal prostitution, legal brothels and legal drugs — and a leader loyal to common-sense values," writes Charles McVety in the current issue of Evangelical Christian Magazine.

      McVety, president of the Canada Christian College, has reason to watch this election closely. For starters, candidate Rondo Thomas is the college's vice-president of student affairs and dean of biblical studies. But McVety is also president of the traditional faith/morals-based Canada Family Action Coalition, whose vision is to see Judeo-Christian moral values restored. It has been urging its 20,000 members to get out and participate in this election. The same-sex marriage issue ("The government invaded the purview of the church," says McVety) was a major catalyst.

      "I believe that people of faith have woken up and participated, and I don't just mean vote," he says. "I mean volunteering, putting up signs, making phone calls, stuffing envelopes... If we leave participation to a few extremists, then we'll have an extremist agenda that's front and centre."

      Though some might peg McVety's views as right of centre, he says they're widely shared. He also points out there's been Christian support for Liberal MPs who share similar views. And he rejects the suggestion that such views are indicative a religious right exists in Canada.

      "Frankly, I don't," he says. "If you attended any of our Defend Marriage rallies, you would have seen thousands of Sikhs. Would you call the Sikhs the religious right? Would you call the Catholics the religious right? Would you call the Chinese the religious right? I don't think so."

      Despite a considerable amount of media attention paid to the religious right, those taking the nation's pulse don't see anything out there with the kind of political clout that helped carry the last U.S. election for the Republicans.

      "If there is one (religious right), it's small, and it's nowhere near the size compared to the hype and scaremongering," says Andrew Grenville, vice-president of polling/research firm Ipsos Reid. "What is occurring is that people are so affronted by the way things worked out in the U.S. that they fear it's going to occur here. So the fear is certainly larger than the group."

      But he also points out, as do others, that there's a flip side to this equation.

      "There's a religious left, too, that's pretty strong," says Grenville. "These are people whose religious values are such that they feel they need to express it in supporting parties with strong social programs."

      And there's no neat way to predict, based on denomination alone, where someone might land on that spectrum. Though regular church-going Catholics historically tend to favour the Liberals and Protestants tend to lean toward the Conservatives, many other factors also go into decisions at the ballot box. And they're not always black and white.

      The Evangelical fellowship, for instance, is urging voters to ask candidates about their stand on issues ranging from the definition of marriage, the legal status of unborn children, steps to make the refugee system more transparent and compassionate, and measures to assist the homeless.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
      • "There's a particular reason why Jesus called men only. It's not that women aren't co-participators. It's because Jesus knew women would naturally follow."怪不得女性不支持保守党的多..