I couldn't change the channel quickly enough so I heard a segment on Stephen Harper on As It Happens. I suppose there are those that would laud Mr Harper being interviewed about his recent book. There are others who would point out he was on Fox.
What galled the most, was his claim that Marxism only survived in Academia. His statement would have carried a lot more weight if he was able to cite some sort of factual backup. Isn't he supposed to be some sort of intellectual policy wonk? Without backup, his claim of Universities being a refuge for Marxist elite-ists carries as much weight as the statements of a (hopefully) soon to be ex-US President.
We suffered under his governance void of intellectual rigour. He hasn't learned anything in 3 years, has he?Recommend this Post
Tuesday, October 9, 2018
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
My question is 'why does he hate Canada so much, to the point where he seems to be inviting US 'intervention' with our national affairs'?
I don't think he hates Canada. He just likes being Stephen Harper more than he likes being Canadian.
He loves basking in the awe of rich, so called American, power brokers. He's the Paul Ryan of Canadian prime ministers.
He's just dog-whistling.
Sour grapes on little stevie's part - as he never could get a real degree from a real university. His thesis is lame libertarian philosophy thinly disguised as con-economics and reads like a Grade 11 term report.
The anti-academic thing is a Level-One-Belief of the modern Con movement - Jordan Peterson being the only real exception . . .
Or maybe he's ticked off because he considers himself an economist . . . and The Economist doesn't support his ideas:
https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2018/05/03/rulers-of-the-world-read-karl-marx?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/rulersoftheworldreadkarlmarxsecondtimefarce
I am regular visitor, how are you everybody? This article posted at this web page is genuinely good.
Post a Comment