The under-16 social media ban marks the end of the open UK internet

Quoting: CaldathrasAh, speaking to a fellow Canadian. What can we do between elections to control our government? The federal government/politicians have done everything they can to prevent it. We have no MP recall. The modern politician ignores citizen protests or invokes the Emergencies Act to silence them. Referendums are pointless, as the federal government does not have to legally implement or follow the results of a referendum. It's basically just a poll. (Look it up, like I did. Referendums, in most provinces, are binding, but not at the federal level.) So, what recourse - other than elections - do Canadian citizens have to influence and control the Canadian government?

The politicians gave themselves raises exactly because they knew that Canadian citizens are powerless to do anything about it. I agree that $209.8K for a MP backbencher is obscene. On the flip-side, at the local government level where I live, our elected officials are only paid $28.9K annually (as of 2023). It used to be $12.9K before that.

Ah, asking the important questions.

For starters, mass political ignorance is a huge problem here. Ask a random person on the street to name a single person in Mark Carney's cabinet, and I bet you most of them wouldn't be able to name a single person - nevermind the details of what our provincial and federal governments are even doing. On the flipside, ask them about American politics, and I guarantee you they'll talk your ear off about all the things they saw on American TV. They'll tell you all about the American problems that American TV likes to report on... and sadly, I really do believe that most people here vote for our Prime Minister based entirely on what goes on in the United States. It's pathetic. We like tell ourselves that we're proud of our country, but the truth is that the majority of us think so little of ourselves that we actually believe that another country is in charge of our own destiny. Most people either did not care about the Emergencies Act, don't even know that it happened, or if they did know about it, don't understand why its illegal use is a big deal and how it affects them. I hate to say it, but Canadian citizens themselves are a bigger threat to us than our government is. How do we fix this? Holy shit... well... I'll let you know if I figure that out.

Quoting: Slaxer

Quoting: CaldathrasAh, speaking to a fellow Canadian. What can we do between elections to control our government? The federal government/politicians have done everything they can to prevent it. We have no MP recall. The modern politician ignores citizen protests or invokes the Emergencies Act to silence them. Referendums are pointless, as the federal government does not have to legally implement or follow the results of a referendum. It's basically just a poll. (Look it up, like I did. Referendums, in most provinces, are binding, but not at the federal level.) So, what recourse - other than elections - do Canadian citizens have to influence and control the Canadian government?

The politicians gave themselves raises exactly because they knew that Canadian citizens are powerless to do anything about it. I agree that $209.8K for a MP backbencher is obscene. On the flip-side, at the local government level where I live, our elected officials are only paid $28.9K annually (as of 2023). It used to be $12.9K before that.

Ah, asking the important questions.

For starters, mass political ignorance is a huge problem here. Ask a random person on the street to name a single person in Mark Carney's cabinet, and I bet you most of them wouldn't be able to name a single person - nevermind the details of what our provincial and federal governments are even doing. On the flipside, ask them about American politics, and I guarantee you they'll talk your ear off about all the things they saw on American TV. They'll tell you all about the American problems that American TV likes to report on... and sadly, I really do believe that most people here vote for our Prime Minister based entirely on what goes on in the United States. It's pathetic. We like tell ourselves that we're proud of our country, but the truth is that the majority of us think so little of ourselves that we actually believe that another country is in charge of our own destiny. Most people either did not care about the Emergencies Act, don't even know that it happened, or if they did know about it, don't understand why its illegal use is a big deal and how it affects them. I hate to say it, but Canadian citizens themselves are a bigger threat to us than our government is. How do we fix this? Holy shit... well... I'll let you know if I figure that out.

Read this to my wife. She feels that the only way to fix this would be to reintroduce a civics class into school curriculum, like they used to have decades ago when her father was a child. She also thinks it's unlikely to happen, just like old-school home economics.

Quoting: CaldathrasRead this to my wife. She feels that the only way to fix this would be to reintroduce a civics class into school curriculum, like they used to have decades ago when her father was a child. She also thinks it's unlikely to happen, just like old-school home economics.

I agree with your wife, that would be a great start, but how would we convince our public school districts to include this in the school curriculum? Our provincial governments have control over that. I dunno what it's like in your province, but the government here in BC loves to preach about how Canada is a terrible racist country that deserves self-hatred because it's fundamentally racist, and will continue to be racist forever. Obviously, this is not true, but this is what they like to remind people everyday.

Even though the Canadian government is required to post our Constitution (both the Constitution act of 1867 and 1982) on the government website, I really do believe that they don't want you looking into that too much. They don't want you to know anything about sections 1 and 33 of the Constitution Act of 1982 (and I'm paraphrasing here) where it basically says that Canadians have basic rights and freedoms, UNTIL a judge decides that we don't. What's the problem with that? Our judges are appointed by the Governor General based on the advice of our Prime Minister... which means the judges in our country will all favour our Prime Minister and his party - which then means that our rights and freedoms are just make-believe. This was demonstrated when NOBODY went to jail for implementing martial law because a bunch of people waved Canadian flags and ate hot dogs on the streets of Ottawa in 2022. It's a joke.

I love Canada, but I definitely don't like it right now. Either way... we'll make it somehow.

Quoting: Slaxer

Quoting: CaldathrasRead this to my wife. She feels that the only way to fix this would be to reintroduce a civics class into school curriculum, like they used to have decades ago when her father was a child. She also thinks it's unlikely to happen, just like old-school home economics.

I agree with your wife, that would be a great start, but how would we convince our public school districts to include this in the school curriculum? Our provincial governments have control over that. I dunno what it's like in your province, but the government here in BC loves to preach about how Canada is a terrible racist country that deserves self-hatred because it's fundamentally racist, and will continue to be racist forever. Obviously, this is not true, but this is what they like to remind people everyday.

Even though the Canadian government is required to post our Constitution (both the Constitution act of 1867 and 1982) on the government website, I really do believe that they don't want you looking into that too much. They don't want you to know anything about sections 1 and 33 of the Constitution Act of 1982 (and I'm paraphrasing here) where it basically says that Canadians have basic rights and freedoms, UNTIL a judge decides that we don't. What's the problem with that? Our judges are appointed by the Governor General based on the advice of our Prime Minister... which means the judges in our country will all favour our Prime Minister and his party - which then means that our rights and freedoms are just make-believe. This was demonstrated when NOBODY went to jail for implementing martial law because a bunch of people waved Canadian flags and ate hot dogs on the streets of Ottawa in 2022. It's a joke.

I love Canada, but I definitely don't like it right now. Either way... we'll make it somehow.

Yep. It is the provincial governments that define the public school curriculum. And I agree that, with an idealogy-driven social activist as Premier, it would probably be very difficult to get a civics class into the curriculum.

Last edited by Caldathras on 16 Jun 2026 at 7:27 pm UTC

Quoting: CaldathrasYep. It is the provincial governments that define the public school curriculum. And I agree that, with an idealogy-driven social activist as Premier, it would probably be very difficult to get a civics class into the curriculum.

Whenever I think about it, I'm still in shock over how the majority of us have continued to elect the same people over and over again despite how bad things have become. At 159 years old, Canada's a very young country - and very naive. We never had to fight the British to gain our "independence", and we've never had to go through anything in our history that truly made us ask ourselves what we actually value... until maybe now. I believe everything we're going through right now is a test that all successful countries have gone through to become who they are. If we pass this test, Canada will go on to be the best that it's ever been. I think we've just gotten lucky, and have had it easy for way too long.

Quoting: CaldathrasWhen I was in high school in the mid-eighties, my English teacher ran a segment that taught us how to recognize the manner in which advertising was manipulating us. It worked for me. For the longest time, I thought this was part of the official curriculum but I learned that this was never part of many Canadian educations, including my wife's education. I am grateful that my English teacher had the courage to add this to his course.

We never had that. That sounds fun though, I would've loved that course.

Quoting: SlaxerWhenever I think about it, I'm still in shock over how the majority of us have continued to elect the same people over and over again despite how bad things have become.

Lack of valuable alternatives? Personnally, I just can't relate to the values of the Reform party... Euh... Sorry... Conservative Party. And Poilievre is just a huge no-go. They are ruled out, right from the start. What's left? NPD? If you dislike interventionism, it's hardly a choice. Right now, Carney is probably the most centrist, in years, in the Liberal party. But everytime I have to vote, I must admit that I'm voting reluctantly.

Quoting: eggroleWhile I don't think an <16-year-old should be on social media, I don't think it is the government's job to make that call. That is up to the parents. Now, you can argue there are bad parents, but that is the cost of freedom. Freedom to mess up.

You could also argue that there are bad drivers, and road kills are just the cost of freedom. The state shouldn’t require a driving licence, or sober driving!

Except one’s freedom to mess up does not extend to other people’s lives. Children are among the most vulnerable citizens and those who have the most to lose in terms of life expectancy. As citizens, they are entitled to the same protections. They are not property that one is free to abuse because of "ownership" (my child, my choice). Yes, the government should protect them from literally toxic environments, and no, being a parent does not automatically mean that one knows better than every subject matter expert.

Quoting: eggroleWhat are the costs of children smoking or drinking? What are the costs of a nanny state when people don't learn to take care of themselves (moral hazzard)? What are the costs of a bad parent? I don't have answers to those questions, but my gut reaction is always to limit what the government can do, especially when it comes to individuals.

And the costs themselves are not only one sided. For example how much does it cost the taxpayer when a child smokes? How much does it cost the taxpayer to prevent a child from smoking? A lot of bleeding heart types will say things like "no cost is too great to protect the child", but that simply isn't the case in a world of limited resources.

Provided that your country has public healthcare (and it really, really should), it’s already been shown, probably many times in many countries, that it’s cheaper to stop people from smoking than treat them (and people exposed to second-hand smoke) for smoking-related diseases through the course of their lives. It’s fun to complain about a nanny state for imposing rules that you don’t like, but it’s that same nanny state (aka every taxpayer) that has to pay when you "mess up", so it’s understandable that it tries to promote behaviours that don’t have a negative impact not only on yourself but also everyone else. As you mentioned, we don’t have infinite resources to undo the damage of irresponsible or outright dangerous individuals. The government isn’t a company and shouldn’t act like one, but it still needs to balance a budget.