Vaieti
-
Posts
30 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Vaieti
-
-
2 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:
I think Palpatine returning did serve a point though its a point that reflects really poorly on the writers of the first two sequel movies. Palpatine was brought back because the trilogy needed a villain after Snoke got killed, and the First Order by definition was not able to fulfill that role...because its the First Order. The First Order proved to be a pathetic villain organisation filled with joke characters and clones of better villains that came before. One of its leading members is an emo teenager, the other is a joke villain, another is a coward and its grand leader was easily butchered by the aforementioned emo teenager. I suspect that the writers didn't believe the audience could accept the First Order really carrying a story by itself. Snoke's mystery gave him the benefit of the doubt but Kylo proved he was not even half the villain we thought he was.
Because the First Order couldn't be counted on to pose a real threat old Palps was dragged back from the grave. Personally I think they did Kylo a little dirty. Kylo growing from emo teenager with temper tantrums into an imposing supreme commander would be some nice character development, but I can understand why Disney wouldn't have faith in people accepting him as anything but an awkward teenager.
Yeah, I get that, what I mean is I would have prefered, like literaly any other solution to the problem, but as the writing of the sequels would have it, it simply couldn't be. If I had been the one calling the shots, I would have had Rey and Kylo join together at the end of The last Jedi and develop a Gray side of the force. this deecision would have made her the supreme leader of the First Order, which would have made it possible for her to try and sort things out more fairly, between the firm and strong leader that Kylo would have been, and her more selfless side. Buuut, it's disney and they would never try that type of risk. I also feel like the whole palpatine reveal would have been actually good if it had been planned from the beginning, but it clearly wasn't and that is imdeed what worsened it.
-
I think the decision to bring back Palpatine in Star Wars 9 didn't contribute much to the story except making no godamn sense. It felt like the team were running out of ideas and made this cheap "twist" to nostalgia bait people.
-
Damn, Andrew Yang dropped out of the dems race. I hope most of his supporters move to support Bernie, since he is the most similar candidate (while still being quite different). He still managed to stay an "issues" candidate and brought the right thing in the discussion. I hope for a cabinet position for him, since I beleive that's how we can get good change. It does put nuclear energy in a grim light though, since I don't think it'll ever come back in the discussion as things are currently. Which is a shame as I beleive it is required for a proper "green deal" providing carbon free base load energy. Anyway, I do hope he'll endoorse Bernie now, as the dems need unity this time over anything
-
The big winners of this election still are the greens who nearly doubled their seats (they were leading on a fourth circonscription but fell behind) and the bloc who actually won 22 seats. Conservatives faired surprisingly well for a party lead by someone lacking any charisma, this says a lot aabout Trudeau's current image IMO. Obviously I am happy it's a minority and libs>tories, but I believe the Liberal party needs to get rid of Trudeau if they want my respect. Until that's done, I'll keep exclusively being a Bloc and NDP supporter. Speaking of NDP I am sadened that they lost so many seats this election. The more I listened to debates and read about the current state of the NDP the more I became a fan of Singh. He's just a geniunely nice dude who wants concrete change and apeard to want to create a larger contrast between his party and the others in how they do politics. I am also curious if Blanchet will be able to push his environemental plan with the help of the NDP and Greens, as it is in my books the most realistic and lines up with the other party's environemental plans, especially considering that a recent discovery in CO2 removal could lower the cost of extraction to under 30$ which is the carbon tax proposed by Blanchet, among other things.
-
I am getting the same issue as of the 22 of october on desktop. I had to install an adblock to even open up a topic.
-
2 hours ago, vanguard333 said:
I must admit that I am inexperienced at this; though I am part of the Game Design Club at my university, I'm not part of the programming team; I just help come up with gameplay and story ideas.
One thing I would suggest is that you look at some of the free game engines that are available, play around with them and see how they work, then decide which one would be best for what you're making.
The first one I would normally recommend would be Unreal Engine 4, since it has a lot of developer-aids (especially for graphics) and it's such a popular engine that people like to post their own code for common gameplay mechanics (such as level-select and lock-on) to help others save time. However, it uses C++, not C#
There is a free game engine that I know of that uses C#: Unity. It's the game engine that my Game Design Club uses. The engine's website has a lot of videos for teaching how to use the engine, but it has very few, if not no developer-aids at all compared to Unreal. It's still a good engine.
However, both these engines are designed for 3D games (and side-scrolling 2D games in Unity's case), not top-down 2D games. I have no idea what engine to recommend if you want your game to be top-down 2D.
I have a few IRL sources who can help with a lot of the programming part and will definitely ask a lot of those general questions to them directly. I will use this thread mostly for specifics in getting advice in game design and artistic guidance.
My IRL sources have all recommended Unity over Unreal since C++ requires a lot more parameters that can be overwhelming for beginners. I know that making it top down could be harder but it’s definitely possible.
-
Heya everyone! This is my last year of high-school in Quebec and I have to do a large scale project on a passion of mine. I chose to try my hand at learning C# and start making a tile based strategy game à la Fire Emblem. Because of my lack of experience in programing in general, I do not believe I will have functional AI comportements for the deadline date, but I want to try and take it further after and continue to work on it in my free time. The other aspect that I will have to work on is spriting and creating tiles in 16x16 pixel art.
Now I know there is quite a lot of knowledgable individuals on this site about the aspects I have mentioned and wondered if anyone had tips for any of them. I really wish to make something of this and anything would help.
-
17 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:
Federal and provincial parties and politics often don't line up; they certainly don't remotely line up in BC for instance where our Liberal party is actually closer to the federal Conservatives. My understanding as a non-Ontario resident is that voters turned on Wynne's government in a big way last provincial election for reasons specific to that government.
huh. Thatès interseting. Here in Quebec the provincial liberal party is an actual right wing liberalist party, but the votes do line up with the federal libs. Although it might more be related to the fact that the PLQ is the only somewhat Pro-Anglo party.
-
So what did everyone think of the English debate? IMO Bernier acted like his usual dufus self in the beginning, then became a background object for most of the second part. May seemed like the only truly civil person on stage and performed rather well. Trudeau didn’t suffer any k.O. Punches which made him a winner as current prime minister. Singh just appeared as a genuine nice guy that could be your next door neighbor. Sheer got beat pretty hard, especially when Trudeau said: Mr. Bernier’s role tonight is to show us what Sheer thinks in secret. And Blanchet’s poor English really hampered his performance, although what he did say was pretty good. All in all the worst in this debate were the biased moderators. When they presented the part about law 21, they downright said that Singh was a coward or « lacked courage » since he said it wasn’t the federal’s role to oppose the court’s decision. They also said the divisive and discriminatory bill 21, when It’s only divisive outside Quebec, since Quebec considers it a necessary form of discrimination, although it even being discriminatory is debatable.
-
55 minutes ago, Life said:
I back this 100%. I just also understand that this is reality and I try to understand Quebec's position.
Don't get me wrong. I think Quebec separatism is a terrible idea. But Quebec nationalism? Let Quebec be Quebec instead of forcing our beliefs on them? You guys don't force anything on Ontario. Why shouldn't we do the same?Yeah, to me, and probably a lot of separatists, independence is what we see as our only option, because of how the federal treats us. I would much rather stay and benefit from all the advantages that the redistribution of
definitely not Alberta’sextra revenue from richer province. The thing is that right now all the partys don’t even want to recognize our rights. -
3 minutes ago, XRay said:
While I understand the hostility towards religion, as an American, I see banning government employees from displaying their beliefs as a violation of their free speech. In my opinion, encouraging religious neutrality or secularism is just as bad as encouraging religiosity. I think the best way to handle religion is to not have any policy or stance on religion at all. Religion is a private matter, just like sexul orientation or ethnic backgound, and I do not think it is right for the government to dictate matters that are personal and private. As long as whatever outfit government employees are wearing do not interfere with their work, putting in a new dress code just seems like a petty move to get back at the church.
To truly separate the church and the state, I believe the best way to go about it is for the church and the state to pretend the other does not exist. We should still have laws protecting people's right to believe in what they want and have anti-discrimination laws cover religion, but outside of things like that, the government ideally should not have any policy or stance on religion.
To be fair a large part of my stance on this issue probably stems from being strongly anti-clerical myself, but I truly believe that people in a position of authority should not display their religious beliefs. In my opinion they have the duty to show total neutrality, and to me, showing religious signs is not what I would call total neutrality. It is my stance, and I do recognize it is bias, but it is what it is. And I should add that I completely understand the other side of the argument, I understand why people believe it is a violation of free speech, I just believe it is a necessary one.
-
2 hours ago, Life said:
In all honesty, I don't Singh would respect the decision of the court. Singh has caused the downfall of the Alberta NDP by attempting to gut their economy for environmental purposes. Oil is the only thing that keeps Alberta afloat and accounts for 10% of the country's GDP. Is it worth a 10% drop in the national economy when we are already spiraling into debt? No. But Singh has already admitted that he would do this by mandate if the NDP were in power. Do you really think the NDP would let Bill 21 go if they got into power? Not a chance. You're all just racists to them. Their words, not mine.
I'd love nuclear power to also be the main base of Canadian energy but that is not feasible as it stands due to the stigma it has.
For the record, I'm hardcore right-wing Libertarian and I'll push the PPC hard. Nationalism only has a bad connotation by way of narrative. It literally means "love for one's nation". The trick is to not substitute any flawed religious diety with the nation-state and since Bernier is a Libertarian at heart, I would be shocked if he did that.I agree that my perception of the NPD as it stands is based on Mulclair’s time, and that from the look of things Singh has been mostly a detriment to the party and especially it’s provincial branches, but I’ll keep faith that the NPD will rebuild itself by going back to what made them a great option. And yes as I said earlier we need to accept that, for now, Alberta’s petroleum industry is extremely important to our economy and putting the axe in it now is suicide. What I believe should be done, after reflecting on this for the entire day, is continuing to match our petroleum production with the demand, while investing the profit obtained from the sale of that petroleum into durable development in other field. My line of thought is that Russia and Saudi-Arabia have the ability to double their production at anytime they want, so if we were to back out of the competition, they would be the ones to profit from it and the world would still be as polluted, we only would have the illusion that we did something “good”. As much as I hate having Oil exploitation in Canada the demand isn’t going away anytime soon and it’s MUCH better if the money from that petroleum goes into our economy instead of fueling the repressive government of Putin or MBS. We, as a society, depend way too much on petroleum and that’s what need to change, then the law of supply demand will fix things by itself.
As for libertarianism I believe it is, currently, unviable for two reasons. The first is that people are not disciplined enough when it comes to consommation, just take a look at the US. As long as people continue creating a demand that shouldn’t exist, companies need to be kept in check by a strong government. The second is that we absolutely need to steer away from the iceberg that is climate change, again if we let companies do their things, we’ll see a lot more like the Koch industries sprouting up and accelerating warming tenfold if it turns a profit. Once those issues are resolved, my only concern is the same as with communism, will human nature make it fail any way?
-
33 minutes ago, Life said:
I know exactly why you consider Trudeau a traitor. PET fucked you guys hard. Like father, like son.
As for the climate change stuff and Bernier, there are a few things to understand:
Canada's carbon footprint is 1.6% of the entire world's output. We could multiply our oil production in Alberta tenfold and this number would still remain under 2% of the world's emissions. Climate policy in Canada is like shooting yourself in the foot in order to sympathize with people in wheelchairs. If you want to do something meaningful in the climate debate, then convince China to stop polluting (who contribute 26% of the world's carbon emissions as of 2014 so this number could be sitting at 30% today).
What you are trying to do is to put a band-aid on a near fully decapitated leg and pretend that the leg is now healed while it hangs on by a tendon. It's laughable due to how incredibly futile the effort is.
And regarding Bill 21 (which is important to you), here's Bernier's statement vs. Singh's.Singh has a vested interest in removing Bill 21 because it would affect him personally. Bernier will let you keep it on the basis that it's a Quebec law. One of the two is working on principle and it's not Singh.
Yeah I am aware of every party’s opinion on bill 21 as it is something I care about. Everyone except Trudeau basically said that if the Supreme Court doesn’t rule it as unconstitutional they won’t do anything further, the only difference is that Singh said that he “obviously didn’t agree with it” but showed great integrity by saying he would respect the decision of the court.
As for petrol and oil sand it’s not so much about CO2 emissions, but more about the damage it does to our forests and land as well as the agressive tactics the government employs when building pipelines. I would much rather Canada go for a Nuclear based energy (which we could do) economy than petroleum. Also, I believe we need to set an exemple to other country that switching out of a fossil fuel economy is viable long term, as it is one of the main worries that prevent a lot of right wingers from supporting major environmental action. Obviously a day will come when we’ll run out of petroleum and that day must not be a fatal blow to our economy. I don’t believe in an immediate stop to petroleum exploitation, unlike certain ideologists, it obviously is very profitable and gives thousands of Albertans solid jobs, but we need to reduce it just a little every year to make sure we can keep a functional economy 50 years in the future.
Also it’s interesting to see people outside the province understand and sympathize with the nationalist movement.
-
34 minutes ago, Life said:
You missed the People's Party of Canada (PPC) who are a cross between the old Reform Party and the Libertarian Party. The modern day Conservatives are nothing more than what the Liberal Party used to be like when Chretien was running it.
I grew up in Toronto in a Liberal stronghold (provincial riding just flipped to NDP which is shocking) but my family always empathized more with the Conservatives. However, both my father and one of my sisters are probably going to vote PPC this time round because Maxime Bernier is the only leader who seems relatively sane. Considering that my father is an immigrant, even he has no issue with turning around and saying "look, mass immigration is a bad idea, let's pump the brakes on that train and reform the country's immigration policy to revolve around Canada's needs instead of blindly accepting everyone just because".
I also find it strange that you would side with the NDP after the Bloc. The NDP as they stand today would be firmly against things such as Quebec sovereignty on sheer principle because they fundamentally oppose nationalism, a key component of Quebec sovereignty. You'd be better served by voting PPC after Bloc in my opinion since you'd also be voting for a Francophone leader. He'd also allow Quebec to retain provincial control over things like education; a promise that not even the Liberals would dare make in fear of alienating their base.
Other things you missed:1. Until recently, the debate commission went out of its way to block the PPC from engaging in the federal debates under restrictions that should have also stopped the Bloc and the Greens from participating... if the standards were consistent for everyone. But, the PPC has now been given permission to join and Jagmeet Singh (leader of the NDP) has formally asked the debate commission to bar the PPC on the grounds that they offend his morality. If he gets his wish, then Canada is in a much worse position regarding individual rights and freedoms than I had thought.
2. It is important to realize that no matter which of the three major parties that gains control (NDP/Conservative/Liberal), the budget will not be balanced. This means that the country will accrue heavy debt that will lead to higher taxes across the board. I can say this because the Liberals lied about their intention to balance the budget, the Conservatives have promised a balanced budget in five years minimum and the NDP are economically illiterate (this applies both at the provincial level and federal).3. Trudeau's finally worn out his welcome and even the Globe & Mail has started to nail his political corpse to the post. From the SNC-Lavalin scandal to the new "brownface" picture to Trudeau's general inability to understand the purpose and function of government, this party is going into freefall quickly. What do you expect from a leader who was elected solely on his flowing mane of hair and name?
Yes, as I said at the beginning I didn’t mention the PPC because it doesn’t have enough traction yet with a possibility of winning only one seat.
I agree that most of our immigration policies are a train wreck and we need reforming there. The thing with immigration is that we need the balance between getting main-d’Œuvre which is lacking more and more because people are getting old and birth rates are low, and also having immigrants who will integrate quickly. That’s why, although I am very leftist myself, I do agree with certain immigration policies of more right wing parties that encourage immigrants needing to learn the main language of the province they wish to immigrate to (and for refugees, since they don’t always have the possibility to learn a new language, I believe we need to make drastically better integration programs). I believe that the future of this country lies with immigrants and it is up to them to become the next generation of Canadians.
But I still have a few major problems with Bernier. First I really dislike his provocative, un exemplary, attitude and as long as he continues to act like an immature teenager I can’t support him, although I do agree he deserves a place on the debate, no matter Singh’s opinion, it’s a question of free speech and not censoring different opinions, even those we don’t agree with at all. Second, his opinion on climate change is dangerous and denying clear scientific evidence is a slippery slope. And third his variant of populism seems unstable, letting any deputy inscribe their on law idea to the party’s program could quickly cause in-party division, but only time will tell for this.
As for the NPD I understand that this isn’t Mulclair’s party anymore, the one that got 45 seats in Quebec, but Singh did say that he would at least respect Quebec’s decision making and officially recognizes Quebec as different entity to Canada, which is already better than both the Libs and the Tories. My obvious problem with the NPD really is the typical problems linked to left populism, telling people what they want to hear while not explaining properly how they’ll achieve their goals while respecting the limits of our economy and the bonus that yeah his breed of left populism is opposed to divisive opinions in general which is really dumb and a dysfunctional way to see politics since it’s always divisive.
Also, Fuck the name Trudeau in general, I don’t think I have to explain to you why this name is considered as a traitor’s name to us nationalists.
-
4 hours ago, Vince777 said:
Always been a Quebec secessionist myself but the Bloc is dead and frankly, so is the Quebec sovereignty drive amongst the general populace.
This post is probably much too excessively Quebec-centric for it to get traction though.
I mean I did say I would give my opinion at the end which is what I did, but yeah it is obviously Quebec-centric.
-
Don’t Know how many people here want to discuss Canadian politics, but I was curious to know what people on here think of our current situation. Right now the Race is really between the Conservative party led by Andrew Sheer and the Liberal party of Justin Trudeau. The other partys that will be major parts of the opposition will be the New Democratic Party or NPD for short, led by Jagmeet Singh, and the Bloc Québécois, led by Yves-François Blanchet (which is a peculiar party but I’ll mention it later.) So, for the uninitiated, I’ll try to name the main objectives of each party in a first paragraph (major disclaimer: some of this may be out of date. The complete official platforms are not available as I am writing this, so I will use the ones from the previous elections combined with what we know, and try to remove what which I know is outdated) then i’ll give my personal take on everything in a second one.
Canada is very different from most other countries in the sense that there are very little right wing options. The main right wing party is the Conservatives, and we now have the Canadian populist/people’s party, which is about as right wing as the American Republican party. I won’t talk about the later, since they have very little political traction and very low chance of doing anything in the opposition, I won’t talk about the greens (although for the same reason. Now, what is the Conservative party? It is currently the most popular party by 0.2% but is half as likely to win as the liberals because they most likely won’t be able to win enough seats. Their leader, Andrew Sheer is an Ontarian, Roman Catholic and the current head of the opposition in Canada. Here are some changes they wish to push for:
Environment
an Abolition of the Carbon tax, which they judge unfair.
They want to cut funding to environmental policies that do not benefit the state.
They want to invest in offshore petroleum extraction, continue to encourage oil sand industry in Alberta and continue to invest in natural gas for energy generation, as well as continue investing in the construction of pipelines, even against the will of certain provinces, to carry petroleum through Canada and allow more exploitation.
They want to invest reasonably in Green energy to limit the effects of climate change.
They want a reduction in restrictions on general ore mining.
They do not advocate for a full transition out of fossil fuel, but rather a balanced energy mix.
They do not want to put more restrictions on internet and cellular cost, one of the highest in the world, but wan’t to improve signal coverage, which is lacking in the north.
They will reduce taxation by 5% on green technology.
They would invest 250 million in private sectors to create new companies to develop green technology.
Economy
They wish to reduce or eliminate laws on foreign property.
They encourage non-interventionism with companies, big and small.
They want more trade-deals and want to limit protectionism around the world.
They want tax-cuts and reduction for the Canadian people.
They hold in priority reducing the Canadian debt.
Justice
They wish to slightly loosen gun laws.
They want to make sentences more harsh for fraud.
They want to give strong sentences for anyone found guilty of possessing illegal drugs.
They will not change laws on abortion, even though their leader is firmly anti abortion.
Family
They want to try to fix the declining birth rate.
They wish to reduce most fiscal disadvantages for parents at home.
Other laws
A review of the federation system, to try and officially conjoin Quebec to the federation, and remedy to the feeling of alienation (their words not mine) of the habitants of the Canadian west.
They might consider a change in election method.
They want a rep. by pop. senate.
They mostly will stick to status-quo for what I have not mentioned, including immigration, but I might have missed a few meaningful policies here and there because of how all over the place and unclear their official program is. Let’s continue with the liberal party. This is the current ruling party and will most likely be re-elected as a majority. Their leader is the well known Justin Trudeau. The party wishes to do the following during their second term:
environment
They wish to rise the carbon tax, in order to economically discourage companies from polluting.
They want to outlaw single use plastic by 2021.
They wish to invest in New nuclear technology and starting research on small modular reactors by 2026.
They want to get rid of all coal plants by 2030.
They want to get rid of combustion car sale by 2040.
Investing 300 million more per year to green technology.
They will not push for a fast stop to oil sand exploitation.
They will continue investing in pipelines, even against the will of specific provinces.
Economy
Encourage a green economy.
reinforce the middle class.
Slightly more balanced taxes, a reduction of 22 percent on the middle class and an increase of 33% for the rich.
Raising international commerce.
More affordable housing.
More affordable high-education.
A reduction of the cost of medicine.
Investing massively in Infrastructure and those who will run them, even at the cost of a higher deficit.
Investing in collective transport.
Giving reasonable power to unions.
Family
Making maternal/paternal leaves less painful on the wallet.
Making it easier to get a leave to go see a gravely ill relative.
Reforming aspects of the worker’s code to help families.
Better employment insurance to help financial stability.
Crime
They wish to improve support to victims of sexual harassment/abuse.
Thigh tier gun laws.
Reduction of sentences attributed to owning illegal drugs.
other laws
They heavily favor higher immigration rates.
I really am tired of reading through their programs by now and having to often read between the lines to see what is actually promised. Now for the other two parties they depend on absolute priority. The NPD favors very socialist policies like: democratization of internet and large reduction to cellular fees, extreme and fast action on climate, including the cost of medication in canada’s Healthcare, but aside from that they have basically all the very progressive policies of the liberals, but more extreme. As for the Bloc, it is a Québec only party that stands at the left of the political spectrum. They are quite similar to the NPD in terms of focus on environment and Socialist policies, but there main objective is to represent and protect the interests of the province of Quebec.
As for my opinion, I am a firm Bloc supporter. I believe that my culture is in danger with the current state of the Canadian federation. The French language is receding quickly in favor of mostly English, especially in Montreal, where it is becoming a common instance to be responded in English when ordering in French for instance. The facts that partys like the Conservative want to officially include Quebec in the federation is also proof that outside of our province, people don’t understand our precarious state regarding language and culture, and that being at least a separate entity within Canada is necessary to protect our different society. Another worrying fact for me is that Trudeau said he would not hesitate to veto the recent controversial law on secularism, that would require individuals in positions of authority to not bear any visible religious symbols. This law is supported by 72% of Quebec citizens. His reaction shows that the federal has the power to get rid of a law that was chosen democratically, in what is basically a completely different society, without possible opposition from said people. But enough about culture, I have other priorities as well. My second largest priority (which is really close to becoming first) is environment. The thing with environment is that Trudeau promised so much about Canada’s great green future, but he’s done close to nothing to help the environment and what he has done is counterbalanced by all the negative things he has done with petroleum exploitation. And don’t get me started on the conservatives. They wish to remove the carbon tax, one of the proven and true greatest way to incentivize companies to pollute less, and then help the environment even more by using the money obtained from carbon credits to invest Green. They also don’t believe that we should transition to all carbon free quickly, I mean whaaat? One of the only things that redeems the liberal party to me though is their investments in new nuclear which I highly support. Once again, the bloc is doing a good job here by calling out the Liberal’s unwillingness to do something and has done a lot of good to try their best in the conservative led opposition. I could also see myself voting for the NPD since Singh also is pretty pro-Quebec and has a great environmental plan. My only big problem with the NPD is that they don’t explain at all how they’ll do things. I want transparency damnit! As for economics the conservatives say they’ll cut taxes, but they’ll probably still find a way to fuck over the middle class, similarly to how Trump’s famous tax cut rose taxes for a lot of his voters. As for Trudeau, it’s pretty centrist, I would definitely prefer if he taxed the richest a bit more, same for large companies, but hey. The NPD’s wish for abordable cellular data and internet is great though especially considering that Canadian pay in average 30% more for data then the rest of the world, only because the government chose to not restrict the fees set by the 3 only major telecommunications companies. So basically my preference is Bloc-NPD-Liberal-Conservatives.
Well this took a while, I hope I’ll have drawn at least a bit of interest to this topic. Also let me know if I have gotten anything wrong or if you want me to back up my claims with data, I am currently on mobile so links are a pain but I’ll be able to respond with proper links.
Now if you wonder why law 21 is not so controversial within the province, you don’t have too look further then Quebec’s history with religion. The Duplessis era which lasted in the three years preceding WWII and between 1944 and 1959, is the cause of Quebec’s hostility to religion. During those 18 years Duplessis ruled, the Société Québécoise underwent a massive recession. With extreme Christian conservative policies, Duplessis basically gave control of education, culture and a lot of other aspect of everyday life to the church. Those years are remembered very negatively, and Duplessis policies, even those unrelated to the church, have forever tainted the reputation of organized religion. Our society still bears the scars of that “great darkness” as it is called here. The damage caused by his anti union policies, which made companies literally abuse their workers and created some of the worst working conditions in the provinces history. His policies against the intellectual elite and making basic education unaffordable for the poorer francophones, caused education (elementary school drop out was at 52%, for francophones, 5 times more than anglophones) to become increasingly rare and continued to hurt Quebec for years. All of these made Quebec suffer, and when the tranquil revolution arrived after his death, we evolved massively as a society and religion lost a lot of it’s influence and importance in our society. Here are the numbers on religion in Quebec: only 63% believe God exists, of those only 43% believe there religion as importance in there lives and only a small fraction, around 20% of believers, still practice their religion at least once a week. This is why the society of my province is favorable to such laws, because we are at a point where 57% of us believe that religion is only an aspect of personal life and should not intertwine with governmental work. We believe that employees of the government should represent religious neutrality or secularism, especially those in position of authority. I understand that some people still give great importance to religion, but I believe that we should learn to set it aside to show that our social responsibility goes before religion. This was my hot take on law 21, thank you for reading.
-
Hey, might do this alongside you as well I wanted to try this out for a while and now that three houses is out and turned out to be a total piece of cake, (also as enjoyable as cake) I needed a real challenge, and playing every game in the series in max difficulty seems like an awesome one at that. Debating the quality of each one will be pretty fun as well. I only really dread reverse lunatic and worse of all Revelations « gimmicks » aside from that it could be a lot of fun.
-
She is somewhat machiuvelical in the literal sense, this doesn’t mean she is evil but it rights her off as at least grey never good. To achieve her ends she employs the help of TWSITD and tolerates and supports to some extent their actions she also starts a war five years long that will claim the life of many, she is in complete contradiction with Claud in her philosophy although their “end” is similar; a United Fódland. Claud’s path also shows us the good way to unite Fódland, on without bloodshed and one at peace with the rest of the world. Once you have played GD you can’t agree with her actions because you have seen the same goals achieved peacefully. She feels somewhat like Arvis. Actually quite a lot, from the treason, to allying with questionable individuals all in the goal to impose her world view onto the continent, also “flame emperor”, dual holy blood, one of which belonging to the biggest evil in history, don’t tell me that’s coincidental, but at the same time neither is completely evil, both are nuanced individuals with bloody ambitions. (My this is really the Genealogy remake /s). Also I hate that you only end Nemesis with the GD that means that in both Edelgard’s and Dimitri’s path Nemesis could awaken (Thales clearly was done with the preparations for is revival so what stops it) at any time and wreck havoc with his ten generals, compromising Fódland’s future. I probably feel more enclined to side with her if she truly went through with making sure peace would last, which again only Claud does.
-
This will require beating a final map 43 times (20 S support male byleth 23 female) but I am down for it in a very long session on what i’ll find the fastest map.
-
One star per for times training that stat, so three sessions wholly focused on that stat is perfectly enough.
-
1 hour ago, Ycine said:
Bienvenue dans la Forêt de Serenes, Vaieti!
Du coup en l'espace de 6 mois, tu as quasi-expérimenté toute la saga Fire Emblem? Chapeau.
Passe une bonne journée et profite de ton séjour!
Merci beaucoup! C’est bien de rencontrer d’autres francophones ici!
-
It's pretty simple the first 3 letters of my family name and the first 3 of my name
-
I am from the wonderful, slightly montainous region of Québec called the Laurentides. I am a huge fan of hiking and this poorly know little corner of the second largest country on earth is definitely worth visiting if anyone shares this passion. (that it is if you enjoy the time worn, smaller mountains typical to Canada)
-
I already have interacted a bit on this site, but hadn't bothered to make an introduction, so might as well.
I am a very new fan of the series, coming from Smash ultimate, actually. So basically, I already knew basically all the franchises represented in that game with the exception of FE and I was wondering why so many character from that game were represented. This lead me to look it up, and man did it not dissapoint. I emediatly wanted to try it out.
I chose to start with the beginnig and played the highly unbalanced FE3 book 1, since I did not know at that time about the DS remakes. I went trough the game until the last chapter, but due to poor management on my part I was not able to complete the endgame.
Since then (it was about 5 months ago) I have experienced every FE though I have not beaten most of them.
I definitely think that the jugdral and tellius games are the best from what I have experienced from them (I am nearly finished with PoR and have seen the narrative from the jugdral games, although I haven't fully went trough them) and hope we'll see remakes soon.
After the first Three Houses direct I was very disapointed, but the Tanibomb leaks and the subsequent E3 trailer renewed my hype and that game cannot come out soon enough.
Anyway glad to be on this forum!
Plot Twists & Turns You Think the Story Would've Been Better Without
in General
Posted
Yes I agrre it seems like a rather commonish trope in writing to pretend to have that big dramatic loss, just to take away everything from that moment by reverting it completely. I like it when stories clearly show that somethings are simply irreversible (especially in a game with perma death), and that all actions have unavoidable consequences. I don't get why writers think that eveyone needs to have a golden or happy ending, since it really isn't that way in life. Tragic texts and stories have always been my favourite personnaly, and man do I love it when a good story hits me in the feels with something like this, although there are times where it has been overdone, and ends up making you indifferent to these events in the story.