Canadians were among the best soldiers in WW1, the majority of ANZAKs fought in Gallipoli where they weren't of much use to the wider war. It was only much later in the war when Australians made it to the western front, but by then the war was practically over. Read literally anything about Canadians in WW1 and you will see that they were the best. If the quote by the prime minister of the UK, Lloyd George, doesn't do it for you I don't know what will
View attachment 1445813
Being the first across no man's land and meat shields for more valued units doesn't make you the best. It makes you expendable. Lapping up false praise from the government that exploited you to ensure it's own citizens came home is pure cope.
While that is true, foreign troops are praised more than any others, Canadians have more merit to the claim than any other. During the 100 days offensive the CEF (Canadian expeditionary force) were put on the front lines the most, leading the way. The CEF took 45k casualties during that time which was quite a lot considering the small number of total CEF men. They wouldn't have been put on the front lines if they weren't really special compared to other divisions.
And while writing this there was another salient point that i was going to mention but I forgot, i'll come back when I remember it.
There's probably a good reason why a lot of these colonial troops were praised. Military theorists, notably Douglas Haig, at the time thought that the best soldiers were farmers because they had been taught from a young age to follow orders and are physically tough. In the colonies most people were farmers and lived rural lives compared to their more developed motherlands. This could explain why those men were praised more
also, 16 Germans were impaled by Hindu lancers at the battle of the Somme, imagine being a German looking out of your trench and seeing a bloody cavalry charge over no man's land. Stalin watched cowboy movies with Nikita Khrushchev
No, dummy. The purpose was twofold, and neither is because colonists make good fighters.
1. Send colonists to front lines. Proper citizens get held back and survive while expendable colonials die for the mother state.
2. The more colonists that die, the weaker the colony becomes, preventing uprisings or independence.
Cope harder, pussy. Canadians were sent to the front lines because the English officers viewed them an a commodity and less than people.
This is an idea from the book Lament For A Nation by George Grant, it goes as follows
"1. The modern world evolves inexorably towards the "universal and homogeneous state," which renders local cultures redundant.
2. Canada is a local culture situated right next to the very heart of modernity, the United States.
3. Canadians think of modernity as a good thing therefore,
4. Canada, even understood by its own citizens, is redundant."
If this is true then how come Canada hasn't been consumed already?
Because Canada is an effective proxy for America. When the US wouldn't negotiate with the Viet Cong, who did it for them? Canada. When the US "wouldn't negotiate with terrorists" and talk to the Taliban, who did it for them? Canada. What country has always been the intermediary in talking to Iran? Canada.
And when it comes to the UN, keeping Canada around is like having a retarded child that's old enough to vote. We basically give the US two votes on all issues.
Sure, but this doesn't make Canada dependent on America. Eastern Europe is experiencing a brain drain but those countries aren't particularly reliant on western Europe. This point just strengthens the protectionist position (I don't know if you're for or against protectionism but I believe free trade has done more harm to Canada than immigration), if Canada brought back base industries then the brain drain would stop. This whole topic was covered extensively in the book the vanishing country, but to sum it up, Canadian lawyers and engineers are leaving Canada because there's nothing for them in Canada, but if we brought back the head offices of these companies then the people working in America would come back.
No they wouldn't. Are you on drugs? People go the US because the pay is better (it always will be), cost of living is lower (it always will be) taxes are lower (they always will be) and there's better opportunity for their children (always will be). We rely on America to send people to fill the gaps created by the brain drain. The shitty refugees we bring in certainly won't, and we don't have a high enough birth rate to do it ourselves, unlike eastern Europe.
International trade is supposed to be fair, so when a country puts forward policies to further their own economic interests the United Nations throws a fit. America was mad because we weren't playing fair by "the laws of international trade" that were dictated by the UN. But I am in favour of the dairy cartels and other government subsidies if it means that Canadian industry survives, and if that means cutting off trade relations with the US then so be it
The central planning of the Canadian economy is what drives up the cost of living for Canadians. In all areas. Central planning fixes prices so Canadians have to pay more for goods, and simultaneously increases taxes in order to compensate all of the superfluous government bureaucrats that are employed by these Byzantine practices.
But at the same time I'm glad that Canadians think about America the way they do because it means that they will reject union with the states and Canada lives to see another day. Hopefully Canada becomes like Austria and we develop a totally different history and culture while still speaking the same language as our bigger neighbour.
When's that gonna begin? Because currently, Canadians drive American cars while listening to American music and driving to theaters to watch American films, or driving to American stores to buy American goods. At home, Canadians watch American programming on American channels while using American or Chinese devices to access American content on American websites and speaking American English.
Sure sounds like we've got our own culture to me!
Canada isn't a socialist country, socialism means that the workers (the state) owns the means of production, Canada is an interventionist country meaning that the government has a hand in the economy but they don't directly manipulate it like more authoritarian governments. The closest economy to Canada is France.
lol WHAT?
Socialism is anytime you have central planning.
The practice of Supply Chain Management in Dairy and Poultry is central planning.
The CRTC regulating how many cellular service providers are active in Canada and the MINIMUM charges for service is central planning.
THE CRTC mandating minimum levels of "Canadian Content" on radio and television is central planning.
The CRTC regulating how many news papers operate in Canada is central planning.
The Federal government distributing funding to the media as long as the publish enough propaganda is central planning.
The existence of the CBC is central planning.
The National Energy Board, which regulates what times of energy Canada produces and what infrastructure is built where, is central planning.
The National Wheat Board, the supply chain management of agriculture, is central planning.
That's sure a lot of socialism going on for a country that's not socialist.