Category Archives: Liberal

Breadcrumb Trail Links

'Its clear that the $600 million "urgent" election was nothing more than a power grab for Justin Trudeau trying to secure a majority government'

Author of the article:

Publishing date:

The Liberal government is taking too long to get MPs back to work in Ottawa, the Opposition charged Friday, after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Parliament will return Nov. 22

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

That means Parliament wont resume until 63 days after the Sept. 20 federal election.

Thats 63 days that Members of Parliament should be working in the House of Commons to address the pandemic, inflation, labour shortages, and a number of other issues important to Canadians, Conservative House Leader Grard Deltell said in a statement.

Its clear that the $600 million urgent election was nothing more than a power grab for Justin Trudeau trying to secure a majority government, and that he is in no rush to get back to work, Deltell said.

NDP leader Jagmeet Singh said in his own statement that by waiting until Nov. 22, the Liberals are showing that they are not interested in helping struggling families and small businesses in this fourth wave of COVID-19.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The House of Commons and the Senate rose for the summer in late June, making for a five-month break in between parliamentary sessions.

The Liberals also announced Friday the new federal Cabinet will be sworn in on Oct. 26. Following their re-election, the Liberals are down four female cabinet ministers, after Catherine McKenna chose not to run, and Maryam Monsef, Bernadette Jordan and Deb Schulte lost their seats. Trudeau has already announced Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland will stay in her role.

Daniel Bland, a professor of political science at McGill University, said it could be taking time to announce a Cabinet because of the need to ensure gender balance and regional representation, and because more ministers will be moved around this time.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

There is the sense that well see a much bigger shuffle of major changes to the Cabinet than in 2019, Bland said.

Bland said historically, the time between elections and Parliament resuming varies, and there have been longer gaps than 63 days, but its the context of how the election was called thats leading to frustration. He cited the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and the rationale Trudeau gave when he called the election in August, including that Parliament wasnt working and that he needed a clear mandate from Canadians to get the work done.

There is a sense that this is quite long, especially considering that there was an emergency to call elections to get things done, he said.

On Friday, the Liberals also outlined their priorities for when Parliament does return. That includes five COVID-19-related measures mandating vaccination for federal public servants, requiring proof of vaccination to board a plane or train, establishing an international proof of vaccination Canadians can use to travel overseas, funding provincial vaccine passports, and criminalizing harassment of health care workers.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Early priorities include re-introducing legislation to ban harmful conversion therapy, moving ahead with 10-day paid sick leave for all federally regulated workers, and bringing the provinces and territories together to work on better sick leave for Canadians across the country, the press release said. It added other priorities are making home ownership more affordable, accelerating climate action, and reconciliation.

The government will also be working to get the provinces and territories who havent signed deals for $10-a-day child care on board, and will be focusing on the COVID-19 support benefits that many Canadians and businesses still rely on.

The Liberals said they will be working with the opposition parties to ensure all MPs are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Canadians expect their elected representatives to lead by example in the fight against this virus, and the Prime Minister will be raising this with other leaders, the release said.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Not mentioned in the press release were three internet regulation bills the Liberal platform promised would be introduced in the first 100 days of the new parliamentary session, two of which stand to draw controversy over their impact on free speech and Canadians constitutional rights. That includes the reintroduction of controversial broadcasting bill C-10, which would allow the CRTC to regulate what social media content Canadians see in order to ensure the promotion of Canadian content.

Experts have also urged the government to send the upcoming online harms bills back to the drawing board, citing numerous issues with the proposal. Allowing social media platforms to proactively monitor and take down social media posts, as the government has proposed doing, amounts to censorship, they said.

Given the Nov. 22 return date, Parliament will only have a few weeks before its interrupted again for the holidays. That means committees wont have much, if any, time to get their work underway before the New Year.

Bland said coming back even a couple of weeks earlier could have made a difference.

It doesnt seem that they have any sense of urgency, on the part of Trudeau and his team, to get back to work, which is a bit puzzling, at least if you take seriously the rhetoric that they used to justify the federal election in the first place, he said.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

More:

Liberals in no rush to get back to work, say Opposition of two month gap between election and Parliament resuming - National Post

The anxiety surrounding cut-backs and the volatility of our job market is all too familiar for many. Professors at Texas A&M worry their departments might be next on the chopping block and are unfairly granted little communication from leadership.

A&M Liberal Arts faculty, staff and students are alarmed about the prospect of consolidation or elimination. These fears stem from a $600,000 contract with MGT of America Consulting, signed off by Billy Hamilton, deputy chancellor and CFO of the university System. President Banks will likely address the issue in the near future, but has remained relatively silent thus far. Anonymous faculty have criticized Banks for not being forthright with Liberal Arts faculty and the future of their careers.

I know firsthand our Anthropology Department does genuinely impressive work that should not be stifled. When I first changed my major from genetics to anthropology, I was skeptical about the latters placement in Liberal Arts. Over time, Ive learned to love the College of Liberal Arts and value the Department of Anthropologys history within it. As a proud student of the Liberal Arts, I would hate to see future Aggies denied any opportunities that come with stretched funding or an unfavorable organization. The hard-working faculty and staff similarly deserve better.

Anthropology professor Sharon Gursky gifted tarsier enthusiasts a small primate who looks like its getting ready for a long night of prepping for midterms worldwide with the knowledge of a new species, Tarsius spectrumgurskyae. These tiny junkie monkeys, though still impressive, are only one small part of A&Ms anthropological breakthroughs.

Anthropology department head Darryl de Ruiter was part of the team that discovered a new hominin species, Homo naledi, ranking among one of the top anthropological and paleontological discoveries of the decade. A&Ms Nautical Archaeology Program was among the first in the country and was founded by a pioneer in the field, George F. Bass, who was included in TIMEs Great Scientists: The Geniuses and Visionaries Who Transformed Our World. Techniques and knowledge developed in the Nautical Archaeology Program will be used to preserve history once inaccessible.

Late archaeology professor Alston Thoms was the assistant director at the Richard Beane site in San Antonio in the 1990s, which proved to be a vital project in allowing south Texas American Indians to reclaim their heritage and artifacts. I took two classes with Thoms, and his enthusiasm and expertise still impacts me to this day. I largely got into foraging because of how much he loved sharing his own personal knowledge of edible flora. Anyone who knew him can probably still recall his stories of the Great Camas Cookout. His advocacy and wisdom will continue to impact Texas archeology and Indigenous Texans fight for recognition for years to come.

There are stories just like these in every department within the College of Liberal Arts. The people, expertise, discoveries and experiences in Liberal Arts are vital to the university and bring real and meaningful change to the world. Theyre a part of Aggie history. If we are consolidated into other colleges, or eliminated altogether, Im afraid we might lose some of our history. As a university that cherishes its history and traditions, it would be shameful to lose such a valued part of ourselves.

Whats worse is the lack of transparency. In correspondence with The Battalion, faculty members accused President Banks of lying about how involved individual colleges are in MGTs evaluations. Above all, faculty and the student body those most directly impacted need to be informed about whats going on.

We need to provide future students the same opportunities for research and success as weve granted in the past, if not more. Even if MGTs consultation yields the best outcomes, everyone involved should be made aware, instead of being left blind and stumbling through the dark. I cant imagine how faculty might feel, having no idea where their job, program, department and even college might be in the coming years.

President Banks response cant come soon enough it should have come earlier, frankly. It needs to lift the veil and let the Aggies know what their future holds. A&M is the legacy of the professors and staff who dedicated their lives to making this university and our world a better place. The least we can do is let people know whats going to happen to their legacy.

Original post:

A&M Liberal Arts under threat | Opinion | thebatt.com - Texas A&M The Battalion

A vast majority of the German Greens' party congress voted in favor of entering formal coalition talks with the center-left Social Democrats (SPD) and the liberal Free Democrats(FDP), putting Germany one step closer to launching a new government.

Only two delegates out of the 70 total voted Sunday against the negotiations, while one party member abstained.

"We have the chance to take on responsibility and play a decisive role in this government of progress. We are happy to face this responsibility," the party tweeted shortly after the vote.

If the talks succeed, the three-way coalition would effectively mark the end of 16 years of a conservative-led government under Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had announced plans to retire from politics before September's vote. That put the Social Democrats, which came first in the election, and their candidate for chancellor, Finance Minister Olaf Scholz, in pole position to lead the next government.

The SPDs party leadership unanimously supported starting the coalition talks Friday, while the FDP's leadership is set to vote on the negotiations on Monday.

Over the weekend, Green party co-leaders Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck urged members to vote in favor of the coalition talks, arguing that thepapernegotiated between the three parties as a basis for the talks included commitments in favor of "future investments in climate protection, research and education, and digitization."

The document, unveiled on Friday, includes a proposal to move Germany's exit from coal from 2038 to 2030; measures to boost the expansion of renewable energy; and the creation of an "immediate climate protection program."

Although some delegates at the Green party congress questioned if the exploratory paper did enough to address issues like immigration and poverty, Baerbock countered that the Greens would use the negotiations to ask for even greater concessions from their partners in the so-called traffic light coalition named for the parties' colors of red (SPD), yellow (FDP) and green (the Greens).

"If we want to change something, we need decisions that will support us in the next decade," Baerbock said. "Our focus is on the big tasks of the future."

Read this article:

German Greens vote to start formal coalition talks with SPD, liberals - POLITICO Europe

Harvard believes in the transformative potential of liberal arts education. And it is through this remarkable power of liberal arts that Harvard pursues its mission to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders of our society. But has Harvard really done justice to the spirit of liberal arts?

Harvards model for imparting its liberal arts education has been its flagship General Education program. At Harvard, students do not just take courses in their field of study.

In addition to taking a course in the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities, students must take General Education courses across four categories: aesthetics and culture; ethics and civics; histories, societies, individuals; and science and technology in society. These requirements, together with the mandatory expository writing requirement to be completed in students first year, a foreign language requirement, and a quantitative reasoning requirement, form the core of Harvards liberal arts curriculum.

While this model gives the impression of fostering intellectual breadth, it leaves a lot to be desired.

A typical Gen Ed course meets twice a week in a large lecture hall where between a couple dozen and a few hundred students passively listen to their professors monologue. In these Gen Ed classes, one can get away with never speaking up in class, ever talking to the professor, and most crucially, without ever meaningfully engaging with the topic. There are smaller, tight-knit discussion sections led by graduate students that meet each week, but these sections can often feel fleeting, incomplete, and futile. These courses often fail to generate sufficient interest among many students, who treat these classes as an unavoidable inconvenience. It is thus no wonder that many students end up enrolling in gems that require little effort and guarantee a good grade.

However, this culture of treating Gen Eds as a nuisance is antithetical to a true liberal arts education. At its core, a liberal arts education is meant to develop critical thinking required to challenge various assumptions and biases underpinning our beliefs, stimulate intellectual growth through a holistic approach to knowledge, engender inquisitiveness about the most pressing issues facing humanity, and cultivate a strong moral character. The ethos of liberal arts, I believe, can be summed up in this famous quote from Platos Socrates: the unexamined life is not worth living.

To be educated in the liberal arts, thus, is to be curious about the world around you, to engage in intellectual debates to get closer to truth, to meditate deeply on the human condition, and to lead a meaningful life. But how successful is Harvards curriculum in encouraging this?

Currently, Harvards commitment to liberal arts is too shallow. It does not have to be this way. In envisaging a true liberal arts education for its students, Harvard could derive inspiration from Columbias core curriculum. At Columbia, each student has to take a certain number of small, discussion-based humanities courses that delve into interdisciplinary topics and engage students with primary sources. Every student at Columbia takes these courses during their time at college, where they critically engage with the dominant themes of our contemporary civilization and study the masterpieces of literature and philosophy, music, visual art, and modern science.

By the end of their first year at Columbia, students have a shared academic experience of reading and discussing texts that have shaped our world in fundamental ways. This experience makes students better thinkers and contributes to creating a more cohesive community by facilitating open discussions and free exchange of ideas in dining halls, dorm rooms, and libraries. In this way, students are encouraged to learn from their peers and empathize with diverse perspectives even outside the classroom. This, I would argue, should be the hallmark of any liberal arts education.

While any liberal arts curriculum prides itself on academic flexibility, what Harvard needs, paradoxically, is a more rigid curriculum that is sufficiently rigorous and challenges students to get out of their comfort zones. The purpose of a liberal arts curriculum should be to inspire students to be independent, life-long learners, and fostering independent learning requires guidance. A core curriculum consisting of timeless works that trace the history of ideas and examine the human condition can serve as the foundation for cultivating the independence and intellectual inquiry essential to a complete education. This would also serve as an antidote to the excesses of career-oriented learning thats ubiquitous at Harvard. Instead, students will be encouraged to learn for the sake of understanding the world.

To that end, in their first year, all students should be exposed to great works of art, literature and philosophy from around the world in small discussion seminars led by Harvard faculty. These classes should abstain from passive pedagogy and should instead be styled in the Socratic tradition. Each student should be expected to produce original, thought-provoking work at the end of these courses reflecting on their sense of purpose in the world.

Ultimately, in addition to nurturing student-faculty relationships, the aim of this model would be to promote human flourishing through helping students discover themselves. This would go a long way in making Harvards promise of a true liberal arts education credible.

Tarun Timalsina 22 is an Economics concentrator in Pforzheimer House.

Read the original post:

Harvard Must Rethink Its Approach to Liberal Arts | Opinion - Harvard Crimson

Media top headlines October 15

In media news today, Don Lemon denies CNN 'lied' about Joe Rogan's ivermectin COVID treatment, Biden continues to exit without taking reporter questions, and a Washington Post columnist warns critical race theory is 'potent' in VA governor race

Liberal Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus slammed Yale Law School students and officials who became upset over a party invitation sent by another student they claimed contained "pejorative and racist language."

In a Thursday op-ed, Marcus ridiculed the "grievance culture" of the students driving the backlash to second-year law student Trent Colbert's invitation to a Constitution Day party, and declared that, although they may be the best and brightest students, they needed to do some growing up.

A Yale University sign in New Haven, Conn. (iStock)

"Sup NALSA, Hope youre all still feeling social! This Friday at 7:30, we will be christening our very own (soon to be) world-renowned NALSA Trap House . . . by throwing a Constitution Day bash in collaboration with FedSoc. Planned attractions include Popeyes chicken, basic-b--ch-American-themed snacks (like apple pie, etc.) . . . Hope to see you all there," Colbert's invitation read, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

ANTI-WHITE YALE LECTURER A RADICAL DISGRACE AMID CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE AMONG BLACK LEADERS: BOB WOODSON

The invitation was sent to students belonging to the Native American Law Students Association (NALSA), of which Colbert is a member. He also belongs to the conservataive Federalist Society.

Marcus explained that although the term "trap house" was described in the Urban Dictionary as being "originally used to describe a crack house in a shady neighborhood," but "has since been abused by high school students who like to pretend theyre cool by drinking their moms beer together," it still ignited a firestorm that spread to students outside NALSA.

"Within minutes, as reported by Aaron Sibarium of the Washington Free Beacon, the invitation was posted on the group chat for all 2Ls, or second-year law students, of which several asserted that the invite had racist connotations, and had encouraged students to attend in blackface," Marcus wrote.

YALE UNIVERSITY CONFIRMS ITS CONTROVERSIAL VINLAND MAP IS A FAKE

"I guess celebrating whiteness wasnt enough," wrote the president of the Black Law Students Association on the chat. Marcus noted that she also claimed the Federalist Society "has historically supported anti-Black rhetoric."

Within 12 hours, Colbert was summoned to meet with associate law dean Ellen Cosgrove and diversity director Yaseen Eldik, who told him they received multiple complaints of "discrimination and harassment" over the invitation and instructed him to apologize.

"New Haven, Connecticut, USA - June 1, 2011: A view of the Yale campus, with the entrance to the renowned Sterling Library at the left. This is one of the largest research libraries in the United States, and is noted for its gothic revival architecture."

Colbert recorded the conversation secretly, which revealed Eldik claiming that the Federalist Society was "triggering" for some students because of "oppressive" political affiliations.

NYC SHIRNK TELLS YALE AUDIENCE SHE FANTASIZES ABOUT SHOOTING WHITE PEOPLE IN HEAD

"Sorry, but if youre triggered by the Federalist Society, you dont belong on a law school campus," Marcus wrote.

Colbert resisted their attempts to send out an apology note to students, but the administrators later sent out their own note condemning the "pejorative and racist" language in the invitation.

A later conversation between administrators and Colbert appeared to include veiled threats to his future as a law student, although the school denied that it intended to discipline him.

The Free Beacon's report has set off a firestorm of criticism of the school amid wider debates about liberal intolerance for opposing view points.

"But thats not the biggest challenge at Yale or at other law school campuses. Its how to deal with a grievance culture in which every slight, real or perceived, is greeted with outsize demands for disciplinary consequences. There is or should be a distinction between sophomoric provocation and outright racism," Marcus wrote.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"These students may be among the best and brightest, but they also need to do some growing up," Marcus wrote.

More:

Liberal WaPo columnist slams 'triggered' Yale after report on 'racist' party invitation: 'Do some growing up' - Fox News

After the Ontario election of 1985, Bob Rae went looking for a way to avoid what he called the "day-to-day blackmail bullshit" of minority government.

The result was a unique accord between David Peterson's Liberals and Rae's NDP which saw the New Democrats (with 25 seats) formally agree to support a Liberal government (with 48 seats) on a series of specific initiatives for a period of two years.

Such arrangements remain rare in Canadian politics. For the most part, whenever an election fails to produce a majority government, the governing party and the opposition parties proceed to engage in the "day-to-day roulette of minority government," as Rae described it in his autobiography, From Protest to Power.Each new measure put before Parliament becomes a game of chicken fought on the basis of whether anyone is willing to force an election.

But if at the federal level, at least minority Parliaments are now likely to be the rulerather than the exception, it might be time for the major parties to agree with Rae's contention that there are better and less exhausting ways to run a democracy.

And perhaps the Peterson and Rae accord could serve asinspiration for Prime MinisterJustin Trudeau and NDP LeaderJagmeet Singh.

In 1985, shared priorities gave the Liberals and NDP a solid basis for working together. "When we came to negotiate between the two parties, we had enough to fill up several legislative agendas that we could agree on," Herschel Ezrin, Peterson's chief of staff, told me in 2015.

The resulting agreement covered a range of progressive priorities, including employment for young people, housing, elder care, child care and pensions.

But the parties also made a deliberateeffort to communicate with each other over those two years.

"We were careful not to give them any view that we were somehow trying to do something that had not been agreed to. We introduced other pieces of legislation that hadn't been on the list, but the point was we never tried to do anything that was a surprise,"Ezrin said. "This was no drama. There was a lot of time expended on maintenance."

In terms of both policy and process, there are echoes of the 1985 accord in the 2017 agreement in British Columbia between theprovince's NDP and Greens. That 2017 dealstated that it would establish "a new relationship between the two parties, founded on the principle of 'good faith and no surprises.'"

In both cases, those deals might have seemed more necessary because the parties with the second-most seats in the legislature (the Ontario Liberals in 1985 and the B.C.NDP in 2017) were looking to defeat and replace incumbent governments after an election. Practically, theneed to guarantee the support of the third party wasobvious. Politically, it was important to project stability.

Those same conditions won't be present in the House of Commons thatconvenes in Ottawa on November 22. The Liberals are relatively ensconced in government, they have more than one potential bargaining partner andthe other parties aren't manoeuvringto replace them immediately.

But one of the messages of last month's election was that Canadians aren'tparticularly interested in seeing politicians campaignright now. What they seem towant instead is forMPstogetthings done.

And however much the Liberals and NDP disagree about methods, they agree broadlywhen it comes to which issues the federal government should focus on: inequality, climate change, reconciliation and improving public support programs like child care and long term care.

For the Liberals, the benefit of suchan agreement could be a chance to get more things done over the next two or four years than they could by negotiatingissue-to-issue. In addition to establishing a clear agenda, an accord might make it easier for the government to get around the sorts of opposition stalling tacticsthat are more easily employed in a minority Parliament.

If such an accord were to succeed, New Democrats could eventually claim some credit for a particularly activist period in federal government. They also wouldwant to come away with a few accomplishmentsthey could point to as havinghappened only because they were involved.

Naysayers on the NDP side might point out that Peterson's Ontario Liberals won a huge majority after the accord concluded in 1987. But Rae's NDPwent on to winits own majority in 1990 the one and only time the party has formed a government in Ontario.

For now, this all seems to be entirely hypothetical. The Prime Minister's Office said Friday that Trudeau will speak with the other party leaders next week, but an NDP source says they haven't yet heard from the government about any plans for how Parliament will work. The same source says the party thinks the last Parliament worked well without a formal accord.

New Democrats did come away from the last Parliament claiming they had moved the Liberals on several fronts (the Liberals might debate the details of some of those claims). They might be content to let the new Parliament play out again as a rolling series of battles and bargains.

The Liberals might be happy to do likewise. On any given issue and for the next while they might find that mostMPs are unwilling to trigger an election by defeating government legislation on a confidence vote.

But perhaps there's a better way to get things done in a parliamentary democracy one that involves less of the"day-to-day blackmail bullshit."

The rest is here:

Bargain or 'blackmail'? Why the Liberals might be wise to do a deal with the NDP - CBC.ca

For my part, from the world of political fundraising Im comfortable to be a self-confessed poacher turned gamekeeper. My agenda is to push for change, as hard as I have pushed for tens of millions of dollars in political donations over the decades.

This week, the Independent Commission Against Corruption is focusing its attention on whether two grants of public money were awarded to community organisations in Wagga Wagga in breach of public trust, but lets not forget that political donations have been at the heart of many of its investigations and that while the existing system remains, this will not change.

Nearly 50 years of tweaking and tinkering at the edges have given us a political fundraising regime that has erred heavily on the side of seeing the rivers of gold flow, albeit with relatively declining volume. Remarkably little meaningful attempt was made to protect the integrity of the political system and the institutions that comprise it.

Over many decades, hundreds of millions of dollars have been donated to parties across the political spectrum, from left to right, including the smaller parties and some independents. Predictably, the major parties are the major beneficiaries. Its worth pointing out that the largest political donation ever made at the time was to the Greens in 2010. That was a donation of $1.6 million by Wotif founder Graeme Wood.

Former ALP senator Stephen Loosley. In Australian politics money doesnt talk, it screams.Credit:Peter Morris

There are very few saints in this game. Maybe none. The Graeme Wood donation is noteworthy especially because it went to the Greens the party that has protested more than any other about the need to reform the system.

Lets be clear. Essentially, we are not talking about bags of laundered cash being handed to MPs or the parties they represent, although gaol time has been served by some who crossed that line and got caught. At the heart of political fundraising is a more subtle form of soft corruption. Its more about being seen at the right functions and having the right ministers know we were prepared to invest in the democratic system.

Loading

To be fair, most who donate do not have an expectation of a return. Yes, there are many altruistic donors giving to a range of parties. The problem is that some do have an expectation of a return. At another level, the debate continues whether fairly or unfairly a government decision that favourably affects a donor can ever pass the smell test.

Nor is public funding the solution, except to the parties problem of declining donation levels from private sources. The truth is that public funding is an appalling rort against the Australian taxpayer. Why should political parties get a royalty for every vote they receive? In many respects, public funding is a more serious rort than anything that may come from private donors for the simple reason it is taxpayers money.

Private donors can work out their own greed or stupidity. Taxpayer money should not be a de facto partner in this game.

Australia has a lofty place on the world stage when it comes to standards of governance, transparency and accountability in both public and private sectors. So why should the blemish, the dark cloud of political fundraising, be tolerated?

Surely in our informed, contemporary, open and accountable democracy, we are beyond being told well, its been like this for 50 years and both sides do it, so its not really a big deal.

This is a big deal. Daily, our system of political fundraising insidiously eats away at the credibility of Australias otherwise relatively pristine democracy. This virus is edging us closer to the Americanisation of Australian politics.

So how do we break the appalling optics and practices surrounding political donations?

There is a solution, and it involves the national cabinet. This will only work if federal, state and territory governments face up to and own the damage done by a flawed system of political donations and public funding.

The reforms should not mean that a business leader, trade unionist, high net worth individual or manual worker are not allowed to donate. Let anyone on the electoral roll donate, capped at a modest amount. Its the companies, unions and employer entities that should be shut out.

Loading

For once, political parties would have to get off their backsides to raise the money from the individuals who actually vote rather than rely on traditional rivers of gold from entities.

These reforms require Australian political parties to sever the umbilical cord with their traditional financial backers. Only then will this stain on the integrity of our democracy be addressed.

Business, unions, industry associations and the community need to vent the concerns about political fundraising that have been making them queasy for decades. The onus is on insiders such as me to blow the whistle on this entrenched soft corruption.

Good luck with all of that, I hear the seasoned wise heads say.

If we dont vaccinate against this virus, Stephen Loosley will remind me in decades to come Brother, the money is still screaming.

Michael Yabsley was a minister in the Greiner government and a federal treasurer of the Liberal Party.

Read this article:

Ive raised millions for the Liberals, but donation rules must change - Sydney Morning Herald

Media top headlines October 15

In media news today, Don Lemon denies CNN 'lied' about Joe Rogan's ivermectin COVID treatment, Biden continues to exit without taking reporter questions, and a Washington Post columnist warns critical race theory is 'potent' in VA governor race

Brooklyn Nets star Kyrie Irving is an outspoken athlete with a large platform who prides himself on putting his beliefs ahead of his career.

These traits resulted in the dynamic point guard being embraced by corporate media as a social justice warrior who risked his livelihood to stand up for what he thinks until he elected not to get vaccinated against coronavirus and broke rank with the liberal elite who are in favor of staunch vaccine mandates.

Last year, Complex published a history of Irvings social justice activism that praised him for supporting WNBA players, seeking justice for police shooting victim Breonna Taylor, resisting the NBAs plan to play in a "bubble" at the height of the pandemic, donating vegan burgers to a food bank, standing with the Rock Sioux in 2016 by opposing the Dakota Access oil pipelines, and wearing an "I Cant Breathe" shirt in 2014 to honor Eric Garner.

Irving was the topic of segments on CNN and MSNBC when he led a group of NBA players who didnt feel the league should take away from the Black Lives Matter movement that followed the killing of George Floyd. BET listed five times Irving used his platform to "fight the power," glamorizing him for bringing "attention to issues that are bigger than the game," and the liberal New York Daily News fawned over him for "putting humanity first."

KYRIE IRVING BREAKS SILENCE ON VACCINE DRAMA: 'I AM DOING WHATS BEST FOR ME'

Now he's standing out in a different way for deciding not to get vaccinated, saying he felt it was the best decision for him.

The unvaccinated Irving is not eligible to play home games in Brooklyn because of a New York City mandate, so the Nets decided a part-time player isnt in their best interest and sidelined him indefinitely. As a result, the glowing coverage Irving typically received for activism has turned into criticism. He is suddenly being called everything from "pathetic" to a "pawn" because of his stance on vaccine mandates.

"Kyrie Irving is being vilifiedfor not falling in line with the establishment media's predetermined stances," DePauw University professor and media critic Jeffrey McCall told Fox News Digital.

Brooklyn Nets star Kyrie Irving has been criticized for taking a stand against coronavirus vaccine mandates. (Photo by Sarah Stier/Getty Images)

"Establishment media don't really respect individual voices today, but instead seek to force conformity of opinion in the false hope that will create cultural unity.No doubt Irving would be getting celebrated if he were publicly advocating for the mainstream media's pet causes such as the green new deal, passing spending packages in Congress, opening borders, etc.," McCall added. "Media outlets should certainly be on board with the concept of free expression, instead of scolding people who actually want to express their own ideas."

The Athletics NBA insider Shams Charania first reported Tuesday that Irving "believes he is fighting for something bigger than basketball" and is upset that people are losing their jobs due to vaccine mandates.

Irving, who stands to lose half of his $35 million salary for skipping games over the vaccine rules, took to Instagram and offered his own explanation on Wednesday.

"This has everything to do with whats going on in our world you gotta put your livelihood on the line for a mandate that you dont necessarily agree with. Nobody should be forced to do anything with their bodies," he said.

"Im rocking with all those that have lost their jobs to this mandate and Im rocking with all those that chose to get vaccinated and are choosing to be safe as well. Im on both sides of all this," Irving said, adding that people with opposing views on the vaccine need to come together.

"No more division," he added.

NETS BAN KYRIE IRVING FROM TEAM OVER VACCINATION STATUS

Irving quickly turned into a villain to liberal members of the corporate media. He has been the subject of disparaging segments on CNN, MSNBC, and ESPN, and Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson blasted Irvings "self-pitying refusal" to get vaccinated against COVID-19 as "pathetic and dangerous" in a scathing column.

Outkick founder Clay Travis addressed what he said was hypocrisy in a series of tweets.

CLAY TRAVIS: KYRIE LOSING MILLIONS FOR STANCE, WHILE MEDIA ONLY SUPPORTS THOSE WHO PROFIT

CNN published a story headlined, "NBA star's vaccine skepticism runs counter to racial justice stance."

ESPNs Stephen A. Smith has been one of corporate medias most vocal critics of Irvings decision.

NEW YORK, NY - SEPTEMBER 04: ESPN anchor Stephen A. Smith attends the Dwyane Wade Book Launch Celebration With ESPN The Magazine at Jazz at Lincoln Center on September 4, 2012 in New York City. (Photo by Rob Kim/Getty Images)

"This is some of the stupidest nonsense Ive ever seen. Just flat-out stupid," Smith said Wednesday before belittling Irvings rationale.

"Youre gonna sit up there and compromise the championship aspirations of an organization you signed onto represent because you want to give a voice to the voiceless. Really? And how is that going to work out for you, Kyrie Irving? Youre going to disappear from the game of basketball," Smith said. "Who the hell is gonna be interested in what you have to say when you have proven that you cant be trusted enough to do your damn job?"

Smith was also invited on CNN to trash Irving to Don Lemon.

"As far as Im concerned, to hell with you," Smith said.

Lemon and CNN colleague Chris Cuomo launched on an extended rant against Irving on Tuesday night

"You have the right to do something, doesnt mean its right the way you're doing it. And that has just been lost in this perverse sense of prerogative that hey, I have the freedom you have the freedom to walk into traffic. You know, we dont suggest you do it," Cuomo said.

"We need to have the moral rectitude in our leaders that we demand of ourselves as Christians in our communities," Cuomo added. "So youre not going to do something science tells you to do to keep yourself and others safe in your community out of some perverse sense of freedom just because you dont have to?"

THE FIVE DEBATE KYRIE IRVING'S DECISION TO SIT OUT

Peacock host Rich Eisen, who took his "TheRich EisenShow" to the NBCs streaming service in 2020, also found an issue with Irvings explanation that he wants to provide a voice to the voiceless.

"Who says theyre voiceless? Every single day its all I hear about," Eisen said.

The Atlantics Derek Thompson questioned whether Irving refused other vaccines when he played college basketball at Duke University, and MSNBC host Joy Reid even called the point guard a "pawn for the alt-Right and MAGA army."

Former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann tweeted that Irvings explanation is both "bull and sh-t," while liberal activist Jon Cooper shared a tweet mocking comparisons between Irving and iconic boxer Muhammad Ali.

Media Research Center vice president Dan Gainor feels that journalists are especially vicious against minority influencers who dare to think for themselves.

"Its always the same whether its politicians like the late Herman Cain or stars like Kyrie Irving the media only celebrate them if they are obedient to the left," Gainor told Fox News Digital.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"Conservatives have been highly critical of the woke NBA. But Irving and others are apparently waking up to the idea that government is too powerful and vaccine mandates are a bad idea even if you support the vaccine," Gainor continued. "I think it's great that someone of his stature would put everything on the line not just for himself but for others. It's 100% predictable that the media would try to destroy him."

Fox News contributor Deroy Murdock is disgusted with the way the "brain-dead left" has covered Irvings personal decision.

"Pathetic, dangerous, flat-out stupid and a pawn for the alt-Right and MAGA army. This is how the Left responds to an adult black gentleman expressing his serious personal reservations about injecting the COVID-19 vaccine into his own body," Murdock said. "The Left could have engaged him with serious arguments about vaccine safety or the importance of ending this pandemic. Instead, they resorted to Kindergarten name-calling and juvenilead hominemattacks."

Fox News Ryan Gaydos and Brandon Gillespie contributedto this report.

Read the rest here:

Liberal media turns on progressive NBA star Kyrie Irving for breaking rank with left on vaccine mandates - Fox News

Progressive Ideals and Political Realities Since World War II

BA Harvard, MA/PhD University of Rochester

Distinguished Professor in the Department of History, the University of Illinois at Chicago

In the decades following World War II, American liberals had a vision for the world. Their ambitions would not stop at the waters edge: progressive internationalism, they believed, could help peoples everywhere achieve democracy, prosperity, and freedom. Chastened in part by the failures of these grand aspirations, in recent years liberals and the Left have retreated from such idealism. Today, as a beleaguered United States confronts a series of crises, does the postwar liberal tradition offer any useful lessons for American engagement with the world?

The historian Leon Fink examines key cases of progressive influence on postwar U.S. foreign policy, tracing the tension between liberal aspirations and the political realities that stymie them. From the reconstruction of post-Nazi West Germany to the struggle against apartheid, he shows how American liberals joined global allies in pursuit of an expansive political, social, and economic vision. Even as liberal internationalism brought such successes to the world, it also stumbled against domestic politics or was blind to the contradictions in capitalist development and the power of competing nationalist identities. A diplomatic history that emphasizes the roles of social class, labor movements, race, and grassroots activism,Undoingthe Liberal World Ordersuggests new directions for a progressive American foreign policy.

Time will be allocated for Q&A.

This program is part of the ColumbiaDC CUP series.

"Offering a broad analysis of left-liberal approaches to foreign policy in the second half of the twentieth century, this is a gripping book that manages to elicit a vision of postwar liberalism as a global project and to suggest some of the real difficulties that it encountered."Kimberly Phillips-Fein, author of Fear City: New York's Fiscal Crisis and the Rise of Austerity Politics

Leon Fink is distinguished professor of history emeritus at the University of Illinois at Chicago and senior resident scholar at Georgetown Universitys Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. He is the editor of the journalLabor: Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas, and his many books include, most recently,Labor Justice Across the Americas(2017).

CUP Series: This is a new initiative between ColumbiaDC and Columbia University Press to showcase acclaimed and pioneering work by renowned academics, scholars, and researchers published by theColumbia University Press.

See the original post here:

Undoing the Liberal World Order: Progressive Ideals and Political Realities Since World War II, with Leon Fink - Columbia University Irving Medical...

Aaron Gunn would be the end of the BC Liberals. Thats not speculative; Gunn intends to change the BC Liberals name and much more. He repeated this during his official leadership campaign announcement on Saturday. Although not greenlit as a candidate yet, Gunn has the intentions and support to shake up and break up the BC Liberals.

The Victoria-raised Gunn is not shy about calling himself a small-c conservative. His strident right-wing politics stand out on the NDPs Vancouver Island stronghold. Unlike other BC Liberal candidates who doggedly avoid the culture war, Gunn is on its frontlines. He protested the 2018 removal of Sir John A. MacDonalds statue from Victoria city hall, he was cancelled by the University of Victoria in 2020, and has provided unfavourable ongoing coverage of the activists at Fairy Creek.

BC Liberal establishment figures like Mark Marissen have scorned him. Marissen has a long history of campaigning for both the federal and BC Liberals and is former BC Liberal premier Christy Clarks ex-husband. Despite the BC Liberals reputation for being the provinces centre-right party, many federal Liberals like Marissen support it. Joyce Murray once sat as a BC Liberal MLA and now sits as a federal Liberal MP and cabinet minister in the Trudeau government.

The party exists as a dtente between federal Liberal supporters like Marissen and Tory supporters like former deputy premier Kevin Falcon. Falcon even endorsed Maxime Bernier in the 2017 Conservative leadership race. The coalitions uniting purpose is keeping the NDP out of power in BC and it has failed at it for two consecutive elections.

Despite Falcons previous enthusiasm for right-wing figures like Bernier, the BC Liberal establishment is desperate to shred the evidence of conservative politics that goes beyond tax cuts and deregulation. Mark Marissen contended that the unabashedly right-wing Aaron Gunn has no place in the BC Liberals.

It makes sense for the enfeebled BC Liberals to shun the Gunn candidacy. The party teeters on the brink of becoming a rump in the legislative assembly. The frail free-enterprise enthusiast coalition of conservatives and centrists cannot coexist with Gunn at the helm. Much of Gunns media output consists of interviewing federal Tories and attacking Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. BC Liberal supporters with connections to the federal Liberals like Mark Marissen will be in an impossible position.

The BC Liberals hemorrhaged votes in the last election. Polling websites give the NDP a 99-100% chance of winning the next one and few people would dispute that likely result. The BC Liberals are a complete and utter mess with no clear direction beyond being broadly pro-business and opposed to the NDP. Aaron Gunns candidacy promises a return to conservative politics that has not existed since Premier WAC Bennett. Gunn mentioned Bennett (16:14) as an inspiration in his Saturday speech.

More British Columbians voted Tory in the last federal election than any other party. Gunn is friendly with the Tories and could bring in a string of endorsements from Tory politicians and even public figures like Conrad Black, whom he interviewed among many more.

BC Liberal candidates signed up around 30,000 new members to vote in the partys last leadership election. Gunn has 80,000 followers on Facebook alone. For establishment figures like Mark Marissen, and MLAs running for leader like Michael Lee and Ellis Ross, their nightmare is Gunns supporters flooding the BC Liberals with new memberships to vote for him.

Gunns campaign is unmistakably a takeover attempt. Renaming the BC Liberals is just cosmetic. Aaron Gunn would end the free-enterprise coalition and turn it into a party by and for conservatives. Roughly 800,000 votes are needed to win a provincial election in BC. About 740,000 British Columbians voted Tory in Septembers federal election. Gunns ambitions for an explicit right-wing alternative to the NDP are more feasible than the BC Liberals want to admit.

If the BC Liberals approve Gunns candidacy, he has a good chance of winning and effectively destroying the party. If the party doesnt greenlight Gunn, they risk losing thousands of right-wing votes to a splinter campaign. That contest is years away and Gunn has ample time to build a breakaway movement. The choice and predicament is the BC Liberals fault alone for failing to offer a compelling alternative to voters. They roll the dice either way. The NDP probably doesnt mind.

Geoff Russ is a writer and journalist who has had his reporting featured in The Source, The Spec, The Tyee and The Times Colonist.

Have an opinion you want to share? Email it to us at [emailprotected].

Go here to read the rest:

Opinion: Aaron Gunn would be the end of the BC Liberals - CHEK