The title doesn't explain it very well. Electronic media in Canada has always been regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, which has had long-standing rules in place to prioritize "Canadian Content." The CRTC mandates that a certain percentage of the content aired on Canadian television or radio stations must be produced by Canadian artists.
This was initially pitched as a way to prioritize Canadian culture in Canada by ensuring that Canadian artists got prioritized access to Canadian audiences. However, the corporate monopolization of the music industry and the way record label contracts work with radio stations has meant instead that Canadians with radios on in their cars or their workplaces have to listen to the same 10 songs over and over again. If you have the government saying such a percentage of what you play has to be Canadian, and you have a record label saying that a certain percentage of what you play has to be their sponsored artists or you lose their contract, the result is endless repeats of Nickelback, Justin Bieber and the Tragically Hip with no variety at all. It's even worse on television, because there have only ever been two or three TV shows produced by Canadian studios that were actually any good.
These rules have never really been applied to the internet, because it's much more difficult to restrict Canadians' access to content that is not produced by Canadians on platforms like YouTube, where the audience can choose what they watch and when
Bill C-10 was initially pitched as a way to rectify this, and to reassert the CRTC's stranglehold on what cultural content Canadians can consume. It was originally targeted at platforms, not individual content creators, but that clause was removed from the bill in committee. The way the bill reads now, the CRTC and other government agencies will be able to order YouTube, Facebook or any other social media company to remove any content posted by a Canadian.
That would be giving the people.funding antifa exactly what they want. The goal of all of this is to give the Feds a reason to establish a national police force, which will supercede local authority. Permanent tyranny from then on.
This is even more ridiculous than the mob throwing a fit because Bieber got dreadlocks.
You overestimate the CIA. They are just about the most incompetent government organization in history. The one thing even more damning than all of their failed Bond-villainesque schemes over the decades is the fact that we know about all of them.
Utah is a typical American example of the kind of sectarian voting you see in places like Northern Ireland, Lebanon, Cyprus and other countries where ethnic or religious divisions are the primary drivers of politics. Politics in places like that are very easy for the globalist elite to corrupt, because they can be sure that any Mormon they run in Utah will be elected simply for being Mormon, regardless of his policies. All they need to do is put more money behind him than his more populist opponents might have, even if they are also Mormon.
Current EU policy is that they will be mandatory for everyone from 2023. They already are in 15 countries.
At least passports and drivers' licences actually serve a specific function. ID cards for the sake of ID cards are nothing but a badge of servitude.
I'd love to leave, but I also won't get vaccinated, so I'm not sure I'll ever be able to get out of here.
How about reject identity cards full stop.
The pace at which we are sliding into outright tyranny has actually managed to surprise me.
It's still going to pass. They won't back down this time. They have the votes, and they will do it.
Over Lorne Michaels' undead body.
Can someone tell me the Mandarin for "All your base are belong to us?"
And yet the California housing market is still on fire in cities like SF and LA. Wonder who's buying all that property if it's not people moving there from other states?
Hmmmmm.
I thought we didn't allow images of child abuse to be posted here?
He's done almost exclusively indy Christian films for more than a decade now.
Human beings reason by means of concepts and definitions, and we also make laws by means of definitions, and if you don't know how to operate with respect for those definitions, you can't make the law.
An individual who is impotent, or another who is infertile, does not change the definition of marriage in principle, because between a man and a woman, in principle, procreation is always possible, and it is that possibility which gave rise to the institution of marriage in the first place, as a matter of law and governance.
But when it is impossible, as between two males or two females, where you're not just talking about something that's incidentally impossible: It's impossible in principle, and that means that, if you say that that's a marriage, you are saying marriage can be understood in principle apart from procreation. You have changed its definition in such a way as, in fact, to destroy the necessity of the institution, since the only reason it has existed in human societies and civilizations was to regulate, from a social point of view, the obligations and responsibilities attendant upon procreation.
When you start playing games in this way, you are actually acting as if the institution has no basis independent of your own arbitrary whim.
Allen Keyes
Dim Fool has the analytical prowess of a fruit fly debating whether to land in a cider trap.
The fact is that the way regional governments are divided in modern countries is a relic of the 19th century, when rural and urban populations were about even. At this point, it makes more sense for megacities like New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, Philly, SF and the rest to be their own states with their own state governments, able to address policy issues that are specific to urban areas, and free up the rural regions of NY, Cali and Illinois to elect state governments that address the concerns of rural voters and industries.
Also please keep your parachute delpoyed until the aircraft has come to a complete stop.
It's Canada. We don't have those anymore.
They don't call him Charlie Cuck for nothing.
No such thing as local radio anymore. Every local station is owned by one of a dozen national or international corporations.
You get fined millions and then you get your broadcasting licence revoked.