1. What is the difference between a. and a. As Prime Minister of Canada, my guiding ideological compass would be right-libertarianism, drawing from classical liberalism and libertarian principles. This ideology places a strong emphasis on individual liberty, limited government interference in both the economy and society, and a commitment to free-market principles. Under my leadership, these principles would shape policies aimed at enhancing personal freedoms, fostering economic prosperity, and minimizing government intervention. One of the core principles of right libertarianism is the protection of individual rights and freedoms. As Prime Minister, I would champion policies that safeguard civil liberties, including freedom of speech, expression, …show more content…
While recognizing the importance of protecting the environment for future generations, I think the market-based solutions are the most effective way to address environmental challenges. Instead of imposing heavy-handed regulations, I would advocate for policies that incentivize innovation and sustainable practices through mechanisms such as carbon pricing and tax incentives for renewable energy development. These measures would encourage businesses to adopt environmentally friendly practices while stimulating economic growth. In terms of foreign policy, I would prioritize principles of non-interventionism and diplomacy. While maintaining strong alliances and partnerships with other nations, I would refrain from unnecessary military interventions and focus on promoting peace, trade, and mutual cooperation. Additionally, I would advocate for free trade agreements that expand market access for Canadian businesses and consumers, leading to greater economic prosperity and global integration. Overall, right-libertarian ideology would lead me to pursuing policies that prioritize individual freedom, economic prosperity, and limited government intervention to foster a business-friendly environment, empowering individuals through choice and competition, and promoting market-based solutions to societal
settlements until Canada’s eventual independence in 1867. Canada is a country with a rich history and a strong political system. Its history and systems mirror the United States’ in many ways, but Canada is most definitely a country of its own. It was influenced by many different European countries over the years, through colonization and immigration, and the people speaking out through their political parties have shaped the country to become the Canada we know today. Works Cited http://mapleleafweb
parliamentary systems, in America and Canada respectively. These neighbouring systems have components, which are different but also share some commonalities; these key characteristics propose several strengths and weaknesses among them. Even though the presidential system provides stability of position during the president’s ruling term, the inability to pass laws swiftly in the legislature postpones any active political change, thus the parliamentary system of Canada is a more balanced and reliable system
of constitutional law as the legislation (acts of parliament for example) and judicial precedents (decisions of the European Court of Justice in relation to Community law). However, there are also rules observed by the Sovereign, Prime Minister, other ministers, members of parliaments, judges and civil servants, which are not included in any judicial decisions or Acts, called constitutional conventions. It is difficult to define what are also named the rules of morality due to the different
exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system (Democracy, n.d.). Canadians generally pride themselves in being able to call this democratic nation home, however is our electoral system reflective of this belief? Canada is a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary democracy that has been adopted from the British system. Few amendments have been made since its creation, which has left our modern nation with an archaic system that fails to represent the opinions
On June 28, 2010, President Barack Obama revealed the nation’s National Space Policy. The new policy was vastly different than the previous administration’s policy. Areas of concern addressed in the 2010 policy included future direction for NASA missions, increased cooperation between nations, commercial and civilian use of space, and space as a contested environment. One of the biggest differences between President Obama’s policy and the policy of past administrations was the stance on weapons
website of a well known German newspaper company. Also, the information has been mostly obtained by primary research. However, the information seems to be a little biased and over the top. "Thailand Protests: 5 Things to Know." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 11 Feb. 2014. Evaluation: The source seems to be only partially credible since most of the information has been obtained by primary research, but no author is mentioned. Also, the article has been published on the website of the