rudieboy77
Member
Ah don't mind them they're just jealous.

LOL you should try calling a Canadian "American" and see how receptive they are of the idea. Only South American, non-English speaking countries get angry about us using the demonym to describe our nationality.This is a minor pet peeve of mine and I know what you meant, but Canadians are "Americans". Just like other South and Central American countries are part of America. It's things like US citizens calling themselves Americans that causes other countries like Canada to have these negative opinions.
Sorry, having the BigMac and a Starbucks is not a sign of huge US influence. Most Asians/Africans don't watch Game of Thrones, have iPhones, know who Kim Kardashian is or have heard the latest Lady Gaga record.
What does any of this have to do with this topic...
LOL you should try calling a Canadian "American" and see how receptive they are of the idea. Only South American, non-English speaking countries get angry about us using the demonym to describe our nationality.
You elected Dubya... twice! That should be enough for any country in the world to look down on you for the rest of eternity.
You elected Dubya... twice! That should be enough for any country in the world to look down on you for the rest of eternity.
Hey, very nice and well reasoned post! Though I would point out that Canada is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. There are something like 200 countries in the world at the moment (give or take), and Canada is in the top 20 for ethnic diversity, placing it in the 90th percentile or top 10 percent.
![]()
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/
You elected Dubya... twice! That should be enough for any country in the world to look down on you for the rest of eternity.
That map is kinda bullshit and heavily weighted by tribalism. You can take it as gospel if you want, but any study that says Central Africa is more diverse than the Americas is nuts.
You elected Dubya... twice! That should be enough for any country in the world to look down on you for the rest of eternity.
You elected Dubya... twice! That should be enough for any country in the world to look down on you for the rest of eternity.
Yeah, people don't usually think of Uganda when they are thinking of ethnic diversity.
Who made this determination that it isn't correct? Random guy that refuses to accept widely agreed upon nomenclature? And how is it not useful socially when everyone... As in society... understands and accepts its meaning?What Gustav said. The OP himself even said "the US" in his post, which is fine as well. Of course I understand how the terminology works, I live in the US, but it still doesn't make it correct or very useful socially. However I'm not interested in going on a crusade vs just responding to the OP. If other GAFers have gone in length on that before that has nothing to do with me and I had no interest in going further than responding to the OP.
Funny that you brought up the "race" issue, because yes, that's another word that would have been better off not in our vocabularies when it comes to discussing ethnic groups. It's one of the reasons we constantly have these race threads on GAF with people not understanding how black/Obama's ethnicity/the one drop rule works, because as a social construct not much thought was put into it other than skin color.
Then it's not just US citizen calling themselves it, but nearly everybody else on the planet. No matter how you paint it, the vast majority of Canadians couldn't give less of a shit if Americans and everybody else uses the word to describe the country's people.Well yeah because Canadians and most of the world knows that the word is meant to refer to the US vs North and South America.
Yup. Canada is 90% white, but people are less likely to identify as plain old White Canadian.
This one is more representative.
Yeah, people don't usually think of Uganda when they are thinking of ethnic diversity.
And perogies are as Canadian now as Maple syrup.
In the prairies at least.
Oh yeah and this... (I know its only Toronto)
![]()
That's because most Canadians retain their cultural heritage over here. For instance, Canada has the largest Ukrainian population outside of Ukraine... And perogies are as Canadian now as Maple syrup.
In the prairies at least.
God bless the Ukranians for that. Perogies are awesome.
the canadian citizen is protected by his goverment and rewarded with a hight quality of life
Yup. Canada is 90% white, but people are less likely to identify as plain old White Canadian.
This one is more representative.
I would suggest that you use more up to date data.
The bolded = you're speaking out of your ass and have no idea what Canada is really like.
The US does far more policing than is 'expected'.
Hey, very nice and well reasoned post! Though I would point out that Canada is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. There are something like 200 countries in the world at the moment (give or take), and Canada is in the top 20 for ethnic diversity, placing it in the 90th percentile or top 10 percent.
He amounts to a single vote in council...and we completely gimped his power when we were unable to remove him from office.
If he gets re-elected, then you might have something of a legitimate comparison... Only difference is I don't think he would have ever been electable at the federal level. No way a major Canadian political party (including the cons) would back a guy like him, and even if they did, he'd likely lose the election.
Well I didnt mean 'hate' in the emotional sense. I mean you wont see someone mention theyre canadian except to point out the difference in being american. Like 'You see what theyre doing down there? thank god Im canadian.'I've heard people say that before.
As a Canadian, I implore the Americans in this thread to not take this attitude seriously. "Hating you" is not something that defines our identity.
I would suggest that you use more up to date data.
http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm
If you don't understand why that sentence is creepy, it would be hard to explain it to you. Attributing an individuals quality of life to government bureaucrats is something, I think, that makes sense in North Korea, or Cuba, but shouldn't make sense in free western democracies. What happened to the views of the enlightenment thinkers that government was a necessary evil, that is was a lamentable thing that we needed to government at all? What I hear from a lot of you is a love of government, something that I don't think you realize is fairly unprecedented in the history of the world, and kind of alarming given the tendency of government towards tyranny.
Yup. Canada is 90% white, but people are less likely to identify as plain old White Canadian.
This one is more representative.
Hey, very nice and well reasoned post! Though I would point out that Canada is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. There are something like 200 countries in the world at the moment (give or take), and Canada is in the top 20 for ethnic diversity, placing it in the 90th percentile or top 10 percent.
![]()
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/
Who made this determination that it isn't correct? Random guy that refuses to accept widely agreed upon nomenclature? And how is it not useful socially when everyone... As in society... understands and accepts its meaning?
Then it's not just US citizen calling themselves it, but nearly everybody else on the planet. No matter how you paint it, the vast majority of Canadians couldn't give less of a shit if Americans and everybody else uses the word to describe the country's people.
If you don't understand why that sentence is creepy, it would be hard to explain it to you. Attributing an individuals quality of life to government bureaucrats is something, I think, that makes sense in North Korea, or Cuba, but shouldn't make sense in free western democracies. What happened to the views of the enlightenment thinkers that government was a necessary evil, that is was a lamentable thing that we needed to government at all? What I hear from a lot of you is a love of government, something that I don't think you realize is fairly unprecedented in the history of the world, and kind of alarming given the tendency of government towards tyranny.
This chart seems kind of odd to me, especially when first nations (aboriginals) make up about 4.3% of the overall Canadian population that seem to be absent from this chart.
In the town I currently reside in, natives make up roughly 20% of the overall population.
Now this chart looks a lot more accurate.
Maybe if Americans werent so 'fuck yeah' people wouldnt give a shit but it's always "America is da best, we lead the way" when your social programs, education system, crime rate, justice system, everything is fucking broken. But the worse it gets the louder you scream about how great you are. Of course people are going to look down on the states then.
sorry, but smh
Multinationals and private armies happened, for example. I'd much rather be a subject to the state than an object to the market. Not that that actually means something today.
Maybe if Americans werent so 'fuck yeah' people wouldnt give a shit but it's always "America is da best, we lead the way" when your social programs, education system, crime rate, justice system, everything is fucking broken. But the worse it gets the louder you scream about how great you are. Of course people are going to look down on the states then.
Those thinkers inspired weighty systems of checks and balances that control human ambition and limit the scope of Government. In the twentieth century in particular, we've become docile in comparison to the time in which these thinkers were writing. I'm not trying to discredit their opinions by pointing out the changing of the times, but there's an extent to which certain political "liberties" no longer serve the same function that they once did. Legitimate fear of western-style representative democracies in this day and age is bordering on irrational (and in the worst cases, fanatical).
For example, the fact that fear of Government is used for the justification of lax gun control is profoundly dumb. The net result is that regardless of the second amendment (or Canada's stricter gun laws), neither Government is going to "turn on its citizens". The tendency towards tyranny, in my view, is an antiquity a this point. It's paranoia in a modern context. Let's try getting something through congress without substantial gridlock before we start worrying about the President "crushing" his own people through violent force.
All guns accomplish, in practice rather than in philosophical principle, is to facilitate gun violence carried out between citizens. I know its just one example, but it's an important one. I think it would facilitate a lot of interesting debate amongst the old enlightened thinkers if they could offer us their opinions today.
Edit:
I guess what I'm saying is that "love for Government", or at least a "more favourable attitude" is unprecedented, like you said. At the same time, I see this as a privilege. The fact that we have a lot to gain and less to fear from joining together in collective Governance means that the principles of freedom and liberty are working. At the same time, while these principles are in broad strokes "absolute", we shouldn't see them as incapable of evolving or changing. Otherwise, they'll just become dead sets of dogma. Beliefs that are held fanatically without question, justifying polices that have horrible and irrational consequences.
I'm American and I don't watch Game of Thrones, have an iPhone or the latest Lady Gaga record.
I'm sure they know Coca Cola and Mickey Mouse.
It seems weird to me that Israel doesn't have Starbucks.
It's not so weird but more hilarious that Italy doesn't.
Isn't that somewhat skewed by the fact that most of your minorities live out in the middle of nowhere or am I wrong about that? Also do the Quebecois identify as a minority?
And the term "ethnic" could mean something other than "racial" so Canada might not be as racially diverse as the US.
Which sort of steers us back to a lot of the issues in the US... We're still dealing with major issues due to impoverished minorities that lead to a lot of gun violence, illiteracy, etc. in addition to a major drug war with our neighbors to the south. It's a huge can of worms to deal with but I'm not sure if Canada historically went through a lot of the same things that the US did to get where we are today.
I think it's pretty naive to assume that we're past tyranny when WWII was just 70 years ago which is pretty minuscule in the scope of human civilization.
Is French considered a visible minority in Canada?
Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada 2013 said:
Tonnes of French Canadian street kids on the streets of Vancouver, climates better here.They're considered traitorous separatists..
No, I'm joking. I actually have no idea.
I have never met a French Canadian person outside of visiting Quebec.