[QatzelOk]

Why do you single out Anglophone countries?

Because this thread is about Canada and the USA, which are together about 95% anglophone, and were created by the British Empire.

If you want to talk about the atrocities of the French, there's another thread for that.
If you want to talk about the atrocities that the Russian, Japanese, Mongol, or Roman empires caused, you can start a thread about that as well.

But try to stick to the subject of this thread, as unpleasant as it is to LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

(By the way, asking people to "look at France" in a thread about the USA and Canada, is like asking your Physics teacher to "Talk more about Biology and Chemistry, rather than putting so much emphasis Physics (THE SUBJECT MATTER))

[Political Interest]

But try to stick to the subject of this thread, as unpleasant as it is to LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

I am not a perfect Anglo-Saxon my friend. But France should not pretend to be morally superior, neither should the Germans.

No, I hear you. But all I'm saying is France does not need a school for colonialism. French policy has been less than helpful. France has been a massive accessory to all of the insane projects of the Anglo-American leadership. As have the Germans after 1945.

My point is, all of this santimonious finger pointing that goes on among Europeans is annoying and hypocritical. All of the European countries are in a terrible state and being very badly run. There is no moral superiority, all are beholden to the stupidity of their neo-imperialist leadership.

The point is, none of this is British, none of this is Anglophone, none of this is French and nor is it German. None of the leaders of any European country today lead in the interest of their citizenry. France and Germany are as much in a state as the UK and US.

[Patrickov]

How revealing that two posters can't come up with counter-arguments, so have resorted to the very snowflake "Hater!". Why didn't you try some counter-argument like: "Why Qatz, the European settlers totally respected the local cultures' sovereignty."

Or you could try: "The White settlers did everything they could to reach out to their hosts, but.." and then come up with some inadequacy on the part of the First Nations to explain their own victimhood.

Or even: :"The European White Settlers respected all their treaties, and were fair and consistent in their relationships with others."

You didn't because... you can't. Just like our current crop of N.A. leaders can't understand why Bolivia had a non-white, non-euro leader. And why N.A. don't seem to understand the link between their SUVs, and all those oil-producing states that WE HAVE DESTROYED.

In 100 years, it will all be forgotten, right guys?

This Honourable Member effectively had discarded my counterargument and claimed that I had not made any.

Quite the contrary, I stated very clearly in the previous post that, while I do not deny anything this Honourable Member had said, I have also seen another side of Western Imperialism, and found it superior than many of the nationalistic ways nowadays. This is my counterargument.

If anything, I see this response as an insult to my effort on my previous post.

[QatzelOk]

... all of this santimonious finger pointing that goes on among Europeans is annoying and hypocritical. All of the European countries are in a terrible state and being very badly run. There is no moral superiority, all are beholden to the stupidity of their neo-imperialist leadership....

...Western Imperialism, and found it superior than many of the nationalistic ways ...

European societies have been both sanctimonious and superior - in their dealings with people's who couldn't defend themselves - for a long time. And this is who created Canada and the USA. These are "cut from cloth" creations of the Europeans that many posters would like to compare them to.

They are comparable, of course. But importantly, the countries that are the subject of this thread are CREATIONS of foreign invaders - just as much as Chile's Fascist dictatorship and its neo-liberalism were creations of foreign (economic predator) invaders. This makes them "projects" more than actual nation states.

The question should be "What kind of countries would Europeans create?"

And notice that my giant sanctimonious finger is pointed INWARD and not outward. This is extremely important because pointing styrofoam fingers outward is a denial strategy for ignoring internal problems that require maintenance.

[Pants-of-dog]

... I have also seen another side of Western Imperialism, and found it superior than many of the nationalistic ways nowadays. This is my counterargument.

Can you provide an example of the benefits of western imperialism or colonialism in Canada or the USA?

Specifically, I am asking for benefits to the indigenous communities of North America. I am already very clear on how western imperialism and colonialism have helped westerners.

[Patrickov]

Can you provide an example of the benefits of western imperialism or colonialism in Canada or the USA?

Specifically, I am asking for benefits to the indigenous communities of North America. I am already very clear on how western imperialism and colonialism have helped westerners.

I think most Honourable Members in this chamber, including this Honourable Gentleman, knows that I am not a Westerner, so an apparent accusation of me of only showing "how western imperialism and colonialism have helped westerners" is a moot point.

IMHO colonialism helped us to understand:
1. There are ways other than believing our own country is the indisputable "centre of the world", and
2. How corrupt, power hungry and barbaric our so-called rulers are. At the very least, the West knows how to appease the people.
3. Sovereignty is bull-shit if it has to be maintained by deceit, tyranny and fear against themselves (not just ordinary people but the ruling elite).

[Pants-of-dog]

Can you provide examples of how indigenous government before colonialism was more corrupt than the colonial government?

[Patrickov]

Can you provide examples of how indigenous government before colonialism was more corrupt than the colonial government?

China. Period.

And do not get me started with all those tribal regimes in the Middle East and Africa. Not to mention the Ottomans, who became very incompetent by the 19th century.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Patrickov

Again, I am specifically discussing North America.

Do yiu have any examples that are about the topic, i.e. Canada and the U.S.A?

[Patrickov]

@Patrickov

Again, I am specifically discussing North America.

Do yiu have any examples that are about the topic, i.e. Canada and the U.S.A?

I was in response to another accusation, and when I made that statement I assume that the argument was not that specific.

I am afraid I was not going for the same goal as this Honourable Member has put down.

Therefore, no, I have no such specific arguments, but it doesn't make my point (which was not specific to the Americas) invalid, because I was not replying this Honourable Member.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Patrickov

So even if colonialism may have been less than awful for people outside of NA, it has been a bad experience for indigenous communities in North America.

[Patrickov]

@Patrickov

So even if colonialism may have been less than awful for people outside of NA, it has been a bad experience for indigenous communities in North America.

I do not have sufficient information to make my opinion. This statement apparently looks like an attempt of idea imposition, and I am not sure if this is a good move.

Edit: I have deleted the latter two sentences because I have misread My Honourable Friend's latter statement.

[QatzelOk]

...China. Period.

And do not get me started with all those tribal regimes in the Middle East and Africa....

A lot of North Americans have the same PIONEER spirit as Patrickov is emanating in this thread.

North America's official history is about the heroic risks and amazing resilience of its white European PIONEERS.

Because the entire planet is now over-populated, and polluted, today's PIONEERS find their greatest hope in novelty - in new technolgies that haven't been proven to fail yet. Every single one is heralded as the new messiah.

To this day, many residents of North America find their greatest pride in the way that two corporate-created states continue to PIONEER new technologies and behaviorism, and to impose them all over the globe through military violence and economic extortion.

And of course, this leads to a lot of people in North America finding inspiration in being a PIONEER themselves.

Harvey Weinstein says he is a pioneer
in advancing the careers of women in the film industry.

'I made more movies directed by women and about women than any filmmaker... I did it first! I pioneered it,' Harvey Weinstein declared in an interview in which he decried being 'forgotten' since being accused of sexual misconduct by scores of women. (Mark Lennihan/The Associated Press)

Harvey Weinstein should understand that North American PIONEER spirit more than most of us. He's in the Cowboy-and-Injun industry, after all.

[QatzelOk]

I started to come of age politically in my late teens while the world was under the Reagan regime of the 1980s. How have North America's great white nations changed since then? How has politics and the society it creates evolved since 1980 in USA/Canada?

When Reagan came to power in 1980, there were 200 food banks in the US; today there are more than 40,000, all overwhelmed with demand and forced to ration their dispersals. Before 1980, one out of every 50 Americans was dependent on food stamps. Today, it is one out of four. Before Reagan, there were 10 million hungry Americans; today there are more than 50 million and increasing.

All of this has happened as both nations have gone deeper into debt, running deficits in good times and bad times. The environment has been further degraded as well, and social institutions have gotten weaker and weaker.

My opinion is that the fatal technoligies were commercial media and suburban car universality. But there were many other culturally degrading changes to blame as well. Plus, there's the whole "founded on genocide and slavery" thing.

[QatzelOk]

...As compared to divided but class-conscious French workers striking today, American wage earners are unfortunately amorphous and blunted in their ignorance, the staunchest flag-waving defenders of the capitalist system that exploits them, so unstructured and ill-organized that they do not constitute a class in the political sense of the word. Though a person who works for wages, blue collar or middle class, is a member of the working class, his wage earner status does not make him a class-conscious revolutionary. Most certainly, capital’s defeat of labor is one of the greatest victories of American capitalism...

In North America, according to Stewart, the labor movement has been so well crushed and dumbed down by the forces of capital, that it doesn't even know it exists.

Which is why the poor and working class have such crappy lives and lack of social programs - especially in the southern half of the continent.

[QatzelOk]

The United States, for all its ideological devotion to the invisible hand, actually has a strongly State-supported military industrial sector, dependent on Congressional appropriations, Pentagon contracts, favorable legislation and pressure on “allies” to buy U.S.-made weaponry. This is indeed a form of planned economy, one that fails utterly to meet social needs.

In the article on the French yellow-jackets protests, Diane Johnstone (who lives in France herself) considers the USA a planned economy, much like the old Soviet Union with its famous five-year-plans.

What's different, according to her, is what is being planned. In the USA, what is planned, is to grab all the surplus labor of Americans (for defense spending), and turn this armed money into a force for extortion, both internal and international.

[QatzelOk]

The term ‘state capitalism’ can be applied to both the U.S. and China. The central difference is that the Chinese communist party maintains political control over Chinese corporations, while U.S. based corporations substantially control the American political system. Political theory recognizes the U.S. system as state corporatism, better known in the twentieth century as Italian style fascism. The term is applied descriptively, not pejoratively.

Organized crime controls the USA. The idea that corporations - which have zero responsibility to American citizens - are "in control" of USA governance, means that USAmericans get taxed without representation at a scale never seen in history.

For Profit health care: costs an extra $5,000 per year, with worse results than less expensive countries
For Profit mass transit: costs an average of $10,000 per year to operate a private vehicle in transitless cities
For Profit education: means that many citizens get 19th Century levels of academic knowledge
For Profit Prisons: puts Totalitarian-governance levels of people (from particular classes) behind bars, zero liberty
For Profit Foreign Policy: richest country blows up a global warming world even during crises
etc.
And it's all due to For Profit Governance.

[QatzelOk]

...The territory dominated by the Iroquois (particularly the Ohio country) was the core of a region coveted by both the French and the British, and the Iroquois Confederacy became adept at playing the two colonial powers off against each other—until the French were forced out of North America by the British in 1763. With the disappearance of the French from the North American scene, the fate of the Indians, who could no longer play off one colonial power against another, was sealed. In the Revolutionary War of 1776, the Iroquois were divided, with some nations supporting the British and some the colonists. In retaliation for Iroquois attacks, General Washington, who later referred to the Indians as “beasts of prey,” ordered a campaign of total destruction.4 On May 31, 1779, he commanded General Sullivan:

The expedition that you are appointed to command is to be directed against the hostile tribes of the six nations of Indians… The immediate objects are the total destruction and devastation of their settlements and the capture of as many prisoners of every age and sex as possible. It will be essential to ruin their crops now on the ground, and prevent their planting more.… [P]arties should be detached to lay waste all the settlements around, with instructions to do it in the most effectual manner, that the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed. ...

The reason this is so important is that the Five-Nation Iroquois Confederacy was the ONLY first-nation allies of the English, and they were used for a hundred years as a battering ram against the other 100 nations.

As soon as they weren't useful anymore, George Washington had them genocided.

This is a formative atrocity, just like the Genocide of the Acadians (and later, the Metis) was for Canada.

[QatzelOk]

In an interesting article on "coronashock," a group of researchers contrast the general responses to the epidemic by both socialist and by capitalist countries.

CoronaShock reveals a deep divide between capitalist and socialist countries. This divide can be best understood, as we have shown, along four axes:

Socialism

Science
Public sector
Public action
Internationalism

Capitalism

Hallucination
For-profit sector
Atomisation and paralysis of the population
Jingoism and racism

That the capitalist countries responded with hallucination, the for-profit sector profit-making,
atomisation and paralysis of the population, jingoism and racism... is because these are the tools in the capitalist class toolbox. These are the tools that are used to create our "disciplinary institutions" (including mass media) that keeps us loyal to our much better-paid masters. And the "needs" of the peasant class are, in our system, something to be "dealt with" rather than something to be "strived for."

[Unthinking Majority]

That's basically all the Canada is: propaganda and adaptation-programs that help international capital exploit the shit out of the land that former international corporations stole from the previous locals.

Ya, that's all Canada is

You make some good points and then muck it up with this nonsensical truth claim.