Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

General Discussions => General Discussion => Topic started by: Quetzalcoatl on February 03, 2019, 11:49:15 AM

Title: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 03, 2019, 11:49:15 AM
Quote
Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life (https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-ranked-best-country-quality-life-2019)

As we told you earlier, Canada has been named the third best country in the world.

Well, we’ve also been named as the #1 country in the world in 2019 for Quality of Life for the fourth year in a row.

Overall, Canada also ranked as the third best country in the world for women, third for education, and second for corporate headquarters.

...

Canada beat out Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, and Finland, which all finished in the Quality of Life top five.

According to the study, Canada placed number one for its political stability, strong job market, safe environment, and its good education system.

Congratulations, Canada!

I think Canada is a very likeable country, I certainly like it very much. If an alien spaceship arrived, and asked me to point to a society, past or present, that represents the best society that humanity has to offer, it might very well be that I would pick Canada. I have not 100% made up my mind on that question.

I think I only dislike two things about Canada:

1. It retains the British monarchy (this is certainly a very minor issue).

2. It is as freaking cold as here, if not worse.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: 2397 on February 03, 2019, 01:03:15 PM
Did the article mess up the link to the Quality of Life ranking? Because it seems to link to the "best countries" ranking instead. I can't find the ranking that has Canada on top.

I was looking at the discrepancies from the 2018 HDI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index#2018_Human_Development_Index), and noticed Iceland isn't even among the top 20, so I wonder if they were part of the ranking.

Edit: They're not; https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-rankings

Noting that the article said 6 countries finished in the top 5.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 03, 2019, 02:52:11 PM
I love Canada. When I lived in North Dakota and was protesting against the 300 Minuteman nuclear-armed misiles then in the state (since reduced to 150 after Senator Quentin Burdick died and the state no longer had enough political clout to keep two missile wings) I always breathed a sigh of relief when I crossed into Canada on my way to visit Winnipeg, as there are no nuclear weapons there. Then I started hiking in British Columbia, which is the most spectacularly beautiful place I’ve ever seen. And the people are friendly. I will miss Canada now that I’m living too far away to visit easily, and have become too skittish to continue my hiking.

Canada is a wonderful country and I’m not surprised it won the Best Quality of Life award.

Had things worked out just a little differently I could have ended up moving to Canada and becoming a citizen there. I managed to dodge the draft (Vietnam era) but had I been unable to, I’d have gone to Canada.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on February 03, 2019, 04:14:59 PM
As ranked by U.S. News and World Report.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on February 04, 2019, 01:47:44 AM
The snow and cold is a deal killer though  ;) and similar for the next 5 countries on that list

Quote
Here are the 20 best countries for Quality of Life in 2019

1. Canada
2. Sweden
3. Denmark
4. Norway
5. Switzerland
6. Finland
7. Australia
8. Netherlands
9. New Zealand
10. Germany
11. Belgium
12. UK
13. Japan
14. Luxembourg
15. Ireland
16. France
17. USA
18. Singapore
19. Portugal
20. China

Australia might be only 7th, but we have better weather (Most of the time)  8)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Rai on February 04, 2019, 07:21:08 AM
I lived in Luxembourg for 3 months and it was probably the worst place I've ever lived in, including a South Sudanese peacekeeper camp.

It is mind-numbingly boring, obscenely wealthy and generally awful in every way, if you actually want to live a life.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: moj on February 04, 2019, 07:45:16 AM
if I had the money would love to spend more time in Canada. I've thought about moving there but don't want to deal with the winters. I would like to summer there though.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 04, 2019, 10:12:51 AM
Much of that only applies to certain regions or classes. The U.S. has an outstanding quality of life if you have enough money. And some parts of it have excellent weather, such as where I am now. British Columbia, as previously noted, is the most spectacularly beautiful place I’ve ever seen, and the weather is lovely, for two months of the year.

Your choice of the best country to live in will depend largely on how much money you have. And the country with the best weather will depend on how much freedom you have to choose your location within that country. The U.S. is a mean, self-centered, racist, violent, and xenophobic country, but there are few* places where someone with money can live a safer, more comfortable life, or get better medical care.

* Note that I didn’t say no places, just that there aren’t many.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Billzbub on February 04, 2019, 10:44:15 AM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 04, 2019, 11:04:42 AM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 04, 2019, 11:09:03 AM
Taxes go in, services come out.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Billzbub on February 04, 2019, 11:16:48 AM
Taxes go in, services come out.

So, like, how socialist is it compared to other countries?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 04, 2019, 11:25:38 AM
Taxes go in, services come out.

So, like, how socialist is it compared to other countries?

Haha, about the normal amount compared to any rich western country, with the notable exception of one neighbour.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 04, 2019, 11:54:53 AM
Taxes go in, services come out.

So, like, how socialist is it compared to other countries?

Haha, about the normal amount compared to any rich western country, with the notable exception of one neighbour.

To the right of Nordic and Scandinavian countries in many ways - likely due to the influence of that far-right neighbour. Much more multicultural, of course.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Ah.hell on February 04, 2019, 12:14:58 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.
Some of Frank Herbert's lesser known works involve this idea, there's a bureau of Sabotage dedicated in ensuring government doesn't get too efficient. 
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: 2397 on February 04, 2019, 12:50:48 PM
Someone's mixing up efficiency and corruption.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 04, 2019, 01:04:05 PM
To the right of Nordic and Scandinavian countries in many ways

I wouldn't necessarily view that as a negative.

likely due to the influence of that far-right neighbour. Much more multicultural, of course.

I think you are confusing righ-wing economics, i.e more market-based, with far-right, which is often implied to refer to fascists or nationalists. The latter are actually often rather left-wing economically. Marine Le Pen's economic views (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Marine_Le_Pen#Economy_and_industry) are certainly not right-wing. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, the Nazis and fascists were no proponents of free market economics. The Nazis considered global capitalism to be a Jewish plot (which they also considered communism to be).
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 04, 2019, 04:20:26 PM
To the right of Nordic and Scandinavian countries in many ways

I wouldn't necessarily view that as a negative.

Neither would I.


likely due to the influence of that far-right neighbour. Much more multicultural, of course.

I think you are confusing righ-wing economics, i.e more market-based, with far-right, which is often implied to refer to fascists or nationalists. The latter are actually often rather left-wing economically. Marine Le Pen's economic views (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Marine_Le_Pen#Economy_and_industry) are certainly not right-wing. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, the Nazis and fascists were no proponents of free market economics. The Nazis considered global capitalism to be a Jewish plot (which they also considered communism to be).

Compared to pretty much every other western country the US political centre is quite far to the right. I am not making a nuanced argument about the many facets of the policies of "the right" and "the left". I am making a broad generalization about the overall political spectrum.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 04, 2019, 05:56:17 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government works the way the US government is supposed to work.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 04, 2019, 10:27:07 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government works the way the US government is supposed to work.

You're thinking of Canadian society, not our government(s).
(click to show/hide)


Culturally we have six major regions that roughly correspond to internal borders. In all cases there is an urban / suburban / rurual divide, as well as a North/South divide.
(click to show/hide)


Thank you for joining me for a Canadian Political and Cultural Primer - With Free Inaccuracies Included!



Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 05, 2019, 09:45:39 AM
Thanks for that, Brillig. It conforms with what little I already knew. Actually I had an approximate idea of how the Canadian parliamentary system works. But the various regional differences in culture I was far less familiar with. Other than the general tolerance for pot in B.C. which I was aware of from having spent so much time there. (I never smoked there, because I quit smoking pot about three decades before I first went there. Tried it again after WA legalized it, but didn’t like it. It’s too strong now. And the reasons I quit using it back then still apply now: It muddled my brain. Same thing I dislike about alcohol.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on February 05, 2019, 09:53:31 AM
"Tonight I'm due to bushwhack Sue",

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQVI7NR8FZs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQVI7NR8FZs)

Gotta love Canadians, even if they celebrate their niceness overmuch.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 05, 2019, 11:43:51 AM
I don't know that we celebrate it too much. We do like having the reputation though.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 05, 2019, 12:05:02 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government works the way the US government is supposed to work.

Apart from systems of government, which the US and Canada have different forms of for historical reasons, I think Canadian society is pretty much what the US would be like if the Democrats controlled all(?) three branches of government for a few decades.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 05, 2019, 12:35:34 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government works the way the US government is supposed to work.

Apart from systems of government, which the US and Canada have different forms of for historical reasons, I think Canadian society is pretty much what the US would be like if the Democrats controlled all(?) three branches of government for a few decades.

Maybe. The US is a set of cultures born at a unique time in world history. The empires were crumbling. In Europe, effective weapons were increasingly restricted to the aristocracy and the state. US colonists in the small states in the Northeast tended to take on a more European attitude toward who needed weapons, and how many weapons they needed. As the Western frontier was pushed across the continent the Wild West was a very different world from the civilized East. The individual warrior was necessary there, and the idea of personal independence and freedom was entwined with individual force of arms, not state force applied with rule of law. By the time the US was a real coast-to-coast nation that tangled mess of attitudes included the protection-from-government ideas too.

Canada asked nicely for independence. Britain said, "Sure." Our settlers - especially the French - tended to intermarry with the locals rather than conquoring them (leading to the Metis people). It was still a racist shitshow in a ton of ways, but we didn't have some kind of manifest destiny in our culture.

Historically the praries have also been a socialist engine for the nation. Our universal health care started out there, and until relatively recently the left-most political parties have done very well. This may seem to contradict my earlier comments about the praries. It doesn't, because we don't have some of the assumptions Americans have.

Canadian culture is individualist, but not nearly as much as the US. Most of us do not hate and mistrust our governments like Americans do. We don't want government to be a bloated, corrupt drag on society and the economy. We just don't think governments are inherently evil that we are forced to tolerate.

If the entire structure of Canadian government were replaced tomorrow with a system identical to the US system we would see senatorial power skew heavily to the Maritimes (what I called the East Coast for 'muricans to understand), while congressional power would be concentrated in Ontario, with Quebec and BC having a shared second place. The praries would be screwed in many ways, with only 6 senators and a relatively small presence in the House. We'd all keep universal health care in each province. We'd still have at least 3 national parties and at least one regional party (in Quebec). I could see new energy behind regional parties forming in the praries and maritimes too. We'd still have a ton of guns - mostly long-guns for hunting and use on farms - and a low firearms-related murder rate.

I'm not at all sure how First Nations would be represented provincially or federally. Perhaps they would be considered a single territory distributed across the country? Two senators and a few congress people? That would be quite good for them I'd think - though the swing votes may not be so big a deal with more than 2 parties.

If the US government were replaced with our Parlimentary democracy... no, I can't see there being better health care, more gun control, or better representation of First Nations. At the least granular level, perhaps Americans say they want a society that is like Canadian society? I'm not at all sure that is what America wants, or that it is what America claims it wants.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 05, 2019, 02:31:38 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government works the way the US government is supposed to work.

Apart from systems of government, which the US and Canada have different forms of for historical reasons, I think Canadian society is pretty much what the US would be like if the Democrats controlled all(?) three branches of government for a few decades.

The Democrats controlled the U.S. government for long enough that I think it’s safe to say that they would not make the U.S. anything like Canada. The Democrats are a bunch of pussies too weak and wishy-washy to push hard for a truly liberal approach to things like health care and such. Remember that the Democrats began as an alliance of Southern racists and Northern liberals, and that they have happily followed the Republicans to the right of the political spectrum. The Democrats’ strategy is to stay just slightly to the left of the Republicans, in the hopes that everybody to the left of them will vote for them as the lesser evil. And the Democrats are just as married to capitalism and the inviolability of wealth as the Republicans are.

I don’t think you give our culture of greed and our deeply-entrenched and historically based racism enough credit for making us the angry and hate-filled nation we are. The Democrats of today would not continue the war on women or the war against gay and trans people that they championed until very recently, and this would be a good thing, but it’s about all that separates the two parties in the U.S. these days.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 05, 2019, 02:41:02 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 05, 2019, 02:57:12 PM
I've lived in both.  I'll never live in the US again.  No offense, but I know what I like and what I don't like.  And GoFundMes for insulin, I don't like.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: random poet on February 05, 2019, 03:13:37 PM
I've lived in both.  I'll never live in the US again.  No offense, but I know what I like and what I don't like.  And GoFundMes for insulin, I don't like.
And also the threat of being shot at any given time.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 05, 2019, 03:19:25 PM
I lived in Luxembourg for 3 months and it was probably the worst place I've ever lived in, including a South Sudanese peacekeeper camp.

It is mind-numbingly boring, obscenely wealthy and generally awful in every way, if you actually want to live a life.

And the U.S. is three worse than that!
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 05, 2019, 03:35:06 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.

https://youtu.be/WMxGVfk09lU

Almost 20 years ago this commercial ripped through our country, providing one of the clearest views of who Canadians are, instead of who we are not. Prior to this much of our description of our culture was comparing ourselves to Americans. After this we started talking about stuff like the cultural mosaic and peacekeeping as their own things, not in contrast to melting pots or police actions.

This is not to say that one 60 second spot covers the range of Canadian culture... but it triggered a different kind of conversation that we are carrying on today. Canada was not founded by heroes. We did not battle our way out of oppression. We didn't have harrowing death-filled internal conflicts. We are a young country with a vast array of cultures. Sure, the dominant narratives are still echoes of the British and French cultures from hundreds of years ago.

In the last 40 years we've developed a sense of self that is distinct from almost every other culture. It's not held homogeneously across the land, of course. Xenophobic populism is on the rise here too. I think our urban/suburban/rural divides are stark and growing in many cases. Demographically I think we may have passed the tipping point for populism of that sort to really take root, though. I expect that the next 20 years will see an demand for dramatically increased immigration, and the people who fight that sort of thing will be dying off in droves. It wouldn't surprise me at all if we take in millions of climate change migrants in the late 2020s and early 2030s. It would shock me if the US did the same.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 05, 2019, 03:50:14 PM
I've lived in both.  I'll never live in the US again.  No offense, but I know what I like and what I don't like.  And GoFundMes for insulin, I don't like.
And also the threat of being shot at any given time.

I never actually felt that particular threat (on an emotional level). 

But I did basically predial 9-1, hover over the 1, and wait and see if the insect that stung me would kill me or not, because if I hit that last 1 we would be bankrupted whether it turned out to be the sort I was allergic to or not (it wasn't).

Sucks to live paycheque to paycheque, but it sucks a lot less in Canada ( I had a health scare while unemployed back here.  I went to the doctor, went to emergency, got imaged several times, saw a specialist, and more - I paid more for parking than we could really afford, but that's all).
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 05, 2019, 03:59:31 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.

This is a joke, but with some real truth in it:

Q: How do you tell the difference between a Canadian and a U.S. American?

A: You tell them that there is no difference. The U.S. American will agree. The Canadian will disagree.

We are very different countries with very different cultures. To a European or an Asian or an African they may look the same. The same way most Americans cannot tell the difference between the people of different Asian countries. But our neighbors can tell the difference. Easily.

Canada is not “U.S. lite.” Canada is something different and altogether better (unless you have sufficient money to buy the best of everything). We speak the same language (with very minor variation) but Canadians recognize the right of their linguistic minorities to speak their own languages, while we only give lip service to such rights. And we eat many of the same foods. We are both capitalist democracies (to the extent that we are a democracy at all). We both call our unit of currency the dollar. We have many superficial similarities. But these are superficial. And our Democratic Party does not want to make the U.S. anything like Canada.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Billzbub on February 06, 2019, 12:29:12 PM
I am glad I read this thread.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 06, 2019, 04:14:09 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.

This is a joke, but with some real truth in it:

Q: How do you tell the difference between a Canadian and a U.S. American?

A: You tell them that there is no difference. The U.S. American will agree. The Canadian will disagree.

We are very different countries with very different cultures. To a European or an Asian or an African they may look the same. The same way most Americans cannot tell the difference between the people of different Asian countries. But our neighbors can tell the difference. Easily.

Canada is not “U.S. lite.” Canada is something different and altogether better (unless you have sufficient money to buy the best of everything). We speak the same language (with very minor variation) but Canadians recognize the right of their linguistic minorities to speak their own languages, while we only give lip service to such rights. And we eat many of the same foods. We are both capitalist democracies (to the extent that we are a democracy at all). We both call our unit of currency the dollar. We have many superficial similarities. But these are superficial. And our Democratic Party does not want to make the U.S. anything like Canada.

Sorry to offend, but both countries are former British colonies in North America. That alone poises them for some similarities. And their similarities can be seen by cultural comparisons on a global scale.

If you compare the countries by cultural values (Hofstede), they are pretty similar. See (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,the-usa/).

For comparison, I added Sweden and Norway (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,norway,sweden,the-usa/) to the list. Their cultural values are not very different from the American and Canadian ones, with the exception that these are much less "masculine" societies, which in this case means inclined to competition. Both Sweden and Norway are individualist societies, for example, though less so than the US and Canada.

But the US, Canada, Norway, and Sweden all originate from the same Western European cultural background. Let us instead compare the US and Canada to Japan and South Korea (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,japan,south-korea,the-usa/). The latter two have Western influences since after World War 2, but still maintain their distinct cultures, and have very different historical backgrounds. Here we see significant differences. In particular, the US and Canada are both much more individualistic than Japan and South Korea, the latter one's low score really surprised me. The two Asian countries are also much more long-term oriented than the two Anglo-Saxon countries, and much more avoiding of uncertainty, and much less indulgent. And for some reason, Japan is much more masculine than all of the other three countries.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 06, 2019, 04:50:41 PM
My point was merely that most people in the U.S. see Canada as being just like us, while most Canadians are offended by the idea. And there are very real and significant differences even though we share a cultural background.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 06, 2019, 06:38:48 PM
I should learn French, full-stack development and emigrate to Canada.

Don't think you can emigrate with no job experience so I can't imagine a French-language knock off of Zork in Vue.js would get me very far.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on February 06, 2019, 06:59:17 PM
I should learn French, full-stack development and emigrate to Canada.

Go for it. I've thought about retiring to the Gaspésie. Might take some getting used to the scenery, however,

(https://www.campingquebec.com/~/media/Images/Cover/Regions/gaspesie.jpg?db=web&hash=F743C82CAF307B75E4D369D50C573D0519EF7D11)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 06, 2019, 08:23:47 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.

This is a joke, but with some real truth in it:

Q: How do you tell the difference between a Canadian and a U.S. American?

A: You tell them that there is no difference. The U.S. American will agree. The Canadian will disagree.

We are very different countries with very different cultures. To a European or an Asian or an African they may look the same. The same way most Americans cannot tell the difference between the people of different Asian countries. But our neighbors can tell the difference. Easily.

Canada is not “U.S. lite.” Canada is something different and altogether better (unless you have sufficient money to buy the best of everything). We speak the same language (with very minor variation) but Canadians recognize the right of their linguistic minorities to speak their own languages, while we only give lip service to such rights. And we eat many of the same foods. We are both capitalist democracies (to the extent that we are a democracy at all). We both call our unit of currency the dollar. We have many superficial similarities. But these are superficial. And our Democratic Party does not want to make the U.S. anything like Canada.

Sorry to offend, but both countries are former British colonies in North America. That alone poises them for some similarities. And their similarities can be seen by cultural comparisons on a global scale.

If you compare the countries by cultural values (Hofstede), they are pretty similar. See (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,the-usa/).

For comparison, I added Sweden and Norway (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,norway,sweden,the-usa/) to the list. Their cultural values are not very different from the American and Canadian ones, with the exception that these are much less "masculine" societies, which in this case means inclined to competition. Both Sweden and Norway are individualist societies, for example, though less so than the US and Canada.

But the US, Canada, Norway, and Sweden all originate from the same Western European cultural background. Let us instead compare the US and Canada to Japan and South Korea (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,japan,south-korea,the-usa/). The latter two have Western influences since after World War 2, but still maintain their distinct cultures, and have very different historical backgrounds. Here we see significant differences. In particular, the US and Canada are both much more individualistic than Japan and South Korea, the latter one's low score really surprised me. The two Asian countries are also much more long-term oriented than the two Anglo-Saxon countries, and much more avoiding of uncertainty, and much less indulgent. And for some reason, Japan is much more masculine than all of the other three countries.

By that logic Sweden and Australia are mostly the same because Europe, or that China and Japan are mostly the same because Asia. Having similarities and shared roots does not mean that the cultures are very similar *now*.

Australia, Canada, and the US were founded on ideas and immigration - unlike basically every other country. The founding ideas included colonialism and democracy in each case, as well as mostly English as the main language. After that? The differences are significant.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: 2397 on February 07, 2019, 06:52:44 AM
I feel like Norway has more in common with Canada than Canada has with the US. Cold, desolate, high degree of public services, sometimes mixed up with its more populous neighbor, parliament, powerless monarch, Celsius, moose.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 07, 2019, 07:53:06 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/CenW9oi.png)

Half of Canada lives south of that line.


Norway is an ancient monoculture that deeply resents being invaded by foreign refugees, and an immensely egalitarian society that invites in huge numbers of refugees because they need help and people are people. Canada is a young multiculture that struggles to properly respect the large number of immigrants that go there. The US is a xenophobic cultural steamroller that crushes or appropriates any non-white-male culture while remaining ignorant of the effects of priviledge or even the concept of priviledge.


Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 07, 2019, 10:41:53 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/CenW9oi.png)

Half of Canada lives south of that line.

NOT MY HALF
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 07, 2019, 12:39:55 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/CenW9oi.png)

Half of Canada lives south of that line.

NOT MY HALF

Yes, that is how fractions work. Your point...?
/sargasm
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 07, 2019, 01:52:39 PM
I didn't mean that the US under long-term Democratic governance would be a copy of Canada. Obviously there are cultural differences that are deeper than things like healthcare. But I though the US would be pretty similar to Canada.

I fully admit I might be completely wrong on this. But Canada is sometimes called US Lite, and I would view that as a positive thing. To my distant eyes, Canada seems to be like the US, but without much of the crazy stuff. A Swedish person I know of who has travelled extensively in both countries described Canada to have all the benefits of the US, but none of its drawbacks.

But if my impression is mistaken, please feel free to correct it.

This is a joke, but with some real truth in it:

Q: How do you tell the difference between a Canadian and a U.S. American?

A: You tell them that there is no difference. The U.S. American will agree. The Canadian will disagree.

We are very different countries with very different cultures. To a European or an Asian or an African they may look the same. The same way most Americans cannot tell the difference between the people of different Asian countries. But our neighbors can tell the difference. Easily.

Canada is not “U.S. lite.” Canada is something different and altogether better (unless you have sufficient money to buy the best of everything). We speak the same language (with very minor variation) but Canadians recognize the right of their linguistic minorities to speak their own languages, while we only give lip service to such rights. And we eat many of the same foods. We are both capitalist democracies (to the extent that we are a democracy at all). We both call our unit of currency the dollar. We have many superficial similarities. But these are superficial. And our Democratic Party does not want to make the U.S. anything like Canada.

Sorry to offend, but both countries are former British colonies in North America. That alone poises them for some similarities. And their similarities can be seen by cultural comparisons on a global scale.

If you compare the countries by cultural values (Hofstede), they are pretty similar. See (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,the-usa/).

For comparison, I added Sweden and Norway (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,norway,sweden,the-usa/) to the list. Their cultural values are not very different from the American and Canadian ones, with the exception that these are much less "masculine" societies, which in this case means inclined to competition. Both Sweden and Norway are individualist societies, for example, though less so than the US and Canada.

But the US, Canada, Norway, and Sweden all originate from the same Western European cultural background. Let us instead compare the US and Canada to Japan and South Korea (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/canada,japan,south-korea,the-usa/). The latter two have Western influences since after World War 2, but still maintain their distinct cultures, and have very different historical backgrounds. Here we see significant differences. In particular, the US and Canada are both much more individualistic than Japan and South Korea, the latter one's low score really surprised me. The two Asian countries are also much more long-term oriented than the two Anglo-Saxon countries, and much more avoiding of uncertainty, and much less indulgent. And for some reason, Japan is much more masculine than all of the other three countries.

By that logic Sweden and Australia are mostly the same because Europe, or that China and Japan are mostly the same because Asia. Having similarities and shared roots does not mean that the cultures are very similar *now*.

Australia, Canada, and the US were founded on ideas and immigration - unlike basically every other country. The founding ideas included colonialism and democracy in each case, as well as mostly English as the main language. After that? The differences are significant.

Actually I think Sweden and Australia have rather similar values. Both are stable democracies with largely post-Christian (Protestant) secularized populations. Sure there are differences. But values-wise, they have much more in common with each other than any of them has with Russia or China.

Having similar societal values doesn't mean "being the same".
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 07, 2019, 01:59:24 PM
My point was merely that most people in the U.S. see Canada as being just like us, while most Canadians are offended by the idea. And there are very real and significant differences even though we share a cultural background.

What people are offended by is irrelevant to the truth of anything.

And yes, they are not copies. But on a global measure in comparison to many other countries, they are closely aligned when it comes to societal values.

Both supporters and detractors seem to view the US as very uniquely different compared to all other countries. But various surveys of societal values across the world don't support that notion.

See also the below chart. The US and Canada are close to each other, as are the other English-speaking countries.

(https://www.iffs.se/media/1906/culturemap_may2015.jpeg)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on February 07, 2019, 02:00:50 PM
Actually I think Sweden and Australia have rather similar values. Both are stable democracies with largely post-Christian (Protestant) secularized populations. Sure there are differences. But values-wise, they have much more in common with each other than any of them has with Russia or China.

Having similar societal values doesn't mean "being the same".

Growing up in the 60s and 70s, I would have described Australia as closer to Britain, but since the 80s we have become more Americanised.

I'd describe Australians as somewhere between Canadians and Americans.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 07, 2019, 02:11:12 PM
Norway is an ancient monoculture that deeply resents being invaded by foreign refugees, and an immensely egalitarian society that invites in huge numbers of refugees because they need help and people are people.

Norway has not even been independent for most of the past millenium. And Norway is an ammalgamation of previous tribes and petty kingdoms that inhabited the area, as is Sweden.

Canada is a young multiculture that struggles to properly respect the large number of immigrants that go there.

I guess.

The US is a xenophobic cultural steamroller that crushes or appropriates any non-white-male culture while remaining ignorant of the effects of priviledge or even the concept of priviledge.

The very concept of "cultural appropriation" is scarcely recognized outside of the US. The same goes for "white priviledge". The rest of the world doesn't really think in American racial terms. Europe in particular is divided more by ethnicity rather than American notions of race. You are super-imposing your domestic views on a part of the world that functions differently.

The US is also one of the world's least racist countries (https://www.good.is/articles/america-isnt-as-racist-as-you-think).

(Maybe I should stop? I know that destroying the popular but demonstrably false narratives that people here hold doesn't really win me any friends here...)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 07, 2019, 02:14:02 PM
Growing up in the 60s and 70s, I would have described Australia as closer to Britain, but since the 80s we have become more Americanised.

That's not unique to Australia. American popular culture has been very influential worldwide since the end of WW2, maybe especially so since the end of the Cold War.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 07, 2019, 07:15:17 PM
I got pretty hot-and-heavy editing together my response. If I've messed up the relationship among quoted text please forgive.

(Maybe I should stop? I know that destroying the popular but demonstrably false narratives that people here hold doesn't really win me any friends here...)

No, you shouldn't stop. Different perspectives on culture fascinate me. I'll assess the evidence you provide. If I see gaps, flaws, or hidden assumptions I'll point them out.

From my perspective the interpretations you share minimize some things that are important and emphasize some things that are not. The result is that you sound dismissive of differences between cultures. I don't think you are being dismissive - I'm saying that's how it sounds to me at first.

Norway is an ancient monoculture that deeply resents being invaded by foreign refugees, and an immensely egalitarian society that invites in huge numbers of refugees because they need help and people are people.

Norway has not even been independent for most of the past millenium. And Norway is an ammalgamation of previous tribes and petty kingdoms that inhabited the area, as is Sweden.

This is not a fair or meaningful comparison. Canada has existed in something like it's modern form for maybe 200 years? The US for maybe 300? Go much further back than that and the entire concept of a country starts to get a bit squishy compared to how we think today. While those Norse tribes certainly had differences, those were very small compared to the kinds of differences you find between next door neighbours across much of Canada.

In addition, Norway today is no longer just the descendents of those tribes. The large influx of Muslim refugees has reached a tipping point - at least in the cities - where the brown citizens are visibly everywhere. This has set up a profound cognitive dissonance in many Norwegians. It isn't a question of skin colour. It is a crisis of identity. What does it mean to be Norwegian when a sizable minority do not have nordic roots? My Norwegian family are universally disgusted by how the French deal with their Muslim population while also feeling profoundly uncomfortable with what real integration means for Norwegian culture. My child's mother is Norwegian. She married a black Guaynese woman (1st gen Canadian as a child). She had a kid with a straight mixed Brit/Indian/Afghan/Trinidadian man. A year or so ago she said, "The most common boy's baby name in Norway this year is Mohamad. Isn't that sad?" Definitely not a racist person - but she sees some of the cultural changes in Norway as a loss of what she grew up with. She is right about that, and it makes her sad.

The very concept of "cultural appropriation" is scarcely recognized outside of the US. The same goes for "white priviledge".

Close.

Cultural appropriation is not recognized outside the US because it is the first time and place in history that usurping a culture is seen as morally wrong. In part this is because white america didn't just remix aspects of black america and latino america... White america actively surpressed and isolated those cultures while doing that remixing, and then largely denied any remixing had taken place.

I think cultural appropriation is often an overblown opportunity to be offended, especially when it presumes that culture and creativity are a zero sum or even negative sum game. As noted above, in the US it has been that kind of game in the past and present. From a practical point of view I worry that minority cultures grasp at the appearance of control over their narratives and histories, without gaining actual control over those things - because they are not controllable in the sense they want. IMO healthier approach would be more like a creative commons attribution license: if you're taking on parts of a culture that is not your own, acknowledge and celebrate those influences and sources.

Oh, and on "white privilege' - there are places where the dominant culture is immensely privileged compared to the subordinate cultures. Saudi Arabia comes to mind. The difference is that they don't give a rat's ass about what anyone else thinks about their position at the top of the food chain. America's minorities have voices, and some of the dominant culture listen to them.

The US is a xenophobic cultural steamroller that crushes or appropriates any non-white-male culture while remaining ignorant of the effects of priviledge or even the concept of priviledge.

The rest of the world doesn't really think in American racial terms. Europe in particular is divided more by ethnicity rather than American notions of race. You are super-imposing your domestic views on a part of the world that functions differently.

I didn't actually use 'race' in my descripition of the US because I'm Canadian and don't think in American terms of race. Their concept of race is barely sensible within their borders. It's almost meaningless outside them. At the same time I can understand how they use the term and what it means to them.

It isn't just Europe that is divided by ethnicity. Most of the world is like that. Places where ethnic boundaries were violated (by empire building, for example) have a lot of internal conflict.

The US is also one of the world's least racist countries (https://www.good.is/articles/america-isnt-as-racist-as-you-think).

I haven't had time to go through the source for those stats, so I can't comment. I have immediate questions about the questions though. The way they were asked could bias the results dramatically. The US and Canada are also more culturally diverse than most other places, but not in homogeneous ways. I look forward to exploring the paper.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 09, 2019, 09:25:26 AM
I got pretty hot-and-heavy editing together my response. If I've messed up the relationship among quoted text please forgive.

(Maybe I should stop? I know that destroying the popular but demonstrably false narratives that people here hold doesn't really win me any friends here...)

No, you shouldn't stop. Different perspectives on culture fascinate me. I'll assess the evidence you provide. If I see gaps, flaws, or hidden assumptions I'll point them out.

From my perspective the interpretations you share minimize some things that are important and emphasize some things that are not. The result is that you sound dismissive of differences between cultures. I don't think you are being dismissive - I'm saying that's how it sounds to me at first.

That's I think a proper take. Exchange of ideas.

Norway is an ancient monoculture that deeply resents being invaded by foreign refugees, and an immensely egalitarian society that invites in huge numbers of refugees because they need help and people are people.

Norway has not even been independent for most of the past millenium. And Norway is an ammalgamation of previous tribes and petty kingdoms that inhabited the area, as is Sweden.

This is not a fair or meaningful comparison. Canada has existed in something like it's modern form for maybe 200 years? The US for maybe 300? Go much further back than that and the entire concept of a country starts to get a bit squishy compared to how we think today. While those Norse tribes certainly had differences, those were very small compared to the kinds of differences you find between next door neighbours across much of Canada.

In addition, Norway today is no longer just the descendents of those tribes. The large influx of Muslim refugees has reached a tipping point - at least in the cities - where the brown citizens are visibly everywhere. This has set up a profound cognitive dissonance in many Norwegians. It isn't a question of skin colour. It is a crisis of identity. What does it mean to be Norwegian when a sizable minority do not have nordic roots? My Norwegian family are universally disgusted by how the French deal with their Muslim population while also feeling profoundly uncomfortable with what real integration means for Norwegian culture. My child's mother is Norwegian. She married a black Guaynese woman (1st gen Canadian as a child). She had a kid with a straight mixed Brit/Indian/Afghan/Trinidadian man. A year or so ago she said, "The most common boy's baby name in Norway this year is Mohamad. Isn't that sad?" Definitely not a racist person - but she sees some of the cultural changes in Norway as a loss of what she grew up with. She is right about that, and it makes her sad.

My main objection, which actually a lot of Americans seem to hold, is that the Nordic countries until a few decades where more or less completely isolated cultures almost untocuhed by foreign influences. This narrative is incorrect. The Nordic region has been part of the Western European culturaol hemisphere since Christianization in the Middle Ages, and even before that thee were contacts with the European continent. They aren't really any more isolated than the rest of Western Europe. The only exception in the Nordics would be Iceland, but even there the story is more complicated.

I never, ever think about "what it means to be Swedish". I'm not a nationalist in the first place. I know that Norway as a country is more culturally conservative than we are, but it sounds like a rural thing, to the extent that people do it. If I may ask, where in Norway does your Norwegian family live?

The very concept of "cultural appropriation" is scarcely recognized outside of the US. The same goes for "white priviledge".

Close.

Cultural appropriation is not recognized outside the US because it is the first time and place in history that usurping a culture is seen as morally wrong. In part this is because white america didn't just remix aspects of black america and latino america... White america actively surpressed and isolated those cultures while doing that remixing, and then largely denied any remixing had taken place.

I think cultural appropriation is often an overblown opportunity to be offended, especially when it presumes that culture and creativity are a zero sum or even negative sum game. As noted above, in the US it has been that kind of game in the past and present. From a practical point of view I worry that minority cultures grasp at the appearance of control over their narratives and histories, without gaining actual control over those things - because they are not controllable in the sense they want. IMO healthier approach would be more like a creative commons attribution license: if you're taking on parts of a culture that is not your own, acknowledge and celebrate those influences and sources.

By my impression, it's mostly a thing that (white) college kids get worked up about, taking offense on behalf of others.

Oh, and on "white privilege' - there are places where the dominant culture is immensely privileged compared to the subordinate cultures. Saudi Arabia comes to mind. The difference is that they don't give a rat's ass about what anyone else thinks about their position at the top of the food chain. America's minorities have voices, and some of the dominant culture listen to them.

But being white (or black) isn't a culture.

The US is a xenophobic cultural steamroller that crushes or appropriates any non-white-male culture while remaining ignorant of the effects of priviledge or even the concept of priviledge.

The rest of the world doesn't really think in American racial terms. Europe in particular is divided more by ethnicity rather than American notions of race. You are super-imposing your domestic views on a part of the world that functions differently.

I didn't actually use 'race' in my descripition of the US because I'm Canadian and don't think in American terms of race. Their concept of race is barely sensible within their borders. It's almost meaningless outside them. At the same time I can understand how they use the term and what it means to them.

It isn't just Europe that is divided by ethnicity. Most of the world is like that. Places where ethnic boundaries were violated (by empire building, for example) have a lot of internal conflict.

Fair enough, I agree.

The US is also one of the world's least racist countries (https://www.good.is/articles/america-isnt-as-racist-as-you-think).

I haven't had time to go through the source for those stats, so I can't comment. I have immediate questions about the questions though. The way they were asked could bias the results dramatically. The US and Canada are also more culturally diverse than most other places, but not in homogeneous ways. I look forward to exploring the paper.

Hmm, wouldn't an American or Canadian racist resent living next door to someone of another race? Could it manifest itself in some other way?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 09, 2019, 10:28:11 AM
My point was merely that most people in the U.S. see Canada as being just like us, while most Canadians are offended by the idea. And there are very real and significant differences even though we share a cultural background.

What people are offended by is irrelevant to the truth of anything.

And yes, they are not copies. But on a global measure in comparison to many other countries, they are closely aligned when it comes to societal values.

Both supporters and detractors seem to view the US as very uniquely different compared to all other countries. But various surveys of societal values across the world don't support that notion.

See also the below chart. The US and Canada are close to each other, as are the other English-speaking countries.

(https://www.iffs.se/media/1906/culturemap_may2015.jpeg)

Cool graphic. Thanks for that. While the U.S. and Canada are closer to each other than they are to many distant parts of the world, the graphic places them pretty far apart to my eye.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 09, 2019, 01:21:01 PM
I'm short on time, so just one bit for now.

(click to show/hide)
My main objection, which actually a lot of Americans seem to hold, is that the Nordic countries until a few decades where more or less completely isolated cultures almost untocuhed by foreign influences. This narrative is incorrect. The Nordic region has been part of the Western European culturaol hemisphere since Christianization in the Middle Ages, and even before that thee were contacts with the European continent. They aren't really any more isolated than the rest of Western Europe. The only exception in the Nordics would be Iceland, but even there the story is more complicated.

I never, ever think about "what it means to be Swedish". I'm not a nationalist in the first place. I know that Norway as a country is more culturally conservative than we are, but it sounds like a rural thing, to the extent that people do it. If I may ask, where in Norway does your Norwegian family live?

While people may claim that Northern Europe was isolated, that is not what I claim. I'm saying that there is a culture that has thousands of years of fairly continuous cultural evolution. Normal cross-cultural interactions were minor influences from trade or major transformations from conquest. That is the global norm, and in the last few centuries borders were defined around those cultural groups (in Europe, at least).

I suspect the reason you never think about what it means to be Swedish is a direct result of being part of a dominant monoculture. Most people don't think about what it means to be part of their in-group at all, but especially if their group is dominant. I bet it's really easy for you to point out what not-Swedish looks like though - as you did with Norwegians. (That is part of privilege. Not [category] privilege. Just privilege. It is really hard to see from the inside.)

The family is my daughter's aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, etc., mostly in Oslo, Brekstad, and Stokkøya.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 10, 2019, 02:11:00 PM
My point was merely that most people in the U.S. see Canada as being just like us, while most Canadians are offended by the idea. And there are very real and significant differences even though we share a cultural background.

What people are offended by is irrelevant to the truth of anything.

And yes, they are not copies. But on a global measure in comparison to many other countries, they are closely aligned when it comes to societal values.

Both supporters and detractors seem to view the US as very uniquely different compared to all other countries. But various surveys of societal values across the world don't support that notion.

See also the below chart. The US and Canada are close to each other, as are the other English-speaking countries.

(https://www.iffs.se/media/1906/culturemap_may2015.jpeg)

Cool graphic. Thanks for that. While the U.S. and Canada are closer to each other than they are to many distant parts of the world, the graphic places them pretty far apart to my eye.

There is certainly a distance between them, but compared to the world as a whole, they are pretty close to each other.

This probably is more obvious if you live in it, compared to if you are not. I could point to many differences between Norway and Sweden, but they wouldn't really be much of differences to outsiders.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 10, 2019, 03:33:11 PM
While people may claim that Northern Europe was isolated, that is not what I claim. I'm saying that there is a culture that has thousands of years of fairly continuous cultural evolution. Normal cross-cultural interactions were minor influences from trade or major transformations from conquest.

Christianization was a very major event in history in this part of the world. And the Nordic countries were all part of the major European wars, for example the 30 Years War and had allies and enemies in Continental Europe, and they even had some minor colonies in the New World and Africa and elsewhere, so they were part of the colonial enterprise along with the rest of Europe, though these colonies were small and mostly shortlived. For example there is New Sweden (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sweden), the Swedish Gold Coast (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Gold_Coast), Saint Barthélemy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_colony_of_Saint_Barth%C3%A9lemy), the Danish Gold Coast (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Gold_Coast), and the Danish West Indies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_West_Indies).

Really, it seems hard to think that the Nordic countries were any more isolated than the rest of Western Europe.

That is the global norm, and in the last few centuries borders were defined around those cultural groups (in Europe, at least).

I think the nation-state is fairly recent, relatively speaking. For example, the Austro-Hungarian Empire had many different nationalities and religions among their subjects. Spain is still a country with local languages and cultural traditions, despite having been one country for centuries. The Ottoman Empire was also heterogenous.

I suspect the reason you never think about what it means to be Swedish is a direct result of being part of a dominant monoculture. Most people don't think about what it means to be part of their in-group at all, but especially if their group is dominant. I bet it's really easy for you to point out what not-Swedish looks like though - as you did with Norwegians. (That is part of privilege. Not [category] privilege. Just privilege. It is really hard to see from the inside.)

It's not just that. I mean, I am not a nationalist. I think that while the background of a person can certainly be interesting and important, it is much more interesting and important to know what values and views a person has. The former can't be chosen, the latter can.

If anyone think I am wrong in my estimation, then please tell that, and explain why.

The family is my daughter's aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, etc., mostly in Oslo, Brekstad, and Stokkøya.

Hmm, apart from Oslo then, sparsely populated places. Maybe it's a reason. I don't know. But as I wrote before, Norway is more nationalistic, or culturally conservative, probably for historical reasons, compared to us, so it might be a reason.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 10, 2019, 04:27:49 PM
My point was merely that most people in the U.S. see Canada as being just like us, while most Canadians are offended by the idea. And there are very real and significant differences even though we share a cultural background.

What people are offended by is irrelevant to the truth of anything.

And yes, they are not copies. But on a global measure in comparison to many other countries, they are closely aligned when it comes to societal values.

Both supporters and detractors seem to view the US as very uniquely different compared to all other countries. But various surveys of societal values across the world don't support that notion.

See also the below chart. The US and Canada are close to each other, as are the other English-speaking countries.

(https://www.iffs.se/media/1906/culturemap_may2015.jpeg)

Cool graphic. Thanks for that. While the U.S. and Canada are closer to each other than they are to many distant parts of the world, the graphic places them pretty far apart to my eye.

There is certainly a distance between them, but compared to the world as a whole, they are pretty close to each other.

This probably is more obvious if you live in it, compared to if you are not. I could point to many differences between Norway and Sweden, but they wouldn't really be much of differences to outsiders.

Canadians see the differences and feel strongly about them. U.S.-ers don’t. That’s a generalization, but it’s a fairly reliable one. I see the differences because I’ve spent so many summers there, but I’m sure I don’t see as many or as significant differences as Canadians see.

As you say, compared to the world as a whole, we have many similarities. And yet we are very different. To someone in Siberia, I am sure North Kihei and South Kihei (in Maui, Hawaii) would seem identical. And yet to me, they have decidedly different character.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 10, 2019, 04:48:47 PM
Can anyone knowledgeable summarize what Canadians think about the US?  I grew up in Detroit, so I had frequent interactions with Canadians, but that was decades ago. I‘m wondering what the current perception is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 10, 2019, 07:03:37 PM
Canada rightly prides itself on being a multicultural nation, as contrasted to the U.S. “melting pot.” Therefore I’m sure there are many different views of U.S.-ers among Canadians.

My recent experience of Canada and Canadians is from hiking in southeastern British Columbia for the past dozen years or so. The Canadians I encounter generally like U.S.-ers while being disgusted with the baboon in the White House and the ridiculous electoral college system that so often gives the office to the person rejected by the voters.

(I generally try to avoid using the word “American” to refer to a citizen of the U.S. since the North American continent includes Canada and Mexico as well as the U.S., and the Central and South American continents include a bunch of other countries as well. Mexicans have a suitable word, “Estadounidense,” though they seldom use it, “Americano” being more common.)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 10, 2019, 11:11:22 PM
Quetz, it seems we mostly agree on this part of the conversation: Northern Europe was not isolated, had a strong and relatively continuous cultural development, and drew nation-lines around bits in the last few centuries.

On the rural/urban thing in Norway - all of them are disgusted by the French approach to Muslim immigration. I mean, after drinking a bunch at a party I had rural Norwegians quite angrily loud about the way the French put their muslims in slums, and so on. Also, "why is Mohammad such a popular name here now?" Cognitive dissonance is still running strong - but from what I've seen they are making some progress.

There is certainly a distance between them, but compared to the world as a whole, they are pretty close to each other.

As a Swede at the very top right of the map it may be hard to get a sense of what it's like in the mushy middle. The relative difference between Canada and the US is the same as Uruguay and Croatia on that diagram. This makes me think the axis chosen should not be linear. I think the apparently large space between Sweden and Norway is magnified, and the apparently small space between Vietnam and Portugal is compressed. I feel like it should be plotted on an inverse-logarithmic scale, where the first step on the X and Y axis is halved for the next step, and so on. Visually, that would put Canada and the US much closer together, and places like South Africa and India much further apart.

Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 12, 2019, 03:09:38 PM
Canada rightly prides itself on being a multicultural nation, as contrasted to the U.S. “melting pot.” Therefore I’m sure there are many different views of U.S.-ers among Canadians.

My recent experience of Canada and Canadians is from hiking in southeastern British Columbia for the past dozen years or so. The Canadians I encounter generally like U.S.-ers while being disgusted with the baboon in the White House and the ridiculous electoral college system that so often gives the office to the person rejected by the voters.

(I generally try to avoid using the word “American” to refer to a citizen of the U.S. since the North American continent includes Canada and Mexico as well as the U.S., and the Central and South American continents include a bunch of other countries as well. Mexicans have a suitable word, “Estadounidense,” though they seldom use it, “Americano” being more common.)

If I may ask, what is the difference between "multicultural" and "melting pot", both in theory and in practice? To my eyes at least, both the US and Canada are two countries that have succeeded well in integration of immigrants, at least compared to many European countries. And I think the general view over here is that both the US and Canada are much better than us at doing so.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, as always. But from what I know and have read, it seems to be the case.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 12, 2019, 03:15:55 PM
Well, there's a different model for success for the two countries (whether either one actually meets the model is a different discussion).

The US model is that immigrants are welcomed, and in a generation or two turn into Americans.

The Canadian model is that immigrants are welcomed, and the equilibrium between all the various immigrants and all the previous Canadians is constantly shifting to a new definition of what "Canadian" means.  They change some, the rest of us change some (just by relative size they change more than we do), and a new normal is attained.

Like I said, it is very much up for debate whether this actually happens, or how successfully, but that's sort of what the target is.

It's kind of like two bell curves, with the same mean, but one is wider than the other.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Morvis13 on February 12, 2019, 03:22:16 PM
I would have said the US is failing at 'integration of immigrants'. Unless of course they are from specific rich white countries. The idea of the melting pot is everyone becomes the same. In this case they all become US citizens by renouncing any culture or traditions.

In Canada diversity is more welcome and integrated to a multi-cultural richness. Diversity is celebrated instead of forced conformity.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 12, 2019, 03:29:43 PM
Quetz, it seems we mostly agree on this part of the conversation: Northern Europe was not isolated, had a strong and relatively continuous cultural development, and drew nation-lines around bits in the last few centuries.

I agree. To be notes, quite a lot of the current borders were drawn after WW1 and WW2.

On the rural/urban thing in Norway - all of them are disgusted by the French approach to Muslim immigration. I mean, after drinking a bunch at a party I had rural Norwegians quite angrily loud about the way the French put their muslims in slums, and so on. Also, "why is Mohammad such a popular name here now?" Cognitive dissonance is still running strong - but from what I've seen they are making some progress.

I'm not really very familiar with France in this regard. I would apprecaite if you could elaborate, or point to appropriate sources.

However, that Muhammad is the most common baby name in Norway appears to be an urban myth, which I suspected. I don't know how much Norwegian/Swedish you can read, but this site (https://www.minbebis.com/artiklar/norska-namn-norges-100-vanligaste-flicknamn-och-pojknamn.html) lists the most common baby names for females followed by males in 2017. Turns out the most common male name is Jakob/Jacob. Muhammad (including all variant spellings) was at place 24.

There is certainly a distance between them, but compared to the world as a whole, they are pretty close to each other.

As a Swede at the very top right of the map it may be hard to get a sense of what it's like in the mushy middle. The relative difference between Canada and the US is the same as Uruguay and Croatia on that diagram. This makes me think the axis chosen should not be linear. I think the apparently large space between Sweden and Norway is magnified, and the apparently small space between Vietnam and Portugal is compressed. I feel like it should be plotted on an inverse-logarithmic scale, where the first step on the X and Y axis is halved for the next step, and so on. Visually, that would put Canada and the US much closer together, and places like South Africa and India much further apart.

Interesting idea. I also appreciate that the map may not be completely perfect in its positions, but at least fairly accurate.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: 2397 on February 12, 2019, 03:41:54 PM
Muhammad is the most popular name specifically in Oslo, where there's a greater share of immigrant families.

https://www.abcnyheter.no/livet/2014/03/14/195061/de-mest-populaere-navnene-fra-1995-2014-for-hvert-fylke

https://www.nrk.no/ostlandssendingen/mohammed-vanligste-navn-i-oslo-1.11898780

Note that it's often one of several names people have, and there's no other equivalent naming structure, as far as I know. Christian kids aren't called Jesus Knut and Jesus Per. Many have multiple names, but with more variety so they don't add up in the statistics at the same rate.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 12, 2019, 03:50:02 PM
I would have said the US is failing at 'integration of immigrants'. Unless of course they are from specific rich white countries. The idea of the melting pot is everyone becomes the same. In this case they all become US citizens by renouncing any culture or traditions.

In Canada diversity is more welcome and integrated to a multi-cultural richness. Diversity is celebrated instead of forced conformity.

That isn't my impression of the US.

The US has Chinatowns and Japantowns. There is a significant Armenian community in Los Angeles since the 1920s. There is Tehrangeles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehrangeles). A lot of Americans also seem very aware of the roots of their ancestors, like Ireland, Italy, Germany, Wales, etc.

In short, people becoming part of mainstream society, while maintaining some cultural traditions from their origin. Which seems perfectly appropriate to me. If I moved to another country, I wouldn't want to isolate myself from the mainstream society. Becoming American seems not to require to cut all ties with your background.

I also wonder how this is different from Canada in practice. I mean, I suppose Canadians of various ethnicities intermarry, which would create mixed-ethnic children grown up in Canada. Who I assume would feel more at home in Canada than in their parents' countries of origin.

And by measures of socioeconomic performance of immigrants, the US performs very well. Indian Americans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Americans) and Iranian Americans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Americans) are among the most successful groups, showing that it is not just people of European origin that succeed there.

To take other examples, Jews, who have historically been subject to much persecution (still are in some places), are also well integrated into American society. Probably the most persecuted ethnic group in Europe, the Romani people, seem well established in the US (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_Americans).

Compare this to the situation of Turkish immigrants to Germany (which took off in the 1960s, and the situation is less rosy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_in_Germany#Integration):

Quote
Turkish immigrants make up Germany's second biggest immigrant group with almost 3 million people and are very poorly integrated, ranked last in Berlin Institute's integration ranking.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 12, 2019, 03:51:56 PM
Canada rightly prides itself on being a multicultural nation, as contrasted to the U.S. “melting pot.” Therefore I’m sure there are many different views of U.S.-ers among Canadians.

My recent experience of Canada and Canadians is from hiking in southeastern British Columbia for the past dozen years or so. The Canadians I encounter generally like U.S.-ers while being disgusted with the baboon in the White House and the ridiculous electoral college system that so often gives the office to the person rejected by the voters.

(I generally try to avoid using the word “American” to refer to a citizen of the U.S. since the North American continent includes Canada and Mexico as well as the U.S., and the Central and South American continents include a bunch of other countries as well. Mexicans have a suitable word, “Estadounidense,” though they seldom use it, “Americano” being more common.)

If I may ask, what is the difference between "multicultural" and "melting pot", both in theory and in practice? To my eyes at least, both the US and Canada are two countries that have succeeded well in integration of immigrants, at least compared to many European countries. And I think the general view over here is that both the US and Canada are much better than us at doing so.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, as always. But from what I know and have read, it seems to be the case.

I would say the difference is in the ideal:

The ideal in the U.S. is that immigrants need to adopt the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture and language. They should “become Americans.” That this does not necessarily happen is both a good thing and a failure of the ideal. It worked on my mother, who as a little girl was made to feel so ashamed of her parents for not speaking English, that she rejected their culture, and I was never exposed to it except for a few hours a year at large family gatherings. I am an ethnic Jew but I know virtually nothing of Jewish culture or religion. In the U.S. it is widely regarded as a bad thing when an immigrant family preserves its cultural traditions or its language. Hispanics in the U.S. are widely excoriated for failing to learn English, even though in my experience working with migrant farm workers most children of immigrants are fully bilingual. I don’t know if that’s the case in self-contained Hispanic communities.

The ideal in Canada is to celebrate cultural diversity. Learn English or French but keep your traditions, language, foods, clothing, etc. My experience of Canada is too limited to comment on how well this works. I know Canadians who after several generations still speak their ancestral language, as well as English.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 12, 2019, 03:52:51 PM
Well, there's a different model for success for the two countries (whether either one actually meets the model is a different discussion).

The US model is that immigrants are welcomed, and in a generation or two turn into Americans.

The Canadian model is that immigrants are welcomed, and the equilibrium between all the various immigrants and all the previous Canadians is constantly shifting to a new definition of what "Canadian" means.  They change some, the rest of us change some (just by relative size they change more than we do), and a new normal is attained.

Like I said, it is very much up for debate whether this actually happens, or how successfully, but that's sort of what the target is.

It's kind of like two bell curves, with the same mean, but one is wider than the other.

Fair enough. I still have a hard time to see what the difference in practice would be. In both cases, it seems like immigrants become part of the mainstream society (either American or Canadian) while retaining some of their customs of background origin.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 12, 2019, 03:54:40 PM
Muhammad is the most popular name specifically in Oslo, where there's a greater share of immigrant families.

https://www.abcnyheter.no/livet/2014/03/14/195061/de-mest-populaere-navnene-fra-1995-2014-for-hvert-fylke

https://www.nrk.no/ostlandssendingen/mohammed-vanligste-navn-i-oslo-1.11898780

Note that it's often one of several names people have, and there's no other equivalent naming structure, as far as I know. Christian kids aren't called Jesus Knut and Jesus Per. Many have multiple names, but with more variety so they don't add up in the statistics at the same rate.

The name Jesus (pronounced hay-SOOS) is common in Latin America.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 12, 2019, 10:37:12 PM
I would have said the US is failing at 'integration of immigrants'. Unless of course they are from specific rich white countries. The idea of the melting pot is everyone becomes the same. In this case they all become US citizens by renouncing any culture or traditions.

In Canada diversity is more welcome and integrated to a multi-cultural richness. Diversity is celebrated instead of forced conformity.

That isn't my impression of the US.

The US has Chinatowns and Japantowns. There is a significant Armenian community in Los Angeles since the 1920s. There is Tehrangeles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehrangeles). A lot of Americans also seem very aware of the roots of their ancestors, like Ireland, Italy, Germany, Wales, etc.

In short, people becoming part of mainstream society, while maintaining some cultural traditions from their origin. Which seems perfectly appropriate to me. If I moved to another country, I wouldn't want to isolate myself from the mainstream society. Becoming American seems not to require to cut all ties with your background.

I also wonder how this is different from Canada in practice. I mean, I suppose Canadians of various ethnicities intermarry, which would create mixed-ethnic children grown up in Canada. Who I assume would feel more at home in Canada than in their parents' countries of origin.

And by measures of socioeconomic performance of immigrants, the US performs very well. Indian Americans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Americans) and Iranian Americans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Americans) are among the most successful groups, showing that it is not just people of European origin that succeed there.

To take other examples, Jews, who have historically been subject to much persecution (still are in some places), are also well integrated into American society. Probably the most persecuted ethnic group in Europe, the Romani people, seem well established in the US (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_Americans).

Compare this to the situation of Turkish immigrants to Germany (which took off in the 1960s, and the situation is less rosy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_in_Germany#Integration):

Quote
Turkish immigrants make up Germany's second biggest immigrant group with almost 3 million people and are very poorly integrated, ranked last in Berlin Institute's integration ranking.

It is hard to make good comparisons between most of Europe and the way either Canada or the US work. I think the UK comes closest, having had so much of their former empire become part of the cultural landscape at home.

Canada aims for a mosaic. We tend to think of ourselves as a quilt, where many cultures contribute to the whole by retaining key elements of their history and sharing them with the whole. We are a patchwork culture, and mostly pretty happy about that.

America aims for a melting pot. In theory you arrive unburdened by the sins of your ancestors, and can blend seamlessly into the alloy of American culture. In practice, as Daniel noted, the dominant white culture expects the immigrants and browns to conform to their ideals, while simultaneously appropriating major elements of those cultures, segregating 'foreigners' from the 'real america', and making it damn hard to actually melt into the pot.

Canada's record is not at all spotless here. We've done a lot of shitty things. Still, we mostly believe that more cultures make us more cultured. That added diversity adds to our worth. We absolutely expect a degree of compliance to the dominant culture - but over the last 30 or 40 years we've been adjusting to the idea that the dominant culture isn't one culture. It's a bunch of them all contributing to something quite different from most of the world.

The US is much less integrated than Canada - and we are MUCH less integrated than I think we should be. Even so, our approach to understanding who we are as a nation is not at all like, say France. Their colonial interests in the Muslim world have led to civil unrest. Muslims are routinely shit on in obscenely racist acts. Ghettoization is only a small part of it. Norwegians have been trying to live up to their egalitarian ideals (the French do not have egalitarian ideals as far as I can tell) with their huge influx of Muslim refugees. Like France, they are a monoculture (yes, with regional differences). Unlike France, the believe that it is their responsibility to treat others as if they were as good as Norwegians are.

...That was hard to phrase. I think ethnic Norwegians absolutely believe that they are better than everyone else in the world, while also believing that they are no better than anyone. They care deeply about their history and culture, while also striving to not put it on a pedastal compared to others.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: arthwollipot on February 12, 2019, 11:03:27 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 13, 2019, 01:46:00 PM
Ok, just to help me understand, let's contemplate two cases, one real, and one fictional:

1. Ali Rizvi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_A._Rizvi) is a Pakistan-born Canadian former Muslim, now atheist. He has even written a book called The Atheist Muslim about his experiences. Now by becoming an atheist, he is, I presume, not raising his children to be Muslims. He is also moving closer to the secular(ish) norm of Canada.

2. Now the fictional case. Let's imagine that a bright girl was born in India. She was born into a reasonably well-off family, got herself an education, and makes herself a career. For various reasons she is unhappy about life in India, and relocates to Canada. At one point she meets a handsome Canadian man of English and Welsh descent having been Canadian for several generations, falls in love, marries him, and they have a family together. Being that she is half-Indian, her children are likely to learn about their Indian background and some cultural customs. They probably even learn a little of her language. But being raised in a home in which only one partner speaks a non-English language, English is obviously going to be the main language spoken at home, and also the dominant language in society. Her kids will know English much better than they will know the mother-tongue of their mother.

In both cases, these two individuals, by their choices in life, by some ways of measuring, decreases the diversity in Canadian society. If Rizvi had remained a Muslim, and married another Muslim, rather than becoming an atheist, he and his children would have diverted more from the mainstream rather than if he does not raises his children into any particular religion. Likewise, if our fictional Indian had married another Indian, it is much more likely that Indian culture and traditions and language had been transmitted to the next generation of her descendents.

As I see it, there are basically two possible responses to this. One is a liberal approach of live and let live. Whatever religion, if any, one chooses to have, and who, if anyone, one chooses to marry, are both personal choices, not to be interfered with. the second approach is to in some way try to prevent such inter-mixing either by force of discouraging it by nudging measures. Now Canada being a liberal democracy, I have no doubt that the Canadian authorities would not interfer with personal choices like that, and I personally find the very idea of doing so very repelling. But then the question becomes, what is the practical difference between Canadian society and the American melting pot in this regard? Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate, in an open society they will intermingle, inter-marry, and influence each other, influencing society at large, and becoming influenced by society at large. Which sounds like the American melting pot to my ears.

As for the American melting pot not being inclusive, at least compared to here it seems very inclusive. Here we speak about first-generation immigrants, second-generation immigrants, and even third-generation immigrants. In the US they have first-generation Americans, and so on.

Someone here wrote about Americans "appropriating" cultures, but I'm not bothered since I don't accept "cultural appropriation" as a valid concept. Cultures have always changed and evolved as they are being influenced by others. The American mainstream culture for example got hamburgers from the Germans, and pizzas from the Italians, and now these items are part of the global urban culture.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Shibboleth on February 13, 2019, 02:21:20 PM
The amount of poutine per capita correlates with the quality of life. This is not unexpected.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on February 13, 2019, 02:25:29 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

So is ours, until them damn Europeans started coming  ;)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Shibboleth on February 13, 2019, 02:29:59 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 13, 2019, 02:30:40 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.

The Vikings weren't very different from their contemporary Anglo-Saxons or Franks.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Shibboleth on February 13, 2019, 02:31:32 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.

The Vikings weren't very different from their contemporary Anglo-Saxons or Franks.

Agreed. I am trying to think about when that shift in mentality begins where we start viewing conquest negatively. I would say that it starts around the French Revolution. Most don't look at what Napoleon did positively.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Billzbub on February 13, 2019, 02:48:54 PM
(click to show/hide)

I think the difference is that in American media and social media, America is painted as a country were some of the population wants schools to only teach in English and for immigrants to learn our freaking language.  How accurate is this portrayal?  I think it is actually pretty accurate.  I know my dad feels that way, and so do a lot of conservative racists.  I get the impression that there's a lot more of this kind of thinking in America than there is in Canada.

The term "melting pot" originally meant that America was made up of a lot of different cultures, so I'm surprised to hear it in this thread as a description of the idea that we want immigrants to come but to abandon their original culture.  I wish they had used a different word.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on February 13, 2019, 02:48:59 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.
Pirates still exist. They do reprehensible things. Some skeptics celebrate them. Arrrrrrrr.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Morvis13 on February 13, 2019, 03:07:21 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.
Pirates still exist. They do reprehensible things. Some skeptics celebrate them. Arrrrrrrr.

Almost a Haiku. Good work.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 13, 2019, 04:18:02 PM
Quote from: brilligtove
the French do not have egalitarian ideals as far as I can tell

Isn’t their national slogan “liberté égalité fraternité”?

Pirates still exist. They do reprehensible things. Some skeptics celebrate them. Arrrrrrrr.

I belong to the anti-pirate schism of Pastafarianism. We believe that the Founder erred when he assumed that pirates are good people just because a decrease in their number is the cause of global warming. The correct interpretation is that there is a balance: when one thing gets better, another gets worse. Pirates are vile scoundrels. The reduction in their numbers is a good thing. But the balance between good and evil is maintained by global warming.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 13, 2019, 05:13:34 PM
Quote from: brilligtove
the French do not have egalitarian ideals as far as I can tell

Isn’t their national slogan “liberté égalité fraternité”?

Pirates still exist. They do reprehensible things. Some skeptics celebrate them. Arrrrrrrr.

I belong to the anti-pirate schism of Pastafarianism. We believe that the Founder erred when he assumed that pirates are good people just because a decrease in their number is the cause of global warming. The correct interpretation is that there is a balance: when one thing gets better, another gets worse. Pirates are vile scoundrels. The reduction in their numbers is a good thing. But the balance between good and evil is maintained by global warming.

IIRC that was about killing the nobles, not caring about subhuman darkies.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 13, 2019, 05:28:19 PM
Ok, just to help me understand, let's contemplate two cases, one real, and one fictional:

1. Ali Rizvi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_A._Rizvi) is a Pakistan-born Canadian former Muslim, now atheist. He has even written a book called The Atheist Muslim about his experiences. Now by becoming an atheist, he is, I presume, not raising his children to be Muslims. He is also moving closer to the secular(ish) norm of Canada.

2. Now the fictional case. Let's imagine that a bright girl was born in India. She was born into a reasonably well-off family, got herself an education, and makes herself a career. For various reasons she is unhappy about life in India, and relocates to Canada. At one point she meets a handsome Canadian man of English and Welsh descent having been Canadian for several generations, falls in love, marries him, and they have a family together. Being that she is half-Indian, her children are likely to learn about their Indian background and some cultural customs. They probably even learn a little of her language. But being raised in a home in which only one partner speaks a non-English language, English is obviously going to be the main language spoken at home, and also the dominant language in society. Her kids will know English much better than they will know the mother-tongue of their mother.

In both cases, these two individuals, by their choices in life, by some ways of measuring, decreases the diversity in Canadian society. If Rizvi had remained a Muslim, and married another Muslim, rather than becoming an atheist, he and his children would have diverted more from the mainstream rather than if he does not raises his children into any particular religion. Likewise, if our fictional Indian had married another Indian, it is much more likely that Indian culture and traditions and language had been transmitted to the next generation of her descendents.

As I see it, there are basically two possible responses to this. One is a liberal approach of live and let live. Whatever religion, if any, one chooses to have, and who, if anyone, one chooses to marry, are both personal choices, not to be interfered with. the second approach is to in some way try to prevent such inter-mixing either by force of discouraging it by nudging measures. Now Canada being a liberal democracy, I have no doubt that the Canadian authorities would not interfer with personal choices like that, and I personally find the very idea of doing so very repelling. But then the question becomes, what is the practical difference between Canadian society and the American melting pot in this regard? Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate, in an open society they will intermingle, inter-marry, and influence each other, influencing society at large, and becoming influenced by society at large. Which sounds like the American melting pot to my ears.

As for the American melting pot not being inclusive, at least compared to here it seems very inclusive. Here we speak about first-generation immigrants, second-generation immigrants, and even third-generation immigrants. In the US they have first-generation Americans, and so on.

Someone here wrote about Americans "appropriating" cultures, but I'm not bothered since I don't accept "cultural appropriation" as a valid concept. Cultures have always changed and evolved as they are being influenced by others. The American mainstream culture for example got hamburgers from the Germans, and pizzas from the Italians, and now these items are part of the global urban culture.

To suggest that racial or cultural purity and segregation increases our diveristy is an almost comical misrepresentation of what we call our culture. A complete double-speak inversion. Our culture is based on sharing each other's cultures, not on isolating them. Honestly, I'm a bit shocked.

Immigrants bring their history and culture with them. How they shares those accents, fashions, languages, foods, stories, perspectives, moral centres and more - those are added to our culture. Theymay reinforce the dominant culture in some ways, compliment it, or oppose it in others. The same will be true for their children. Sure, the kids are more Canadian in some sense than their parents. In part that is because what it means to be Canadian has shifted to accomodate who they are, not just forced them to adopt a specific set of correct values.

I have to run, but I'll come back to the rest later tonight.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 13, 2019, 05:34:55 PM
To suggest that racial or cultural purity and segregation increases our diveristy is an almost comical misrepresentation of what we call our culture. A complete double-speak inversion. Our culture is based on sharing each other's cultures, not on isolating them. Honestly, I'm a bit shocked.

I did not intend to suggest that. Just that some of the posts in this thread could be interpreted in that way. I wanted some clarification. I don't think Canada actually practices such a thing. I'm sorry if that was unclearly stated.

Immigrants bring their history and culture with them. How they shares those accents, fashions, languages, foods, stories, perspectives, moral centres and more - those are added to our culture. Theymay reinforce the dominant culture in some ways, compliment it, or oppose it in others. The same will be true for their children. Sure, the kids are more Canadian in some sense than their parents. In part that is because what it means to be Canadian has shifted to accomodate who they are, not just forced them to adopt a specific set of correct values.

To my foreign ears, sounds a lot like that pot south the border.

I have to run, but I'll come back to the rest later tonight.

Looking forward to read it tomorrow. :)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: haudace on February 13, 2019, 06:47:47 PM
As a Canadian layman, I would say that we are not completely sold on the idea of laissez faire economics or unrestrained capitalism. We are not terrified of good socialist policies. If something works, it will be quickly adopted. Your Democrats would be seen as progressive conservatives in Canada. Our conservatives do not even question universal healthcare for instance. Those are the most obvious fundamental differences that I see in both our system of governance and society. We are very liberal social democracy.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 13, 2019, 06:54:25 PM
...I have no doubt that the Canadian authorities would not interfer with personal choices like that, and I personally find the very idea of doing so very repelling. But then the question becomes, what is the practical difference between Canadian society and the American melting pot in this regard? Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate, in an open society they will intermingle, inter-marry, and influence each other, influencing society at large, and becoming influenced by society at large. Which sounds like the American melting pot to my ears.

"Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate..."


If I sound hostile here it's because HOLY SHIT. I don't expect you to have an encyclopedic knowledge of US history, but I can't understand how you could make that statement without an agenda akin to holocaust denialism. Did you forget about...



When my dark skinned Trinidadian father started dating my 5+ generation white mother in a small Ontario farm town in 1965 he was considered exotic, hot, and a catch. Sure, one of her brother's wives was racist and thought that mom was being defiled, but even she had no problem working with black and brown people. Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

FFS, until a few years ago it was illegal to marry across races there!

How are you ignoring this stuff in your argument?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: haudace on February 13, 2019, 07:18:45 PM
Brillig, I also believe the US has an issue with the way they treat their poor or most vulnerable. I used to hear a lot about American dream, not so sure this thing even exists anymore. Income inequality continues to grow https://inequality.org/facts/income-inequality/. We have our own problems of income inequality but we actively fight against it. People like Bernie or Ocasio are not controversial personalities over here. In fact they would make very boring politicians in Canada. Preaching to the choir, I know.

Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: arthwollipot on February 13, 2019, 09:18:01 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.

The Vikings weren't very different from their contemporary Anglo-Saxons or Franks.

Right, but the history of Norway has a lot going on other than Vikings, which by most definitions were really only around for about 250 years.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on February 14, 2019, 09:49:49 AM
"All of the people in solitary confinement in one way or another are suffering and sometimes that suffering turns into damage, and sometimes the damage proves irreversible, even fatal. "

"On any given day there are about 340 inmates being held in solitary across Canada. It's called administrative or disciplinary segregation. "


Quotations above are from the latest Quirks and Quarks podcast,

https://podcast-a.akamaihd.net/mp3/podcasts/quirksaio-AQrpmdqw-20190208.mp3 (https://podcast-a.akamaihd.net/mp3/podcasts/quirksaio-AQrpmdqw-20190208.mp3)

That show prompted me to watch a 2014 CBC documentary on YouTube titled Inside Canada's Prisons. I think this is one area where Canada falls short of being #1. Some of your prisons are rough, violent places. At the conclusion of the documentary it is pointed out that people travel from other parts of the world to study Canada's prisons. You could do far worse than land in one of Canada's facilities. It also appears that some of your politicians are hell bent on appearing tough on crime. Kinda reminds me of home.

I'm led to believe places like Germany and Norway are onto something others have yet to grasp. But admittedly I know little about corrections.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 14, 2019, 12:32:21 PM
Your Democrats

I'm not an American.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 14, 2019, 01:07:33 PM
...I have no doubt that the Canadian authorities would not interfer with personal choices like that, and I personally find the very idea of doing so very repelling. But then the question becomes, what is the practical difference between Canadian society and the American melting pot in this regard? Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate, in an open society they will intermingle, inter-marry, and influence each other, influencing society at large, and becoming influenced by society at large. Which sounds like the American melting pot to my ears.

"Unless you take forceable measures to keep groups separate..."


If I sound hostile here it's because HOLY SHIT. I don't expect you to have an encyclopedic knowledge of US history, but I can't understand how you could make that statement without an agenda akin to holocaust denialism. Did you forget about...

  • Slavery?
  • Black men transitioned from slavery to forced lavour in the prison system?
  • Lynching, assassination, violent unrest over the colour of your skin? Race riots over school integration?
  • Millions of Americans today still suffering from deeply institutionalized racism?
  • Disaster response in Puerto Rico? New Orleans before it?


When my dark skinned Trinidadian father started dating my 5+ generation white mother in a small Ontario farm town in 1965 he was considered exotic, hot, and a catch. Sure, one of her brother's wives was racist and thought that mom was being defiled, but even she had no problem working with black and brown people. Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

FFS, until a few years ago it was illegal to marry across races there!

How are you ignoring this stuff in your argument?

I was told in this thread that Canada and the US have totally different approaches to integration and immigrants. I wrote that in practice they seemed pretty similar, and that Canada doesn't appear very different from the American melting pot. Apart from amysrevenge who seemed to doubt that they are very different in practice, there have been no responses showing those significant differences, apart from various suggestions along the themes that Canadians are open-minded and embrace diversity, and Americans are narrow-minded, turn everyone into Americans, and that immigrants in the US are expected to completely cut ties with their roots. Which are not arguments at all.

Because of that, I took some examples, asking to be shown the radical difference, and you react by being offended.

So I ask again: What is the radical difference? If Canada does not take measures (and I assume it does not) to prevent mixing between groups, or between "races", which seems to be the local obsession around here, then those groups will over time mix with each other, they won't remain unaffected. Which sounds like the American melting pot, to my ears.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 14, 2019, 01:10:15 PM
Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

An appalling story to be sure, but I don't think mid-1960's Louisiana was a good representative sample of the entirety of US culture during the Civil Rights era.

That said, I certainly don't mean to diminish the influence of racism in the US. Race relations seemed to have steadily improved over the course of the 1980s, '90s, and early aughts, but for some reason it's deteriorated very quickly since about 2007 or so.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 14, 2019, 01:32:31 PM
To be fair, the history of Norway is fucking aweseome.

It is but I am always amazed that we look back on ancient historical people way differently than current populations. Could you imagine if there was a group of people like the Vikings today running around. We would revile them.

The Vikings weren't very different from their contemporary Anglo-Saxons or Franks.

Right, but the history of Norway has a lot going on other than Vikings, which by most definitions were really only around for about 250 years.

You mean like when we annexed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treaty_of_Br%C3%B6msebro_(1645)) a significant part of their territory? :P ;)

I was responding to the implication that the Vikings were unusually violent compared to their contemporaries.

I think that Norway was not an independent country for most of the last millennium.

If you are interested in Norwegian or Scandinavian history, you should read about Jämtland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A4mtland). I've never been there unfortunately, but I think it has possible the coolest history of all the Nordic provinces.

From Wikipedia:

Quote
Jämtland was originally an autonomous peasant republic, its own nation with its own law, currency and parliament. However, Jämtland lacked a public administration and was thus best regarded as an anarchy, in its true meaning. Jämtland was conquered by Norway in 1178 and stayed Norwegian for over 450 years until it was ceded to Sweden in 1645. The province has since been Swedish for roughly 370 years, though the population did not gain Swedish citizenship until 1699. The province's identity is manifested with the concept of a republic within the kingdom of Sweden, although this is only done semi-seriously.

...

Historically, socially and politically Jämtland has been a special territory between Norway and Sweden. This in itself is symbolized in the province's coat of arms where Jämtland, the silver moose, is threatened from the east and from the west. During the unrest period in Jämtland's history (1563–1677) it shifted alignment between the two states no less than 13 times.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 14, 2019, 02:05:55 PM
Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

An appalling story to be sure, but I don't think mid-1960's Louisiana was a good representative sample of the entirety of US culture during the Civil Rights era.

That said, I certainly don't mean to diminish the influence of racism in the US. Race relations seemed to have steadily improved over the course of the 1980s, '90s, and early aughts, but for some reason it's deteriorated very quickly since about 2007 or so.

That was not the only US city where they had trouble on their drive South from Toronto, but the anecdote was to add colour to the list of problems that the US has had with both cultural and explicit legally mandated segregation and racism over the last century or so. Slavery, forced labour in prison, lynching, assassination, violent unrest and race riots, and federal abstention from helping the brown and poor people with disaster relief, and even gerrymandering and voter suppression - those are not anecdotes.

I was told in this thread that Canada and the US have totally different approaches to integration and immigrants. I wrote that in practice they seemed pretty similar, and that Canada doesn't appear very different from the American melting pot. Apart from amysrevenge who seemed to doubt that they are very different in practice, there have been no responses showing those significant differences, apart from various suggestions along the themes that Canadians are open-minded and embrace diversity, and Americans are narrow-minded, turn everyone into Americans, and that immigrants in the US are expected to completely cut ties with their roots. Which are not arguments at all.

I confused by your claim my words are "not arguments at all." I have been making claims backed by evidence and examples.

I did not claim that the US and Canadian immigrant experience is totally different. I said your arguments and studies minimize significant differeneces and emphasize similarities. My attempts to explain these differences and their significance does not appear to be connecting with you. The differences that you dismiss lead to things like the US attempting to deal with illegal border crossings by building increasingly punitive and murderous border barriers on their southern border, and Canada budgeting $173 million in extra funds to help accomodate the asylum seekers.[1]

Because of that, I took some examples, asking to be shown the radical difference, and you react by being offended.

I'm not clear on what 'because of that' refers to. You seem to be attempting to say that the US and Canada have the same relationship with immigration because of superficial similarities that are not borne out in the actual immigrant experience in these countries.

That is not why I'm offended though.

You specifically claimed that Canada and the US are the same in this way because Canadian governments do not regulate segregation or desegregation among our immigrant and dominant cultures. This utterly ignores centuries of systematic segregation, oppression, and enslavement of blacks in the US. This is akin to ignoring the effects of apartied in South Africa when considering their culture.

Slavery and the follow-on effects that are still felt today are an enormous influence on US immigration.[2] Dismissing that reality as irrelevant offends me.

So I ask again: What is the radical difference? If Canada does not take measures (and I assume it does not) to prevent mixing between groups, or between "races", which seems to be the local obsession around here, then those groups will over time mix with each other, they won't remain unaffected. Which sounds like the American melting pot, to my ears.

Canadian government and society are rarely involved in active segregation.

American governments and society are frequently involved in active segregation.

Is that clear?

=====
[1] This is well short of the estimated $400M that is needed to really accomodate them well, but it is still an action that is diametrically opposed to the American approach. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pbo-budget-officer-asylum-seekers-costs-1.4924364

[2] Canada was lucky enough to dodge that particular horror. I don't think that was because we were particularly better than Americans. I suspect having a Colonial Master of our own limited our ability to adopt that practice. We certainly mirror many other American atrocities over the last few centuries.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 14, 2019, 02:09:57 PM
Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

An appalling story to be sure, but I don't think mid-1960's Louisiana was a good representative sample of the entirety of US culture during the Civil Rights era.

That said, I certainly don't mean to diminish the influence of racism in the US. Race relations seemed to have steadily improved over the course of the 1980s, '90s, and early aughts, but for some reason it's deteriorated very quickly since about 2007 or so.

That was not the only US city where they had trouble on their drive South from Toronto, but the anecdote was to add colour to the list of problems that the US has had with both cultural and explicit legally mandated segregation and racism over the last century or so. Slavery, forced labour in prison, lynching, assassination, violent unrest and race riots, and federal abstention from helping the brown and poor people with disaster relief, and even gerrymandering and voter suppression - those are not anecdotes.

Oh, I know. And it's getting worse.

I'm starting to feel desperate to leave this country, and I'm a white guy. I just don't want to have any part of it anymore.

But at the same time I'm conflicted, because the ability to pick up and leave is a privilege I might have that others don't. If I leave, am I not abandoning those less fortunate? Wouldn't I be shirking my civil responsibility to my homeland, to stay and contribute my voice, vote, and actions to the cause of reforming this mess?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 14, 2019, 02:27:27 PM
Oh, I know. And it's getting worse.

I'm starting to feel desperate to leave this country, and I'm a white guy. I just don't want to have any part of it anymore.

But at the same time I'm conflicted, because the ability to pick up and leave is a privilege I might have that others don't. If I leave, am I not abandoning those less fortunate? Wouldn't I be shirking my civil responsibility to my homeland, to stay and contribute my voice, vote, and actions to the cause of reforming this mess?

People emigrate to seek gain and avoid loss - usually both. The relative value you place on the quality of life of others and of yourself drives a decision that is rarely all-positive. The romantic myth of "seeking your fortune" ignores the bittersweet-to-terrifying range of reasons people leave a place.

What I'm saying is I'm not surprised you're conflicted. If you were not it would be because your situation was so dire that there was nothing left to lose. Almost any move away from existential danger is a move toward less worse.


Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 14, 2019, 02:48:29 PM
Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

An appalling story to be sure, but I don't think mid-1960's Louisiana was a good representative sample of the entirety of US culture during the Civil Rights era.

That said, I certainly don't mean to diminish the influence of racism in the US. Race relations seemed to have steadily improved over the course of the 1980s, '90s, and early aughts, but for some reason it's deteriorated very quickly since about 2007 or so.

That was not the only US city where they had trouble on their drive South from Toronto, but the anecdote was to add colour to the list of problems that the US has had with both cultural and explicit legally mandated segregation and racism over the last century or so. Slavery, forced labour in prison, lynching, assassination, violent unrest and race riots, and federal abstention from helping the brown and poor people with disaster relief, and even gerrymandering and voter suppression - those are not anecdotes.

Oh, I know. And it's getting worse.

I'm starting to feel desperate to leave this country, and I'm a white guy. I just don't want to have any part of it anymore.

But at the same time I'm conflicted, because the ability to pick up and leave is a privilege I might have that others don't. If I leave, am I not abandoning those less fortunate? Wouldn't I be shirking my civil responsibility to my homeland, to stay and contribute my voice, vote, and actions to the cause of reforming this mess?

People leave their countries for all sorts of reasons. And even if you are an expat, you can still vote. At least Swedes living abroad can vote in our elections. And I have known some dual American-Swedish citizens who live here who vote in American elections.

You have to strike a balance. Yes, you'd like to be a voice in your country, but you'd also look for a good life for you personally. One should also be careful not to over-idealize the rest of the world. It has benefits compared to the present situation, but it also has drawbacks.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 14, 2019, 06:31:31 PM
Around the same time dad went on a road trip to New Orleans. When a white woman hugged him in public<ref>Another teacher from Milton who travelled there with her friends and met up with dad and his friends.</ref> traffic fucking stopped and he had so flee for his life. They still had goddamn colored drinking fountains and bathrooms then!

An appalling story to be sure, but I don't think mid-1960's Louisiana was a good representative sample of the entirety of US culture during the Civil Rights era.

That said, I certainly don't mean to diminish the influence of racism in the US. Race relations seemed to have steadily improved over the course of the 1980s, '90s, and early aughts, but for some reason it's deteriorated very quickly since about 2007 or so.

That was not the only US city where they had trouble on their drive South from Toronto, but the anecdote was to add colour to the list of problems that the US has had with both cultural and explicit legally mandated segregation and racism over the last century or so. Slavery, forced labour in prison, lynching, assassination, violent unrest and race riots, and federal abstention from helping the brown and poor people with disaster relief, and even gerrymandering and voter suppression - those are not anecdotes.

Oh, I know. And it's getting worse.

I'm starting to feel desperate to leave this country, and I'm a white guy. I just don't want to have any part of it anymore.

But at the same time I'm conflicted, because the ability to pick up and leave is a privilege I might have that others don't. If I leave, am I not abandoning those less fortunate? Wouldn't I be shirking my civil responsibility to my homeland, to stay and contribute my voice, vote, and actions to the cause of reforming this mess?

Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: bachfiend on February 14, 2019, 10:17:03 PM
I have no idea how the Canadian government worked, so I looked it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Canada

I still have no idea how the Canadian government works.

Like most democratic governments, the answer is "just barely". Personally I am quite happy with this. When governments get good act acting swiftly we can have awful outcome really fast.

I was going to note that the Australian government works in much the same way as the Canadian government, both using the Westminster system, and generally works very well.

Except, not at the moment.  The current conservative Liberal/National Party Australian one is in minority government to the liberal Labor Party Opposition and combined independent cross-benchers, some of whom are conservatives, and also to the other Opposition of ultra-conservatives within the government itself.

So it’s doing little, until the next election in a few months.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 15, 2019, 06:16:16 AM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?

Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 15, 2019, 05:50:46 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 16, 2019, 08:07:59 AM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.
Humans are intrinsically altruistic to the in-group, and intrinsically form in-groups. Indoctrination makes use of this. It does not cause this.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 16, 2019, 06:01:44 PM
So I ask again: What is the radical difference? If Canada does not take measures (and I assume it does not) to prevent mixing between groups, or between "races", which seems to be the local obsession around here, then those groups will over time mix with each other, they won't remain unaffected. Which sounds like the American melting pot, to my ears.

Canadian government and society are rarely involved in active segregation.

American governments and society are frequently involved in active segregation.

Is that clear?

Am I misinterpreting?  Did we find common ground? What is your response?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 16, 2019, 06:05:22 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.
Humans are intrinsically altruistic to the in-group, and intrinsically form in-groups.

Well, I guess that absolves us all of individual responsibility.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 16, 2019, 06:59:29 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.
Humans are intrinsically altruistic to the in-group, and intrinsically form in-groups.

Well, I guess that absolves us all of individual responsibility.

I mentioned the natures side to compliment the nurture side you stated. Both are relevant to the discussion.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 16, 2019, 07:47:08 PM
So I ask again: What is the radical difference? If Canada does not take measures (and I assume it does not) to prevent mixing between groups, or between "races", which seems to be the local obsession around here, then those groups will over time mix with each other, they won't remain unaffected. Which sounds like the American melting pot, to my ears.

Canadian government and society are rarely involved in active segregation.

American governments and society are frequently involved in active segregation.

Is that clear?

Am I misinterpreting?  Did we find common ground? What is your response?

It will come, probably tomorrow.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 16, 2019, 09:40:40 PM
Thx
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 17, 2019, 03:22:09 PM
So I ask again: What is the radical difference? If Canada does not take measures (and I assume it does not) to prevent mixing between groups, or between "races", which seems to be the local obsession around here, then those groups will over time mix with each other, they won't remain unaffected. Which sounds like the American melting pot, to my ears.

Canadian government and society are rarely involved in active segregation.

American governments and society are frequently involved in active segregation.

Is that clear?

Am I misinterpreting?  Did we find common ground? What is your response?

You are referring to past American policies. By decree of the American supreme court, segregation became illegal in the 1960s. The Canadian policy of multiculturalism was established in the 1970s. In other words, both countries have become more tolerant in recent decades, as have all Western countries, really. It does not seem fair to me to compare Canada today with the US in the 1960s and before. Canada may not have the US's history of slavery and segregation, but I'd be surprised if it deviated from the Western norm before the 1970s. The general "argument" in the thread still seems to be that Canadians are tolerant and enlightened and Americans are narrow-minded and intolerant. The US makes immigrants Americans, while Canada... doesn't make immigrants Canadians?

What we should look at is what those countries are like today.

From here (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9602218.html#msg9602218):

Quote
In practice, as Daniel noted, the dominant white culture expects the immigrants and browns to conform to their ideals

This obsession with skin color is perplexing. I have argued (online) with (Swedish) right-wing populists, and even many of them are much less interested in skin color compared to what lots of people on this forum apparently are.

And no matter what skin color you have, if you move to another country, you will often have to adapt to some of the customs, practices and ways of doing things there. Hardly unique for the US, and I could bet you a lot of money that it is also true for Canada.

Quote
while simultaneously appropriating major elements of those cultures

This nonsensical concept again. The melting pot means that various cultural elements become part of the greater whole, the pot, so to speak. Like hamburgers and pizzas, like we discussed earlier. Cultures evolve by adopting foreign influences. This is only a problem if you consider intermixing to be a problem.

Over here, potatoes are an important part of our food. Yet it is by no means native to this part of the world. It came originally from South America, and was introduced here in the 17th century, probably by returning soldiers from the 30 Years War. It has become an important part of our cuisine by cultural evolution over the centuries.

I'd say that pretty much every decently sized city with people from all sorts of backgrounds are kind of melting pots today. Different cultures meet, influence each other, and evolve as a response. Again, only a problem if you consider intermixing to be a problem.

Quote
segregating 'foreigners' from the 'real america', and making it damn hard to actually melt into the pot.

Compared to here, it doesn't seem the case. The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 18, 2019, 07:57:15 PM
Let's start at the top.

Here is a short list of Post-Civil Rights era race riots in the US:
For much more visit Wikipedia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States).

Here is a list of Post-Civil Rights era race riots in Canada (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Race_riots_in_Canada):
If you want to be generous and include the civil rights era we can expand Canada's list to this:
To be fair we'd need to add US rioting from the same time, of course. Let's start with the Long Hot Summer of 1967. There were 159 race riots that year alone.

How do you explain this difference if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 19, 2019, 12:40:32 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.

I don't see it so simple as that.

Is civic responsibility nothing more than indoctrination into a "tribe"?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 19, 2019, 01:23:27 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.

I don't see it so simple as that.

Is civic responsibility nothing more than indoctrination into a "tribe"?

It is not obvious to me why one would automatically feel a responsibility to his "homeland."
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 19, 2019, 02:44:35 PM
Just speaking for myself, I regard the nation-state as a bad thing. I'm on record as advocating open borders. And I like H.L. Menken's aphorism that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. I certainly do not regard anyone as a scoundrel for feeling the need to remain in their country of birth with a view toward making it a more just and tolerant place. But I feel strongly that everyone has a right to live where they choose. If I had not managed to dodge the draft in 1967, I'd have gone to Canada, without the slightest feeling that I had any obligation to the USA.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 20, 2019, 12:31:04 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

I have been pointing out a lot of shitty things that happen or happened in the US in this thread. I'm not anti-American. Overall I like the country, enjoy their culture, use their tech, and like visiting. Some of my in-laws are republicans, even. :)

I love Canada, but it is no utopia either. We have a lot of stains on our history too, and some of them are still hurting people. The legacy of slavery and white supremacy is vast, however, and institutionalized in all sorts of ways.

You are referring to past American policies.

You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 20, 2019, 03:08:59 PM
You are referring to past American policies.

You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.

I did not say the countries are completely alike. I said that when it comes to integration, both countries are (here) cited as successful at it, and in practice they seem to do it rather similarly. Might be because neither of them are nation-states.

I thought it was obvious that I meant that today they appear to do integration similarly. I did not keep 1962 or 1838 or any other year in mind, and it is not reasonable to expect me to account for every single year if we are speaking about today.

I don't think there have been any responses to the claim that the integrations in the US and Canada look rather similar except that Canada is good and the US is bad (and variants thereof), and references to various events that took place in the US decades or even centuries ago, that are not really strictly about integration in many cases in the first place.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 20, 2019, 04:58:15 PM
You are referring to past American policies.

You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.

I did not say the countries are completely alike. I said that when it comes to integration, both countries are (here) cited as successful at it, and in practice they seem to do it rather similarly. Might be because neither of them are nation-states.

I thought it was obvious that I meant that today they appear to do integration similarly. I did not keep 1962 or 1838 or any other year in mind, and it is not reasonable to expect me to account for every single year if we are speaking about today.

I don't think there have been any responses to the claim that the integrations in the US and Canada look rather similar except that Canada is good and the US is bad (and variants thereof), and references to various events that took place in the US decades or even centuries ago, that are not really strictly about integration in many cases in the first place.

I don't expect you to know much about the history I'm citing. I'm learning too.

I do want your take on this question: How do you explain the current differences in racial/cultural tension and violence if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?

The immigrant experience is directly connected to this question.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 20, 2019, 05:40:25 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 20, 2019, 06:29:56 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors, however, which is why I think "indoctrination" is too strong a word. If you don't fit into a group like a country, you may be able to leave it voluntarily1 or you may be involuntarily ejected or killed.2 Similarly, you may not be able to voluntarily join a country3 or you may be forced to.4

I do agree with you that your country of birth is not special in any way, any more than you are special in any way. (Neither am I.)

====
[1]Emmigration, fleeing war.
[2]Killed by the State for being gay.
[3]No green card for you!
[4]Internment camps at the border instead of being allowed into the country.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 20, 2019, 07:04:09 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 20, 2019, 08:03:48 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.

You are correct about eventually being an adult and making informed choices. You seem to think that we have some sort of existential radical free will in those choices though. We don't. You also seem to be arguing that humans do not have a powerful inborn drive to be part of a group. I mean, you may have some choices about what group you belong to in some cases, sure. Humans don't really have much choice about being part of groups though. I mean there are are hermits, but even they are part of groups.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 20, 2019, 08:07:39 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.

You are correct about eventually being an adult and making informed choices.

Yes.  Period.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 20, 2019, 08:29:55 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

100% agree with the above.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 20, 2019, 08:49:23 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

100% agree with the above.

Well, that's a comment I don't often get! 
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 20, 2019, 09:13:38 PM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.

You are correct about eventually being an adult and making informed choices.

Yes.  Period.

Fine. You're 100% correct.

Now explain why humans form groups, please.

Also, how did Africans choose to be American slaves again? If you insist all national group membership is voluntary, I mean.

And finally, don't put words in my mouth with shitty childish edits.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: haudace on February 21, 2019, 06:14:13 AM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.

Individualism is not present every where. There are a lot of people in this world who have no control over their destiny. Talking about making informed decisions and having the ability to implement those decisions can be extremely difficult for some people living in not so developped countries.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 21, 2019, 10:50:46 AM
John, Daniel, jt512: Loving your family, wanting good for your group, caring about what your culture values... these are all part of being human. It doesn't matter that the specific targets of these feelings are largely an accident of birth: the feelings are real.

Your family, yes.  Your "group" is too ambiguous to comment on.  What I'm arguing about is your country.  Uncountable numbers of people leave their homelands exactly because they oppose the "values" of those countries and favor the values elsewhere.  To believe that you owe an allegiance to a country just because you were born there or a religion just because you were born into it is just indoctrination.  The sooner one realizes this the freer one is.

I think your argument confuses cause and effect with respect to 'owing' loyalty or allegiance. Humans often feel loyalty to the groups they are part of. Membership in any group is a combination of voluntary and involuntary factors...
You wouldn't even know you were a citizen of a country unless someone told you, nor a "member" of a particular religion.  We are told practically from infancy that we are "American" or "Jewish" or whatever.  We have no inborn nationalistic or religious ties.  We are taught them.  At some point one becomes a grown-up and ought to be able to see this for him or herself.

Individualism is not present every where. There are a lot of people in this world who have no control over their destiny. Talking about making informed decisions and having the ability to implement those decisions can be extremely difficult for some people living in not so developped countries.

The above is true. But does not change the fact that there is no reason to feel loyalty or obligation to a country just because you were born there.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on February 21, 2019, 10:58:24 AM
No, but there is plenty of reason to feel loyalty and obligation to your in-group, and there is no magic line for the scope of your in-group beyond which that loyalty and obligation switches from rational to irrational.

(For me in a Venn diagram sense, there are a series of encircled in-groups one inside another, starting with "all humans" as the outside circle, and "wife and child" as the inside one - I have a diminishing sense of loyalty and obligation to each group as you head outward, but even at the outermost one that sense does not drop to zero.)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 22, 2019, 05:48:49 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.

I don't see it so simple as that.

Is civic responsibility nothing more than indoctrination into a "tribe"?

It is not obvious to me why one would automatically feel a responsibility to his "homeland."

So are you getting hung up on the word "homeland"? Is that it?

Perhaps that was a poor choice of verbiage on my part. I certainly did not mean to imply that I feel some spiritual connection to the dirt under my feet. I would hope that's obvious given the overall tenor of my posts on this forum.

What I'm talking about is a sense of social responsibility to the people among whom I have lived my entire life.

At this point in time, in the country which I call home for better or worse, a concerted attack is being waged against certain segments of the population. The attack has come in the form of a racist and classist social movement which has gained so much popularity that outspoken bigotry has become a viable political platform for political candidates. This movement threatens the livelihood and well-being of many of my family and friends.

Given that situation, I have two options. I can stay and fight with vocal opposition, community organization, and political campaigning. Or I can leave in disgust, immerse myself in the day-to-day culture and politics of another country, and mitigate my effectiveness by opposing the situation from afar.

The point I was trying to make is that I'm part of the racial and cultural majority, hence I'm in a (somewhat) privileged position. I'd incur less danger than if I were, say, a Muslim, Latino or member of some other targeted minority.

So if I exercise my privilege to freely pick up and leave, am I not just running away, shirking my civic responsibility,  and leaving the less fortunate to their fate?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 22, 2019, 06:01:45 PM
Why do you feel you have a responsibility to your homeland?


Maybe it's because I was brought up to believe that politics is a personal responsibility and I'm capable of making a difference if I try.

Or, to put it another way, maybe it's because you were "brought up to believe" (ie, indoctrinated) that you have a special responsibility to the tribe into which you were born through no choice of your own.

I don't see it so simple as that.

Is civic responsibility nothing more than indoctrination into a "tribe"?

It is not obvious to me why one would automatically feel a responsibility to his "homeland."

So are you getting hung up on the word "homeland"? Is that it?

Perhaps that was a poor choice of verbiage on my part. I certainly did not mean to imply that I feel some spiritual connection to the dirt under my feet. I would hope that's obvious given the overall tenor of my posts on this forum.

What I'm talking about is a sense of social responsibility to the people among whom I have lived my entire life.

At this point in time, in the country which I call home for better or worse, a concerted attack is being waged against certain segments of the population. The attack has come in the form of a racist and classist social movement which has gained so much popularity that outspoken bigotry has become a viable political platform for political candidates. This movement threatens the livelihood and well-being of many of my family and friends.

Given that situation, I have two options. I can stay and fight with vocal opposition, community organization, and political campaigning. Or I can leave in disgust, immerse myself in the day-to-day culture and politics of another country, and mitigate my effectiveness by opposing the situation from afar.

The point I was trying to make is that I'm part of the racial and cultural majority, hence I'm in a (somewhat) privileged position. I'd incur less danger than if I were, say, a Muslim, Latino or member of some other targeted minority.

So if I exercise my privilege to freely pick up and leave, am I not just running away, shirking my civic responsibility,  and leaving the less fortunate to their fate?
I'll keep an eye out for your name in the headlines.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 22, 2019, 06:17:53 PM
I'll keep an eye out for your name in the headlines.

What is this supposed to mean?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 22, 2019, 06:20:38 PM
I'll keep an eye out for your name in the headlines.

What is this supposed to mean?

You know, when you become president, or win the Medal of Freedom.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 22, 2019, 06:34:49 PM
I'll keep an eye out for your name in the headlines.

What is this supposed to mean?

You know, when you become president, or win the Medal of Freedom.

Um, okay...
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 22, 2019, 08:03:37 PM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on February 22, 2019, 08:10:21 PM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?

https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603066.html#msg9603066
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 23, 2019, 12:29:42 AM
The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.

While I wait on a response to the other questions (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603330.html#msg9603330), I wanted to mention that I largely agree with you on this statement. For example, America has found ways to incorporate many cultures into itself in a small number of generations and with significantly less rapine violence that conquering empires have historically used to 'mix up the cultures' so to speak. Ghengis Khan created a multicultural society by some standards, but there was a lot more violent death involved. That's something your country and others can learn from. At the same time, America's failures at integration - horrible systemic segregation and racism baked into its bones for instance - are also something to learn from.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Rai on February 23, 2019, 03:00:13 AM
The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.

While I wait on a response to the other questions (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603330.html#msg9603330), I wanted to mention that I largely agree with you on this statement. For example, America has found ways to incorporate many cultures into itself in a small number of generations and with significantly less rapine violence that conquering empires have historically used to 'mix up the cultures' so to speak. Ghengis Khan created a multicultural society by some standards, but there was a lot more violent death involved. That's something your country and others can learn from. At the same time, America's failures at integration - horrible systemic segregation and racism baked into its bones for instance - are also something to learn from.

This statement kind of ignores the tens of millions of Native Americans who had to be killed off for the melting pot to become open for business. And there was still a lot of voilence, as about 50 different conflicts were fought in North Ameica since 1776, including the Civil War, which remains the bloodiest war in American history (if you don't count the European Invasion). There were wars of conquest (the Mexican-American War), mass racist/nativist violence (the Lynching Era, Mountain Meadows, the War on Drugs, etc.) and many smaller conflicts.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 07:38:06 AM
The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.

While I wait on a response to the other questions (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603330.html#msg9603330), I wanted to mention that I largely agree with you on this statement. For example, America has found ways to incorporate many cultures into itself in a small number of generations and with significantly less rapine violence that conquering empires have historically used to 'mix up the cultures' so to speak. Ghengis Khan created a multicultural society by some standards, but there was a lot more violent death involved. That's something your country and others can learn from. At the same time, America's failures at integration - horrible systemic segregation and racism baked into its bones for instance - are also something to learn from.

Your link didn't lead to anything I posted.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Mongols mostly conquered cities, and those they didn't destroy, they made them pay tribute, and apart from that, were left to teir own affairs. Very different from immigration to the US, or any other country.

Is American society ("racially") segregated today? Yes, I know of the segregation policies in the south in the 1960s, but today?
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 07:38:50 AM
The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.

While I wait on a response to the other questions (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603330.html#msg9603330), I wanted to mention that I largely agree with you on this statement. For example, America has found ways to incorporate many cultures into itself in a small number of generations and with significantly less rapine violence that conquering empires have historically used to 'mix up the cultures' so to speak. Ghengis Khan created a multicultural society by some standards, but there was a lot more violent death involved. That's something your country and others can learn from. At the same time, America's failures at integration - horrible systemic segregation and racism baked into its bones for instance - are also something to learn from.

This statement kind of ignores the tens of millions of Native Americans who had to be killed off for the melting pot to become open for business. And there was still a lot of voilence, as about 50 different conflicts were fought in North Ameica since 1776, including the Civil War, which remains the bloodiest war in American history (if you don't count the European Invasion). There were wars of conquest (the Mexican-American War), mass racist/nativist violence (the Lynching Era, Mountain Meadows, the War on Drugs, etc.) and many smaller conflicts.

When the American integration is held up as a success, it does not refer to the conquest of the continent.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 23, 2019, 09:19:18 AM
The American success at integration has been considered something we should learn from.

While I wait on a response to the other questions (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603330.html#msg9603330), I wanted to mention that I largely agree with you on this statement. For example, America has found ways to incorporate many cultures into itself in a small number of generations and with significantly less rapine violence that conquering empires have historically used to 'mix up the cultures' so to speak. Ghengis Khan created a multicultural society by some standards, but there was a lot more violent death involved. That's something your country and others can learn from. At the same time, America's failures at integration - horrible systemic segregation and racism baked into its bones for instance - are also something to learn from.

This statement kind of ignores the tens of millions of Native Americans who had to be killed off for the melting pot to become open for business. And there was still a lot of voilence, as about 50 different conflicts were fought in North Ameica since 1776, including the Civil War, which remains the bloodiest war in American history (if you don't count the European Invasion). There were wars of conquest (the Mexican-American War), mass racist/nativist violence (the Lynching Era, Mountain Meadows, the War on Drugs, etc.) and many smaller conflicts.

I wasn't trying to minimize any of that, but was not clear. You are right: I should have noted 'since the initial colonization' of North America - which to be fair was still happening in the early 20th century (the Wild West).
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 23, 2019, 09:33:00 AM
Your link didn't lead to anything I posted.

Apologies. I linked to the wrong post (correct link below). The question is, "How do you explain the current differences in racial/cultural tension and violence if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?"

(click to show/hide)

Is American society ("racially") segregated today? Yes, I know of the segregation policies in the south in the 1960s, but today?

Yes, it is. As one example, the entire justice system is biased at all levels to harm and remove rights from non-white people - primarily blacks, but not exclusively - more than white people.

As another,
You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on February 23, 2019, 10:17:14 AM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?

Speaking for myself, I do feel that people have social responsibilities. But these responsibilities are to society, not to any nation-state. My own choice, once I had successfully dodged the draft, was to remain in the country of my birth and try to make it a better place (until, eventually, I became cynical and said "screw it!") And I applaud those who choose to remain and work for the good of others. But I don't feel that anyone has a reaponsibility to any given country. Which means that everyone, IMO, has a moral right to leave if they so choose.

Note that I also think that running away seldom results in a better life. Exceptions are refugees and draft dodgers (which in any case are a category or refugee). People who leave a country because the president is a baboon and a pustule are not likely to be any happier somewhere else. But they have the right to do so. And such people probably weren't making their home country any better anyway. Because activists usually are committed people who stay and fight. Runners are seldom people who were working to better their country.

Which makes the whole question a bit moot: If you're the kind of person who puts time and energy into bettering your country, you probably don't really want to leave, and if you're the kind of person to run away because a baboon and a pustule got elected to office, you probably weren't doing anything to make the place any better.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 08:07:00 PM
Your link didn't lead to anything I posted.

Apologies. I linked to the wrong post (correct link below). The question is, "How do you explain the current differences in racial/cultural tension and violence if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?"

(click to show/hide)

Is American society ("racially") segregated today? Yes, I know of the segregation policies in the south in the 1960s, but today?

Yes, it is. As one example, the entire justice system is biased at all levels to harm and remove rights from non-white people - primarily blacks, but not exclusively - more than white people.

As another,
You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.

I did not say that the US has no issues. I said that both the US and Canada are much better than European countries (or at least Sweden) at integration, and that from the outside they seem pretty similar in their approaches.

Bias in courts isn't really what I'm referring to. By "integration" in this case is usually meant the ability to become part of society by having a job and so on. And we (Sweden) are crappy at it. Do you know what the average time for an immigrant that arrives to Sweden to get a job is? 8 years. What is the comparable number in Canada or the US? A quick googling gives lots of articles about how the US has succeeded at integration where we have failed.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 23, 2019, 08:48:00 PM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?

https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603066.html#msg9603066

All this tells me is that you're trying to be deliberately obtuse.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on February 23, 2019, 09:01:31 PM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?

Speaking for myself, I do feel that people have social responsibilities. But these responsibilities are to society, not to any nation-state. My own choice, once I had successfully dodged the draft, was to remain in the country of my birth and try to make it a better place (until, eventually, I became cynical and said "screw it!") And I applaud those who choose to remain and work for the good of others. But I don't feel that anyone has a reaponsibility to any given country. Which means that everyone, IMO, has a moral right to leave if they so choose.

Of course I acknowledge the right to leave. The option to travel is open to all Americans who can afford it, provided they're not under some legal restriction.

I don't feel any obligation to the government, per se, except to speak out against policies that hinder or threaten the lives of others. Because we live under a elective representative government, the authority to change that government rests with the people of this country. And as a US citizen, I can't help but feel that carries some social responsibility. 


Note that I also think that running away seldom results in a better life. Exceptions are refugees and draft dodgers (which in any case are a category or refugee). People who leave a country because the president is a baboon and a pustule are not likely to be any happier somewhere else. But they have the right to do so. And such people probably weren't making their home country any better anyway. Because activists usually are committed people who stay and fight. Runners are seldom people who were working to better their country.

Which makes the whole question a bit moot: If you're the kind of person who puts time and energy into bettering your country, you probably don't really want to leave, and if you're the kind of person to run away because a baboon and a pustule got elected to office, you probably weren't doing anything to make the place any better.

This is a very good approximation of my feelings on the subject.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 23, 2019, 09:04:56 PM
Your link didn't lead to anything I posted.

Apologies. I linked to the wrong post (correct link below). The question is, "How do you explain the current differences in racial/cultural tension and violence if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?"

(click to show/hide)

Is American society ("racially") segregated today? Yes, I know of the segregation policies in the south in the 1960s, but today?

Yes, it is. As one example, the entire justice system is biased at all levels to harm and remove rights from non-white people - primarily blacks, but not exclusively - more than white people.

As another,
You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.

I did not say that the US has no issues. I said that both the US and Canada are much better than European countries (or at least Sweden) at integration, and that from the outside they seem pretty similar in their approaches.

Bias in courts isn't really what I'm referring to. By "integration" in this case is usually meant the ability to become part of society by having a job and so on. And we (Sweden) are crappy at it. Do you know what the average time for an immigrant that arrives to Sweden to get a job is? 8 years. What is the comparable number in Canada or the US? A quick googling gives lots of articles about how the US has succeeded at integration where we have failed.

Let's finish dealing with whether Canada and the US have systems that are actually as similar as you claim before we deal with how different our systems are from your systems.

There are many ways that the US is segregated. Gerrymandering and the biases in the legal system from policing to sentencing are among the most obvious. The legacy of slavery and segregation in the US has direct causal connections to these current problems.

If Canadian and American systems are so similar, how do you explain the rather different immigration policies, cultural violence, and other issues that I have raised?




Title: Re: &quot;Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life&quot;
Post by: jt512 on February 24, 2019, 02:57:37 AM
Are you trying to imply that citizens of a country have no civic or social responsibility, short of running for public office or performing some act of extraordinary heroism?

https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,50948.msg9603066.html#msg9603066

All this tells me is that you're trying to be deliberately obtuse.

All that tells is that you have a reading comprehension problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 25, 2019, 02:32:07 PM
Your link didn't lead to anything I posted.

Apologies. I linked to the wrong post (correct link below). The question is, "How do you explain the current differences in racial/cultural tension and violence if both countries are equally integrated across cultural boundaries?"

(click to show/hide)

Is American society ("racially") segregated today? Yes, I know of the segregation policies in the south in the 1960s, but today?

Yes, it is. As one example, the entire justice system is biased at all levels to harm and remove rights from non-white people - primarily blacks, but not exclusively - more than white people.

As another,
You're right, of course. Now that it is illegal to discriminate against people with non-white-person hair, (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/02/18/black-hair-protected-same-laws-ban-discrimination-nyc-says/2906013002/) at least in NYC, there are no racist policies, laws, or systemic practices. Canada and the US are the same.

I did not say that the US has no issues. I said that both the US and Canada are much better than European countries (or at least Sweden) at integration, and that from the outside they seem pretty similar in their approaches.

Bias in courts isn't really what I'm referring to. By "integration" in this case is usually meant the ability to become part of society by having a job and so on. And we (Sweden) are crappy at it. Do you know what the average time for an immigrant that arrives to Sweden to get a job is? 8 years. What is the comparable number in Canada or the US? A quick googling gives lots of articles about how the US has succeeded at integration where we have failed.

Let's finish dealing with whether Canada and the US have systems that are actually as similar as you claim before we deal with how different our systems are from your systems.

There are many ways that the US is segregated. Gerrymandering and the biases in the legal system from policing to sentencing are among the most obvious. The legacy of slavery and segregation in the US has direct causal connections to these current problems.

If Canadian and American systems are so similar, how do you explain the rather different immigration policies, cultural violence, and other issues that I have raised?

I am not talking about segregation like that. I am talking about how successful the integration of immigrants to their new country is. And the US is arguably successful at that. The segregation of the 1960s or gerrymandering doesn't change that.

Let's look at our statistics. If you can understand Norwegian, you should be able to read through these data in Swedish:

Arbetslöshet - utrikes födda (https://www.ekonomifakta.se/fakta/arbetsmarknad/integration/arbetsloshet-utrikes-fodda/): In recent years, of immigrants born outside of Europe, close to 50% are registered as unemployed.

Sysselsättningsgap - internationellt (https://www.ekonomifakta.se/Fakta/Arbetsmarknad/Integration/Sysselsattningsgrad---internationellt/): Sweden has the second largest gap in employment rate in Europe among native born and foreign born.

(Data is provided by the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise and uses official domestic data as well as international data. (https://www.ekonomifakta.se/en/mer/About-Ekonomifakta/))

Let's face it, we suck at integration when measured in this way, which is what it usually emphasized, rather than what the American south in the 1960s looked like. What does the comparable data for the US look like? Not like here, that's for sure. See image below.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Morvis13 on February 25, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Well the US was #6 on immigration so not too bad. Too bad that is only one aspect in "Quality of Life."
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 25, 2019, 10:56:05 PM
Quetzalcoatl, are you claiming there is no meaningful connection between the immigrant experience and the segregationist policies I've been talking about? I'm drawing a line from those aspects of US culture and little things like what's happening to people who trusted the US to honour DACA. Or those children in cages separated from their parents - and maybe never to find them again.

Again, you are discounting and minimizing things that are important and amplifying things that are not.

While you come up with an answer to that, consider that in this part of the world integration can be a perverse joke. In Toronto a huge number of cabbies have advanced degrees, often in medicine. We have a shortage of doctors. We actively recruit doctors as immigrants. Then we make it almost impossible for them to certify here and they end up doing unskilled labour. It's a shitshow. They have 'jobs' I suppose. Jobs that are a colossal waste of talent and skill. But hey, we rank high on that integration scale thing.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 26, 2019, 02:34:16 PM
I don't even know what "DACA" is.

Integration is not unimportant. I don't understand how can you think I am "amplifying things that are not [important]". The things I am "amplifying" are hugely important, both for individuals and for society as a whole.

Yes, the US has certain issues past and present, but it succeeds well at integration (at least compared to us). Inhumane treatment of arriving prospective immigrants from Mexico, and I am no endorsing that (in case someone here would think that), does not invalidate that the immigrants who settle down there often do well in society. They are employed to about the same extent as people born in the country, and some groups even have higher average earnings. How is that not successful?

What does segregation in the 1960s in the American south have to do with our failures? Nothing. If the Americans have succeeded better than us at something, we should be willing to learn from that. That doesn't make it necessary to repeat their failings.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on February 26, 2019, 02:46:54 PM
I'm not even sure how to carry on this discussion.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 26, 2019, 02:53:36 PM
Me neither. It has drifted so far from the OP.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Morvis13 on March 07, 2019, 10:18:58 PM
(https://i.redd.it/0fwlwd62npk21.jpg)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: haudace on March 21, 2019, 09:39:08 PM
I don't even know what "DACA" is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_Arrivals

They are employed to about the same extent as people born in the country, and some groups even have higher average earnings. How is that not successful?

The devil is in the details.

Getting a job is good. But what kind of job is it? Minimum wage? Menial labor? Is there job security? Does the job make the cost of living tenable?

Without obtaining the proper context and stats, we can't really say for sure the US has been a successful story in terms of immigrant employment.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DanDanDan on March 21, 2019, 11:24:43 PM
If I were to retire now, and if I didn't have friends and family tying me to the DC area, I would absolutely move to Canada. Not just because of the quality of life, but because I effing hate summers in this swamp town, and it only seems to be getting worse. I'm like a human heat pump, so I love the winter, and I especially love snow. In 25 years or so, DC might not be getting any snow at all.

*tear falls*
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 22, 2019, 06:48:36 AM
If I were to retire now, and if I didn't have friends and family tying me to the DC area, I would absolutely move to Canada. Not just because of the quality of life, but because I effing hate summers in this swamp town, and it only seems to be getting worse. I'm like a human heat pump, so I love the winter, and I especially love snow. In 25 years or so, DC might not be getting any snow at all.

*tear falls*

The weather in the GTA is getting more extreme. This winter was pretty brutal. If you want consistent snow for at least a few years you'll want to go further up the St Lawrence - at least as far as Montreal, I'd say.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on March 22, 2019, 08:20:42 AM
I don't even know what "DACA" is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_Arrivals

They are employed to about the same extent as people born in the country, and some groups even have higher average earnings. How is that not successful?

The devil is in the details.

Getting a job is good. But what kind of job is it? Minimum wage? Menial labor? Is there job security? Does the job make the cost of living tenable?

Without obtaining the proper context and stats, we can't really say for sure the US has been a successful story in terms of immigrant employment.

A bad job is better than no job at all.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 22, 2019, 08:25:30 AM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Morvis13 on March 22, 2019, 10:07:52 AM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on March 22, 2019, 10:22:58 AM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

I'd say even a bad job is better than living of welfare indefinitely. Living of welfare for decades while you could work is destructive. Having a job also aids integration into society.

Further, the job might be "bad" from your point of view, but what about the person in question? A poor person coming from El Salvador working at Walmart in Arizona might be much better off than whatever El Salvador has to offer him. And starting at Walmart doesn't mean that he will work for Walmart for the rest of his life. The data I could find suggests that Walmart has a pretty high staff turnover.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on March 22, 2019, 10:52:15 AM
The data I could find suggests that Walmart has a pretty high staff turnover.

That's because they treat their employees like shit, and don't pay them enough to live.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: moj on March 22, 2019, 11:26:44 AM
If I were to retire now, and if I didn't have friends and family tying me to the DC area, I would absolutely move to Canada. Not just because of the quality of life, but because I effing hate summers in this swamp town, and it only seems to be getting worse. I'm like a human heat pump, so I love the winter, and I especially love snow. In 25 years or so, DC might not be getting any snow at all.

*tear falls*

Howdy neighbor, I also live in the swamp town and a big fan of Canada but not a fan of the snow. Dream life would be to summer in Montreal and winter in a variety of tropical places.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: amysrevenge on March 22, 2019, 11:46:32 AM
Hard winter is actually pretty easy to become accustomed to.  Life kind of slows down.  Takes you longer to leave the house, takes you longer to get out of your driveway, takes you longer to drive or walk anywhere, etc.  Everyone instinctively knows that you can't get around as fast, so fewer people are in a hurry.  You have appropriate clothing so that over the course of routine in-and-out daily activity you might get a few blasts of cold air in your lungs, but you don't spend an appreciable amount of time being actually cold.

(Unexpected cold is an entirely different beast - a single day of 10F surrounded by days of 40F+ on either side provides a colder experience, in a "how does this affect how your body feels" sense,  than an extended period of -20F.)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 22, 2019, 12:52:27 PM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

I'd say even a bad job is better than living of welfare indefinitely. Living of welfare for decades while you could work is destructive. Having a job also aids integration into society.

Further, the job might be "bad" from your point of view, but what about the person in question? A poor person coming from El Salvador working at Walmart in Arizona might be much better off than whatever El Salvador has to offer him. And starting at Walmart doesn't mean that he will work for Walmart for the rest of his life. The data I could find suggests that Walmart has a pretty high staff turnover.

I don't think that's what we're talking about when we talk about 'bad' jobs. Driving a cab is not a bad job. Forcing world-class surgeons to drive cabs because we make it almost impossible for them to recertify/qualify to work here is a bad job. Especially after we seek them out and woo them to come here to be doctors.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on March 22, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.

You only wait for elective surgery and non-life threatening (There is no wait if you have health insurance)

For any other procedure, essential surgery, rehabilitation, hospital tests (XRays, MRIs etc), pathology (blood tests etc), GP visits etc there is no wait (and no cost, other than the 2% I pay with my taxes.)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on March 22, 2019, 04:41:14 PM
Hard winter is actually pretty easy to become accustomed to.  Life kind of slows down.  Takes you longer to leave the house, takes you longer to get out of your driveway, takes you longer to drive or walk anywhere, etc.  Everyone instinctively knows that you can't get around as fast, so fewer people are in a hurry.  You have appropriate clothing so that over the course of routine in-and-out daily activity you might get a few blasts of cold air in your lungs, but you don't spend an appreciable amount of time being actually cold.

(Unexpected cold is an entirely different beast - a single day of 10F surrounded by days of 40F+ on either side provides a colder experience, in a "how does this affect how your body feels" sense,  than an extended period of -20F.)

I never got used to the cold in North Dakota. I stayed there for 30 years because N.D. had other advantages I wanted. I loved it there, but I did not love the cold. I had all the cold-weather clothing but I endured the cold, never became accustomed to it. Eventually, when I could take it no longer, I left. I definitely like it here better.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 22, 2019, 04:53:12 PM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.

You only wait for elective surgery and non-life threatening (There is no wait if you have health insurance)

For any other procedure, essential surgery, rehabilitation, hospital tests (XRays, MRIs etc), pathology (blood tests etc), GP visits etc there is no wait (and no cost, other than the 2% I pay with my taxes.)

OHIP (the Ontario Health Insurance Plan) has a real problem with wait times for procedures that are not life-threatening, but which fuck up your life. Kidney stones that cause debilitating pain might take years to deal with. A friend has a 6 month wait for surgery to correct a pelvic wall hernia that closes off her ureter - because the catheter/stent means she won't die, even if she can no longer work, has shitty quality of life, and is at higher risk of a bunch of complications.

Yeah, so not perfect by any means.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: DanDanDan on March 22, 2019, 06:50:44 PM
Hard winter is actually pretty easy to become accustomed to.  Life kind of slows down.  Takes you longer to leave the house, takes you longer to get out of your driveway, takes you longer to drive or walk anywhere, etc.  Everyone instinctively knows that you can't get around as fast, so fewer people are in a hurry.  You have appropriate clothing so that over the course of routine in-and-out daily activity you might get a few blasts of cold air in your lungs, but you don't spend an appreciable amount of time being actually cold.

(Unexpected cold is an entirely different beast - a single day of 10F surrounded by days of 40F+ on either side provides a colder experience, in a "how does this affect how your body feels" sense,  than an extended period of -20F.)

Sounds like my kind of living.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on March 22, 2019, 11:15:54 PM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.

You only wait for elective surgery and non-life threatening (There is no wait if you have health insurance)

For any other procedure, essential surgery, rehabilitation, hospital tests (XRays, MRIs etc), pathology (blood tests etc), GP visits etc there is no wait (and no cost, other than the 2% I pay with my taxes.)

OHIP (the Ontario Health Insurance Plan) has a real problem with wait times for procedures that are not life-threatening, but which fuck up your life. Kidney stones that cause debilitating pain might take years to deal with. A friend has a 6 month wait for surgery to correct a pelvic wall hernia that closes off her ureter - because the catheter/stent means she won't die, even if she can no longer work, has shitty quality of life, and is at higher risk of a bunch of complications.

Yeah, so not perfect by any means.

Yes there are the odd horror stories here as well, but for most who can't afford health insurance the safety net of medicare is an overall net benefit.

There are drugs and treatments available for free or minimal cost, that would cost 100s of thousands of dollars normally. Poor people here would literally die, and/or have a worse quality of life, without Medicare and the PBS (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 23, 2019, 12:46:28 AM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.

You only wait for elective surgery and non-life threatening (There is no wait if you have health insurance)

For any other procedure, essential surgery, rehabilitation, hospital tests (XRays, MRIs etc), pathology (blood tests etc), GP visits etc there is no wait (and no cost, other than the 2% I pay with my taxes.)

OHIP (the Ontario Health Insurance Plan) has a real problem with wait times for procedures that are not life-threatening, but which fuck up your life. Kidney stones that cause debilitating pain might take years to deal with. A friend has a 6 month wait for surgery to correct a pelvic wall hernia that closes off her ureter - because the catheter/stent means she won't die, even if she can no longer work, has shitty quality of life, and is at higher risk of a bunch of complications.

Yeah, so not perfect by any means.

Yes there are the odd horror stories here as well, but for most who can't afford health insurance the safety net of medicare is an overall net benefit.

There are drugs and treatments available for free or minimal cost, that would cost 100s of thousands of dollars normally. Poor people here would literally die, and/or have a worse quality of life, without Medicare and the PBS (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme)

Mostly we're in that sort of situation here. But it's still a shitshow for a huge range of degrading, painful, debilitating conditions.

My cancer surgery was rammed through in weeks - mostly taking that long because I had to heal before the next assault. My buddy with the stones? Four years before it was finally dealt with.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on March 23, 2019, 01:44:13 PM
Depends on where you live. In places with robust social safety nets and health care you have options you don't have in the US.

As long as you are willing to wait for your health care.

You only wait for elective surgery and non-life threatening (There is no wait if you have health insurance)

For any other procedure, essential surgery, rehabilitation, hospital tests (XRays, MRIs etc), pathology (blood tests etc), GP visits etc there is no wait (and no cost, other than the 2% I pay with my taxes.)

OHIP (the Ontario Health Insurance Plan) has a real problem with wait times for procedures that are not life-threatening, but which fuck up your life. Kidney stones that cause debilitating pain might take years to deal with. A friend has a 6 month wait for surgery to correct a pelvic wall hernia that closes off her ureter - because the catheter/stent means she won't die, even if she can no longer work, has shitty quality of life, and is at higher risk of a bunch of complications.

Yeah, so not perfect by any means.

Your system at least sounds more rational than ours. Over here, there have been cases of people dying in queues.

About 10% of the adult population here also has private health insurance, in most cases paid for by the employer.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: John Albert on March 25, 2019, 06:46:00 AM
Here in the Land of the Free, I have to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket per year just to be able to regularly see a doctor and a dentist.

And I don't even have children.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on March 25, 2019, 06:39:09 PM
Here in the Land of the Free, I have to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket per year just to be able to regularly see a doctor and a dentist.

And I don't even have children.

My health insurance doesn't even cover dentistry. That's 100% out of my pocket. Fortunately, Los Angeles was fluoridating the water when I was growing up, and I have pretty good teeth.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: jt512 on March 25, 2019, 06:41:02 PM
Here in the Land of the Free, I have to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket per year just to be able to regularly see a doctor and a dentist.

Ah, but you're free to not see the doctor!
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: arthwollipot on March 25, 2019, 10:06:44 PM
Here in the Land of the Free, I have to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket per year just to be able to regularly see a doctor and a dentist.

And I don't even have children.

My health insurance doesn't even cover dentistry. That's 100% out of my pocket. Fortunately, Los Angeles was fluoridating the water when I was growing up, and I have pretty good teeth.

Australia is usually held up as a model for universal medical coverage, but even our system doesn't cover dentists.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: Tassie Dave on March 26, 2019, 02:50:32 AM
Here in the Land of the Free, I have to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket per year just to be able to regularly see a doctor and a dentist.

And I don't even have children.

My health insurance doesn't even cover dentistry. That's 100% out of my pocket. Fortunately, Los Angeles was fluoridating the water when I was growing up, and I have pretty good teeth.

Australia is usually held up as a model for universal medical coverage, but even our system doesn't cover dentists.

or optometry. Those are the 2 big ones that you really need health insurance for.

Luckily you can get insurance that covers just those 2 (Optometry and Dentistry)
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: 2397 on March 26, 2019, 04:52:52 AM
In Norway those aren't covered routinely either (dentistry is free until you're 19). But there are circumstances where you can get partial coverage, such as more complicated wisdom teeth removals. Visiting eye doctors is part of general medical expenses where you only have to pay up to a minimum amount per year. So I don't think there's much to save on having private insurance, when the public system acts as an insurance program.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: daniel1948 on March 26, 2019, 04:16:22 PM
I think my insurance covers optometry, as well as two pairs of glasses a year, or maybe that's one pair of glasses every two years. Yeah, probably the latter.
Title: Re: "Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life"
Post by: brilligtove on March 26, 2019, 10:53:43 PM
Almost certainly 1 checkup per 24 months, with associcated prescription change up to $300-$500 depending.

My wife just got coverage here in Canadia and I'm going through the option to see what's worth taking and what we should just pay out of pocket. Dental is looking like the good deal given our ages.