The original person I responded to was describing the paradox as a social contract, and I was saying I don't think it really makes sense conceptually as a social contract for reasons. What I'm hearing you say is that it it prescribes nothing, so I would infer that to mean that is isn't really an agreement either, so not really a social contract either.
I still get the feeling that we're roughly at the same place but took different paths to get there
For the record, what makes it smell like propaganda is that I actually do think you're very aware of the pros and cons, and that you keep leading with the currency argument when it's by far the weakest argument. It's the most emotionally persuasive argument,however, because it's suggesting Canadians part with a tangible everyday item. People were flustered losing the penny. It pulls emotional levers that simply are not pulled by things like budget deficits and Dutch elm disease. It pulls emotional levels that need not be pulled or even approached because the point is settled already by Article 49. I think you absolutely know all of this, and that is my point.
With precedent of an opt-out clause.
There are plenty of reasons to join or not join a union of any kind.
"But Canada would be forced onto the Euro" to me reads as straight propaganda because it acts directly as an identity wedge. This is even before it not being strictly true.
If you're concerned about Canada joining the EU, you can merely state that article 49 restricts membership to European states, and it has already been tested by Morocco.
It has been tested and Morocco didn't make the cut. I think it'd be a tough sell to argue Canada does when Morocco doesn't.
Canada technically administers a small parcel of land in France, and Canada has a land border with an EU state.
I do think that if Canada was genuinely prepared and unambiguously politically willing to join the EU, that the rules would get rewritten. Canada would be the 4th largest economy in the EU.
I think any hesitation on the EU side would be basic trust that they aren't going to get jerked around by another primarily English speaking country, or have the country fall prey to unsavoury North American politics. I feel like Canada would need to do some PR work to distance ourselves from the UK and USA.
Adopting the Euro isn't a requirement, so kinda a weird thing to say.
2 successive generations at 20 years isn't statistically typical in north America in the last 60 years.
The math checks out, but isn't a median representation.
There is some nuance. Talking someone into or out of anything usually gets pretty easy if you can convince them it's part of thier identity. Generational identity is absolutely a propaganda tool... but once you recognize this, it becomes apparent that it cuts both ways
When I was a kid I used to make bows and arrows, and so obviously lit arrows on fire.
You for sure need an accelerant. I recall personally using gas line antifreeze. Otherwise yeah they'll extinguish pretty much instantly.
I can't really remember if the flaming arrows "flamed" the whole flight, or if they extinguished in flight but because of the accelerant were able to reignite once they stopped.
My dad gave me $1 to seed a lemonade stand. Trump's dad gave him billions.
Our experiences are equivalent.
Yes, I agree.
I'm saying that within that framework, "the paradox of intolerance" ceases to have any conceptual value, because it is a social framework, and "anyone can do anything they themselves think is right" is an individualistic model.
Right, but once you decide that you are your own arbiter, then everyone is thier own arbiter, and at that point there is NOTHING COMPELLING about the thought experiment AT ALL.
At that point, you're just saying "I can exclude whoever I want for whatever reason I want", and that isn't really anything compelling l.
Imagine having to, because the most self-righteous, selfish people that possibly exist, opted to take "absolutr worst" over "bad"... and are still justifying it. Still lording thier moral superiority over the rest of us. Still incapable of grasping that thier self satisfaction came at a tangible cost to humans lives.
A big part of maturity, perhaps all of it, is recognizing that sometimes, you do need to degrade yourselves for others. Maybe not even to make things good for them, even just less bad.
Does it make me feel good to boil this down to an analogy like I'm talking to a 2 year old? No. It's degrading to say. I expect it's degrading to hear. But some people still don't get it.