it's estimated that the diet of urban coywolves is about 40% stray pets, and it's generally understood that that number increases in areas with strong feral cat populations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAsjRRMMg_Q

he doesn't know what you're talking about; he thinks you're asking him if he's a white supremacist.

fwiw, the statistics are pretty clear that white privilege does not exist in canada. it certainly does exist in the southern united states. but, statistically, whites are not at the top of the income ladder in canada. they're not even second.

this has largely to do with the immigration system that was introduced during the pearson government, which abolished racial categories on immigration and restricted it to highly educated people. so, there's actually an inversion of the situation in the united states (where people of colour were historically enslaved). canada does have a history of slavery, but the percentage of people in canada that are descendents of african slaves is statistically insignificant. i think it's about 0.2% of the population. almost all black canadians are recent african or caribbean immigrants, and they require advanced levels of education (and in most cases concrete employment opportunities) to enter the country. in canada, our non-white population has a much higher level of education, a much higher window of opportunity and much higher incomes. our white population, on the other hand, is mostly composed of the traditional working class, which has been eased into low income work over the last few decades.

somebody working on a critical legal theory in the southern united states would not have cared about whether their ideas were applicable in canada or not. whatever else you think of these ideas, this generalization is our error, not theirs. a critical legal theory should exist in canada, but it should be developed out of an understanding of the relevant history and data.

what john tory did this week in signing up for a line of credit is heading toronto to the path of bankruptcy, as we've recently seen in cities like detroit. it's remarkable that so many voters continue to be so stupid as to think that conservatism has anything to do with fiscal responsibility. rather, what we've seen from the progressive conservatives in ontario has consistently been a systemic political goal - that is, this is ideological - to transfer wealth from taxpayers to financial institutions. it's a dominant, consistent theme.

the financial institutions are going to make millions from this, while torontonians pay for it for the next fifty years.

you just got sold, toronto.

it's hard to know what the comments here really represent - people naively thinking they have anonymity over the internet and can escape the bounds of political correctness by posting here, or just a lunatic fringe. see, this is why libertarians get weirded out by all this culturally enforced self-censorship. it doesn't eliminate racial bias. it just sweeps it under the rug, where it's allowed to gestate in a way that nobody can really measure until it explodes. i think the fringe idea is more likely. but it's honestly hard to say, because it's just so quieted.

i think there's a deeper concern, from a ruling elite perspective. i maintain a level of agnosticism about this stuff; the reality is that i can't prove this stuff did or did not happen, and the preponderance of evidence is pretty clear that it's reasonable to be skeptical. it's simply not coherent to question the official narratives on syria, yugoslavia and vietnam just to start with (as a fact-based analysis necessitates), but to draw the line on germany as though it's beyond question. that's just not clear thinking. it's easy to paint yourself into this awful space by pointing this out. but this is the fact of it: i have no idea what happened 40 years before i was born, and there's simply not a source that can explain it to me that i can trust. agnosticism is the logical conclusion. one should not attack me for this, one should realize that it is the inevitable conclusion of seventy plus years of american foreign policy built on staged attacks, secret wars and just balls out lies. if somebody lies to you every day for fifty years, why should you believe what he told you fifty one years ago? don't go after me for this, go after the state.....

but, that's just it. whether the motives for invading germany were containing the soviets or not, and whatever actually happened there, the liberation of auschwitz is the year zero of the american empire. whether it's myth or reality, it's the founding myth of the empire. the reason this gets so much attention four, five, six times a year is that this needs to be enforced. it defines the state, as the state defines itself.

for people to increasingly question the validity of the holocaust is consequently to increasingly question the foundation of the american empire. this has deep consequences.