Canada : News & Discussions. (1 Viewer)


🤣

Bandar ke haath mein talwar dene ka asar...
He lost his own seat which he's held since 2019. Chap shouldn't quit ,he ought to be asked to turn around & someone should come running at full speed & give him a swift powerful kick on his no good arse.
 
Overall best result for Canada: Liberals win, NDP reduced to near zero.
Pierre Polievre synergizing with Trump presents a very nasty angle that immigrants tought about and rejected:
People dont know one simple fact about Canada : Canada is definition of ' genocide begins when smiling stops'.
WE are literally the nation that is the basis of Geneva war convention - Canada is the leader of war crime count by a country mile in WW1.
This is because Canada is a lot less cosmopolitan than the US and our ozarks boonies people are FAR MORE boonies people than USA - not only more remote, but also far less densely populated boonielands.
So it breeds the special kind of unga-bunga rage filled dehati.

Visit various canadian subs or MAGA subs and you will find, most of the ultra-hardcore ' lets just make fertilizer with chinku and pajeet' are Canadians. Yes, that is the landscape of Canadian whites :

50% of them are woke libbus, 45% of them are the regular bjp type ' very very moderate right wing' type and the rest 5% are all straight up Hitler wannabes.

With Trump in power, there was a genuine risk that PP would've synergized with him with anti-immigration stuff, because if ONE thing that would make a canadian PM stand out as unique, is if he takes an anti-immigration stance - will be first PM in 40 years to do so and the stage was ideal.
Ofcourse, his platform is pro-immigration, but we speak of the temptation/risk of allying with Trump to make North America no bueno to immigrants.

What we immigrants want is simple - we want to immigrate to Canada. What we hindu immigrants want is also simple- we want no khalistani/islamism in Canada and no race-tide in Canada.

With jagmeet decimated, Khalistanism is on decline - Khalistanism is 75% NDP and 25% liberals-conservatives in Canada but one thing MUST be taken into note in the difference :
Khalistani sikhs are the MOST politically active subcontinentals in Canada. The libbu-conservative love for them is topical - they are political parties who wont say no to vote-bank politics, particularly when Hindu ( the target) is sleeping at the wheel and dont give a shit.
Whereas jagmeet and NDP are pucca- khalistanis. They aint your standard ruthless politician courting the more powerful community, they ARE the enemy.

So i would say, from Indo-Canadian POV - the election was the best we can hope for.

PS: Note : I dont think PP and conservatives have the balls to platform the 5% Hitler types IF maga isnt in power down south. The synergy of MAGA with Cons is what worried most immigrants here and they were justified given how ultra-harcore the racist whites in canada are.
They may be very few, but they are all Hitler-wannabes.
 
Like I said, the orange man is in a mission to demolish right wing populists globally.

Should check out how the Kaneddian cuckservatives are continuing to dickride trump amidst their vidhwa vilaap - shit is legit hilarious!:bplease::bplease:

There is hardly any effect of Dolund Paji on Canada elections.

Its mostly the seat allocation by Pierre in his party. He tried to be even more cozier to Khalis and gave over 15-20 seats to them most of which they ended up losing.

I think he lost himself too.​
 
There is hardly any effect of Dolund Paji on Canada elections.

Its mostly the seat allocation by Pierre in his party. He tried to be even more cozier to Khalis and gave over 15-20 seats to them most of which they ended up losing.

I think he lost himself too.​
The reversal in approval rating of the LPC coincided with Dlound's rhetorics. @GaudaNaresh

Meanwhile, the orange man is bragging that he cost Poilievre the election;

Canada is a very different country than USA internally.
I will say this and i will say this again- Canada is the only major developed nation on the planet who doesnt really have its own independent media and entertainment industry.
Canada ITSELF has only 3 channels - CBC, CNKW and Global. One or two more in frenchieland. Thats it.

Except, CNKW, Global + Frenchieland news channels are not very political news/global news oriented - we all tune in to CKNW to learn about bridge closures and traffic conditions in any given time, its all about ' local dude who kidnapped your dog or local dude who stabbed another local dude and manhunt is on around pacific mall, so avoid' kind of news.
CBC is our **ONLY** news channel that gives us global + political news and commentary. And that is basically Kanedi-doordarshan ( Cbc is gormint owned and run).

Everything else, is from USA-we only ever see people see cnn, nbc, abc, fox, etc if they dont watch cbc.
So it is a given, that Dolund/US rhetoric has direct effect on Canadian elections - the average Canadian knows more about Trumpwa than Pollievre, more about Biden than Turd-O.
Donard's brag is a justified one- except this time he did it without actually rigging the election like USA did against Diefenbaker gvot in the 60s ( look into it whenever USA says muh election interference - USA full on collapsed diefenbaker govt. by sending cia agents to vote rig, vote buy, etc etc)

And as i said, Canada is ALSO very different in internal demographics than USA - 1 in 4 Canadian is born overseas. That number is FAR smaller in USA, coz USA sees far less %-wise immigration into it than Canada ( as in, what is immigrant % to your own population).
The racial/ethnic composition balance is also SIGNIFICANTLY different - USA sees vast majority of its immigrants from Latin America, Canada sees vast majority of its immigrants from Asia.

For eg, Asian % in USA - as in TOTAL % of people from all over Asia - is around 6%.
In Canada, us desi-Asians ( including pakis and bangbros and lankans) ALONE is at 8%. Chinku alone is at 5%. Pinoy babu alone is at 4%. Arabs at another 3%. Iranis nearly 1%. We also have SIGNIFICANTLY higher native americans than USA as % - we stand at around 5% indegeous population- usa is like 1.5% or so.
The biggest difference, by far, is that in USA, hispanic makes up around 15% of the population, while in Canada, hispanics are like 2% or less.
Another huge difference between Canada and USA, is our black populations - USA has around 14% black people, Canada has like 4%.


Remember, this creates a much different balance of ethnic composition mix and as such, Canadian reaction to unga-bunga white supremacist shit is FAR stronger than that in the US - the biggest haters of white supremacy arent latinos - because some latinos THEMELVES are white supremacist/white-passing.

The biggest haters of white supremacy in north america are either those with an axe to grind against them - the blacks and indegenous people - or us snooty asians who outperform those MAGAT dehatis in every damn metric known to man.
And in this respect, white supremacy faces a FAR bigger challenge in Canada - pretty much all rank and file asians+blacks+indegenous are the PRIME haters of white supremacy.
While both US+ Canada bats at around same % of ' black+asian+indegenous', blacks dont weild/hold power nearly as effectively as Asians,primary due to economic metrics and the Asian dominace of whites in terms of every metric known to man, translates far more effectively in Canada.

So long story short, yes - Donard lost Pollievre the election. Easy peasy to conclude. because Canadian white extremists - especially the white extremist PPC went all slobbering with glee at prospect of controlling Canadian immigration policy.

And that is the ONE thing we asins will unifiy with the libbu whites + muslims to ' haath nahi lagene denge tujhko, jo ukharna haye, ukharle'. That is the prime voting plinth of Asian-Canadians + muslims of all sort and that is the one thing we will not compromise on- because we can all do math and we can see the white-panic in Canada : in 25 years FLAT, whites are going to be ' uttar pradesh' style still the biggest demographic but overall minority in Canada.

And that is a civilization-changing arc. We are in a race with muslims + chinese and so far we are winning the race, because Indian immigration is like 1.5x that of 2nd place (pinoy) and double of third place ( Chinku), with hindu immigration overall equal to that of muslims and actually MOAR than that of khalistanis. Hence the sharp increase in hinduphobia in Canada.
 
Modi visiting Canada

Modi should not come to Canada for the G7 meet and decline the invitation. It is India’s rebuff to Canada for supporting Khalistanis for the last four decades.

Nothing has changed in Canada even if Trudeau is gone. He is exercising influence from behind the scenes. The new Liberal government is same with same policies and letting media publicity by handful of Khalistanis in Toronto and Vancouver.

If new prime minister Carney wanted to show change then he will order the arrest of Khalistanis demonstrators who attacked a Hindu temple in Brampton. In addition he can order no demonstrations against the invited leaders at the G7 conference. He under pressure from Liberal party insiders has ordered none of these steps.

For Carney to show change, he has to put Khalistanis under police watch, begin restoring the diplomatic ties which a fool like Trudeau broke off at the behest of Khalistani lobby.

If none of these steps are taken then PM Modi should decline the invitation. It would show other national leaders that Canada is not as pure as they project it to be.
 

View: https://x.com/sidhant/status/1935391970215801175

BREAKING: KHALISTANI EXTREMISTS A NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT, SAYS CANADA Canada calls spade a spade. For the first time, uses the terms "extremism" for khalistanis in an intel report.

1750323534572.webp

Can we assume apart from US Deep State farmans, the Nijjer drama by Justinder Singh Castro was because of political compulsions resulting from Hagmeet's party?
 
We hear a lot about the US deep state, which is generally not friendly toward India. What about the Canadian deep state? Canada at the level of government, security agencies, academia and perhaps most of all, media, is not terribly friendly toward India either. Scrutiny, negativity, sensationalism, one sidedness, putting on airs of moral superiority, these are all traits of deep state aversion to India. Canada has serious issues with empathy( including India's experience with colonialism) nuance and subtlety when it comes to India. It probably all comes down at the end of the day to dislike of a non-white, non-Christian country being independent minded on a whole range of issues; India's potential if not actual competitive ability in many sectors; a very developed space, defense and nuclear sector; a very large population...all overlain by at the least a smattering of racism, though that is not always readily apparent. After all, the same sourness and negativity doesn't exist, to the same felt degree, for Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, South America and African countries, a casual observer could state.

can we narrow the source to british colonial influence?

one thing common among all nations who show overt and covert hostility by respective state establishments towards India are former or current british colonies/dominions.

one of the themes i would like to explore is whether what we are seeing is continuation of british policy "divide and rule" in sooth asia during their rule in sub-continent, but playing out domestically in these countries to keep the sooth asian communities divided, possibly because of vote bank politics.

if all sooth asian communities unite as a single vote bank in these countries, the native political parties will lose a lot of say in their own governance.

in case of canada, even without united sooth asian front, punjabis alone are ruling the roost. which is an unintended consequence.
 
can we narrow the source to british colonial influence?

one thing common among all nations who show overt and covert hostility by respective state establishments towards India are former or current british colonies/dominions.

one of the themes i would like to explore is whether what we are seeing is continuation of british policy "divide and rule" in sooth asia during their rule in sub-continent, but playing out domestically in these countries to keep the sooth asian communities divided, possibly because of vote bank politics.

if all sooth asian communities unite as a single vote bank in these countries, the native political parties will lose a lot of say in their own governance.

in case of canada, even without united sooth asian front, punjabis alone are ruling the roost. which is an unintended consequence.

It's because the ((( literature ))) and institutional memory about anything related to India is a creation of the Bri'ish onlee.
Goes for both the bureaucrats there and the various glow in the dark "intelligence" creatures.

And obviously all this flows from Anglo produced literature etc about India and Indians during the colonial period.
After WW2 some Anglo exfarts in such "fields" may have also found employment in the US, the rest of the 4 kaanes, it is implicit since the Anglo had tight integration with these "crown colonies" in the past.

It is good all their perceptions produced this way about India are defective, the greatest defect is leaving India with a strong central govt with the Churchhillian arrogant expectation of "it will collapse since there is no India, we created India" :pmegusta:
 
can we narrow the source to british colonial influence?

one thing common among all nations who show overt and covert hostility by respective state establishments towards India are former or current british colonies/dominions.

one of the themes i would like to explore is whether what we are seeing is continuation of british policy "divide and rule" in sooth asia during their rule in sub-continent, but playing out domestically in these countries to keep the sooth asian communities divided, possibly because of vote bank politics.

if all sooth asian communities unite as a single vote bank in these countries, the native political parties will lose a lot of say in their own governance.

in case of canada, even without united sooth asian front, punjabis alone are ruling the roost. which is an unintended consequence.
Yes, but what explains the far less sourness, negativity and scrutiny toward other south Asian countries plus Africa, including those that were once British colonies. Vote banks is one factor, by not criticising the other South Asian countries and Africa, Caribbean et al, the deep state may be pandering to the ethnic electorate to some extent. But then this doesn't seem to extend to India, which has a large expatriate and ethnic population. It must be India's competitive 'threat', and the utter absence of the same from the other places. It could be a belief by the deep state that the ethnic Indian population is largely mature and balanced, and devoted more to their professional careers, unlike the more directly agitating Sikhs, Pakistanis, Moslems and so on.

There's also another insidious reason, which flows from the competitive threat. It's that they want the focus of anything negative in the third world to be associated with India. Otherwise, if they mention Brazil and Indonesia and Nigeria and the Congo together with India, that would diffuse the awareness and take the attention away from India, which is the prime target, presently, of the deep state. The ignorant, uneducated population( in Canada, for example) would then have many reference points to deal with, making them confused and overwhelmed. Keeping the lens on India, simplifies matters! Following the KISS ( keep it simple, stupid) method.
 
Yes, but what explains the far less sourness, negativity and scrutiny toward other south Asian countries plus Africa, including those that were once British colonies. Vote banks is one factor, by not criticising the other South Asian countries and Africa, Caribbean et al, the deep state may be pandering to the ethnic electorate to some extent. But then this doesn't seem to extend to India, which has a large expatriate and ethnic population. It must be India's competitive 'threat', and the utter absence of the same from the other places. It could be a belief by the deep state that the ethnic Indian population is largely mature and balanced, and devoted more to their professional careers, unlike the more directly agitating Sikhs, Pakistanis, Moslems and so on.

There's also another insidious reason, which flows from the competitive threat. It's that they want the focus of anything negative in the third world to be associated with India. Otherwise, if they mention Brazil and Indonesia and Nigeria and the Congo together with India, that would diffuse the awareness and take the attention away from India, which is the prime target, presently, of the deep state. The ignorant, uneducated population( in Canada, for example) would then have many reference points to deal with, making them confused and overwhelmed. Keeping the lens on India, simplifies matters! Following the KISS ( keep it simple, stupid) method.

You are correct, we are seen as a threat because of our potential( 1.2 billion young population, large territory, large arable land, access to Indian/Pacific oceans ) and the fact that our Govt doesn't ((( obey orders )))
 
Yes, but what explains the far less sourness, negativity and scrutiny toward other south Asian countries plus Africa, including those that were once British colonies. Vote banks is one factor, by not criticising the other South Asian countries and Africa, Caribbean et al, the deep state may be pandering to the ethnic electorate to some extent. But then this doesn't seem to extend to India, which has a large expatriate and ethnic population. It must be India's competitive 'threat', and the utter absence of the same from the other places. It could be a belief by the deep state that the ethnic Indian population is largely mature and balanced, and devoted more to their professional careers, unlike the more directly agitating Sikhs, Pakistanis, Moslems and so on.

There's also another insidious reason, which flows from the competitive threat. It's that they want the focus of anything negative in the third world to be associated with India. Otherwise, if they mention Brazil and Indonesia and Nigeria and the Congo together with India, that would diffuse the awareness and take the attention away from India, which is the prime target, presently, of the deep state. The ignorant, uneducated population( in Canada, for example) would then have many reference points to deal with, making them confused and overwhelmed. Keeping the lens on India, simplifies matters! Following the KISS ( keep it simple, stupid) method.

not sure about competitive threat, if it was the case it would have showed up in pop culture. in pop culture, one aspect that has been consistently showing up is "first-world ism".

different context, neighbouring country, blatant "first-world ism".

View: https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1940114312124862947

let's keep the conclusion open, till a better explanation is found, it may take years.
in this age of podcasts and social media, someone is bound to ask a straight forward question, and someone is bound to give a straight forward answer.
 
not sure about competitive threat, if it was the case it would have showed up in pop culture. in pop culture, one aspect that has been consistently showing up is "first-world ism".

different context, neighbouring country, blatant "first-world ism".

View: https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1940114312124862947

let's keep the conclusion open, till a better explanation is found, it may take years.
in this age of podcasts and social media, someone is bound to ask a straight forward question, and someone is bound to give a straight forward answer.

Cultural difference is a factor, even here Indians seem to be the target, or the example to made out of. More so than Moslems, Pakistanis, Africans, Filipinos, Koreans, Latinos etc. In the Canadian media, that seems to be the case. Indians are both visible and milder, so you can use them as the 'foil' or 'the other' or 'the culturally different' without much consequence. On anything to do with 'gender issues', Indians are more often than not going to be cited for difference, if not for outright oppression. Moslems will be given a free pass, as will Blacks for the most part, because of fears of a backlash.

Of course, intelligent, aware people can see through this charade and falsehood.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Back
Top