The issue is not guns, it’s civil liberties

black panthers

Viva Frei on Trudeau’s gun ban on “assault-style” weapons:

Global News, what a ban on “assualt-style” weapons means for legal gun owners:

Brian Lilley, Trudeau’s gun ban will do nothing but cost us money:

CBC (2013), Gun Culture in Canada:

CTV News, Premier Ford criticizes federal assault rifle ban, buyback program:

True North, Scapegoating lawful gun owners:

Michelle Rempel, Trudeau’s firearms confiscation must be stopped:

CCFR, Trudeau Assault Weapons Ban:

 

 

Civil Liberties

 

Let’s just get right into this. We are two months into the biggest violation of Canadians’ civil liberties as we all try to #stayhome during a government imposed lockdown. Now for lack of better tools, it has served to battle the Covid19. But with still no end date to this isolation mandate, it has felt more like Covid1984. There has been a lot of positives to come out of this lockdown and it may be necessary to save lives. But while people are getting ticketed, for walking dogs or sitting on benches, by Gestapo-like police task forces Trudeau came out this week curtailing our freedoms even more by effective immediately making 150 guns illegal to own in Canada. Once again, Canadians are less liberal by this “liberal” government.

 

Ezra Levant covers Ontario mom handcuffed after taking daughter to playground:

 

While no one is really surprised by this, because the liberals campaigned on gun bans, it just falls so tone deaf and opportunistic that I believe it’s truly revealing the depth of the modern liberal ideology. With people forced to stay home we cannot discuss this among our friends and peers. We would be mocked and condemned if we attempted to form a protest that disrespected the physical distancing guidelines in any way. MPs have been told to conduct their parliamentary duties virtually as glitches and literacy issues compromise any useful content. The official opposition leadership has been suspended up to now and there’s no way that Canadians would accept an election right now with everything going on so it would be political suicide to bring forth a non-confidence vote. Combined with these emergency measures that have empowered this government, they implemented this new legislation without passing it through the house of commons for debate and critique.

We can agree to disagree on gun bans themselves but that’s a totally separate issue from what we can agree is a completely undemocratically implemented law from a minority government whos new law affects a majority of Canadians who would not have voted Liberal in the first place. This isn’t just a debate, by the way. This is something that affects 2.2 000 000 Canadians. These are real, living, breathing people who are directly impacted by these bans. That deserves a debate in the house of commons at the very least. But with the stroke of a pen Trudeau declared many of these people criminals. With a 2 year grandfather clause and buy-back initiatives but that doesn’t change the fact that these weapons have now been criminalized. It’s really not that the Trudeau government dislikes disparities themselves, they just want to ensure that the disparities travel in only one direction.

 

CCFR Channel on legal gun owners:

CTV News with Erin O’Toole wanting gun control measures to go through the house:

 

 

Canadian VS American Gun Culture

 

Now I’ll just be totally upfront. I don’t own a gun nor do I feel the need to own a gun. I don’t sport shoot or hunt even though I have been to shooting ranges several times for fun and would love to go hunting someday. I don’t know that I can sufficiently build the most appropriate defence for gun ownership but as a free individual this ban still affects me as it still infringes on my freedoms. And in many circumstances in the past, Canadians have been put in seriously compromising and dangerous situations.

 

TVO Steve Paikin in discussion with Christie Blatchford on her book Helpless:

 

Situations like Caledonia as thoroughly documented by Christine Blatchford’s book Helpless. Where police, at the behest of politicians and political agendas, refused to enforce the law and put hundreds or law abiding Canadian lives at risk. Perhaps things would’ve gone differently if they had formed their own local militia. But despite all odds, locals appealed to their better nature and did not devolve into a tribalized gun culture seeking to emancipate themselves from civilization at the first sign of trouble.

It’s important to note that often when we see politicized coverage of gun culture, most of that comes from the states. Where there is a big difference between gun rights and gun issues than here in Canada. The biggest difference being that gun ownership is an actual constitutional right whereas here in Canada is it a privilege in the same way that obtaining the licensing to drive vehicles is a privilege. Which are two totally different conversations. I think we do a piss poor job at protecting civil liberties and after seeing how easy it is for politicians to bully law abiding innocent people, I believe it serves to argue in favour of the American model more than the Canadian.

The problem with honour systems and privileges is that authoritarians love trampling all over them. Establishing a privilege as a constitutional right builds in protections for the people against the government. But It seems to me that Canadians have generally become reliant on government to the extent that we like being controlled. We like being told what to do because then we don’t need to think for ourselves. It’s no wonder that politics has become about as tribalized as professional wrestling because if you’re going to forfeit your liberties you want your team at the helm.

That’s ok. We just need the right politician leading the country to make liberals regret this more than ever for them to wake up to the reality of the value of independence. We’re seeing that in America right now. America’s republic has much better controls in place to prevent abuse of power by authorities but with the expanding the power of executive orders over years has now backfired against democrats there as Trump has leaned on executive orders to govern basically however he wishes, regardless what senators say on matters. So be it, they get what they deserve. Maybe they’ll scale back executive orders once Trump is out of office.

In one country if you’re arguing for gun control you’re arguing against individual constitutional rights. That’s different than regulating a privilege. I personally feel that Canada has the better approach to guns. If someone abuses their privileges then those privileges can be taken away. But a free and democratic society acknowledges individual sovereignty and so to curtail those liberties is an extremely serious thing. This is why I am so disturbed by modern liberals who seem hell bent on constantly lecturing us all on what type of Canadian is a “good” Canadian. Modern liberals who regard our social safety nets to be more of a kind allowance by daddy politician, as moralized budgetary spending items continue to trend.

Most Canadians are not gun owners. And an unfortunate side effect to that is a lot of ignorance around guns, gun laws and gun owners. And like everything else, it’s easy to come to the conclusion that something should just be banned when you have little expertise to draw from when evaluating complex issues. It’s no different than censoring free speech. We all want to have the freedom to express ourselves but the second we hear something we don’t like we want to condemn it, deplatform it, contest it in every way possible. It’s the laziest method of debate but we all engage in it because we’re all scared that just maybe we’re the ones who are wrong. That could reveal some disturbing details about ourselves that would be far more comfortable to ignore.

“Facts don’t care about your feelings,” -Ben Shapiro

Styxhexxenhammer666 speculates on Trudeau’s Gun ban:

 

Gun Issue(s)

 

What I want to invite everyone to do here is to attempt to broaden the conversation that’s being had. If we’re going to discuss negative gun issues then we can’t also ignore the positive gun issues. Just think to every social justice movement of the past. What if the black panthers didn’t have access to guns. Could they have been as effective? Were lives lost as a direct result of their actions? Yes. They were effectively domestic terrorists. But they forced all of America to have a very uncomfortable conversation. A conversation that America struggles to have even today. I don’t think removing the use of the word “nigger” from Huckleberry finn is going to produce the same results. Gun rights are black rights.

And while we’re reviewing the days of old, let’s rate how successful the prohibition was. I mean, it made for great business for Canada and started organized crime in America. Just collateral damage for a greater cause. They argued back then too that nobody “needs” booze. And now the LCBO is an essential service. And this all coming from the guy who legalized weed. Now Trudeau is demanding a border shut down while Trump is calling for open borders. What the actual fuck is going on? This truly is clown world.

The whole necessity argument liberals make is precisely the slippery slope gun owners worry about. Who “needs” alcohol? Who “needs” weed? Who “needs” cigarettes? Access to public discourse, sugar, tanning salons, harmful cosmetics, excessive caffine, etc, etc, etc? Amidst a morbid obesity epidemic it would seem totally reasonable to ban unhealthy eating habits. You can make a case for why you don’t need anything but air and sustenance. But this isn’t about needs, is it? It’s about wants. And what I want is to have complete control of my life and my life choices. Who needs a ruling elite constantly deciding for you what your needs are?

One of the many differences between men and women is that women are far more vulnerable to domestic violence than men. There are women who check the back seat of their car every time they get in. They experience anxiety from merely having someone walking behind them in confined spaces like parking garages. Some women check every room of their home when they walk in. Personal security is a women’s issue. It’s always confused me why women weren’t more supportive of female gun ownership. If she’s packing, now it’s the dude who’s at the disadvantage. Gun rights are women’s rights.

This to say nothing about sports and hunting and farming and animal population control. You can actually be a gun collector and not Hitler at the same time. This is not so different from the abortion debate or drug legalization and others. These are complicated issues that require more voices not less. I’ve said many times before and I’ll say again that I have no right to tell an Albertan not to own a gun and an Albertan has no right to tell me not to get an abortion. Not to say that I, personally, would ever require one. I’m sure there’s a better example out there somewhere.

Sweeping blanket solutions often fail to work for anyone. And this is where I fall back on my libertarian sentiments and believe that it is not the role of the federal government to dictate terms to the provinces. In fact it should be the other way around. The feds should embody what it is the provinces are championing. Policy making should be a bottom-up approach, not top-down. Quebec has decided to prioritize it’s cultural identity of secularism and francophone language and tradition over pluralism. You are allowed to practice your personal faith and traditions within your own home, within your community but when you are representing the government in any way you must convey Quebec values first and foremost.

There’s no doubt that it is discrimination and if this is truly something Quebecers want then they should put it to a vote and then respect the outcome of the referendum. Using the non-withstanding-clause is no way to implement such significant policies. But if that’s truly what Quebec wants, we should all be prepared to respect the outcome of that referendum. Part of the agreement during confederation was that Quebec was to keep it’s language, culture and traditions. That was the day Canada became a multicultural country. On the basis of acknowledging provincial sovereignty.

That is the only way we’re going to produce the most ideal outcomes to these complex issues. It needs to be left up to the provinces. And from there it’s up to those within the province to sort out. Right now the government is telling the entire country what to do based on a mandate given to them by Ontario. How’s that for a disparity? Would today’s Canada allow Quebec to keep that culture? Is that very tolerant? I think Quebec could find a much better way of handling other faiths and religious symbols and I hope they do strike a better balance to respect individual freedoms as I do feel this is in conflict with the federal charter of rights to practice one’s faith freely. But again, that is not my battle. As a Canadian I am a voice in that discussion but as an Ontarian, it’s not my place to dictate terms to Quebec. That’s all Ontario is doing with gun bans. Toronto is free to ban whatever gun it likes as cities should be in control of their own destiny. But it should end there.

News and narratives

 

Notice that I have yet to really talk about guns. Because I don’t need to be a gun owner to be impacted by this curtailing of freedom. But I suppose it’s time to more specifically address the elephant in the room. And that has to start with the wolf in sheep’s clothing, the head of the G20 debacle in Toronto, Bill Blair. If you know anything about guns or gun laws as they existed prior to this new ban, you can easily see right through Blair as his overt mischaracterizations and outright lies are totally transparent. He has placed himself as the authority over otherwise non-partisan police departments.

 

Sheila Gunn Reid covering CCFR interview with Bill Blair back in Oct. 2019:

True North, Politicizing a tragedy:

In this True North clip specifically at 15:15 – 18:20 you see the moment the spokeswoman for the RCMP actually turns to Bill Blair for him to take control of questioning to interject the political narrative. Both Trudeau and Blair talking about how important it is for a non-partisan RCMP investigation and statement and yet the RCMP directly taking a back seat to the political narrative that would go on to support Trudeau’s gun ban. And of course the question at hand was towards the legality of the Nova Scotia shooters guns. It’s shit like this that is driving people crazy. Everywhere we turn our news media is not informing us, they are managing us.

The Weekly Briefing with Wendy Messly interviewing Tony Bernardo:

Canadas gun lobby agrees with NRA

It’s important to observe people’s reactions to media’s reporting on guns and gun violence. It’s generally pretty split in terms of likes and dislikes and the top comments tend to flow against the grain of the messaging the media is trying to propagate. But it doesn’t stop them from promoting their one sided reporting anyway. To get better coverage you literally have to travel back in time to watch older content when they at least allowed contrarians on the show to rebut their propaganda. These days you don’t even get that. The only devil’s advocate they play are ridiculous straw man arguments and the only people they feature are the typical weaker, more controversial pundits that they can easily contend with in debate. The people out there making the best arguments has effectively been deplatformed by partisan media outlets.

 

You Can’t do Moore with Less

 

John Moore, morning show host of Moore in the Morning on Newstalk 1010, is a good example of the kind of Ontario liberal who seems to have adopted this god complex where everything liberal equals good and everything conservative equals bad. He used to be a voice that I relied on to make sense during the Harper years when he actually worked to understand both sides of the argument. Now it seems like in his later years he’s lost the appetite for a good debate and feels obligated to tow the party line and only argue in one direction. Some of the most absolutely most ridiculous straw man arguments around conservative perspectives has come from John’s mouth. And it makes me very sad as a guy who admired him for so many years and widely regarded him as a sense maker who could shake off the tribal filters.

John writes in the Toronto Sun in an article titled “gun owners, you’re on your own“. He basically spends the whole article whining about how mean Twitter is to him. John, seriously? You can’t post a bunt cake recipe without expecting at least a handful of threats. Twitter is not representative of reality. It’s the birth place of trolls of all stripes and more divisive than 4chan. What the fuck did you expect? You don’t get to brag to your friends that you have a million followers and then try to complain when those million individuals take exception with something you posted.

John tweeted, “I support gun rights for hunters and target shooters. I don’t know why anyone needs automatic weapons.” It’s easy to understand why this shouldn’t be a controversial statement. But John Moore, whether he acknowledges it or not, is a prominent voice in Toronto and he, like most liberal media covering this issue, is getting his facts wrong. The guy who constantly harrangs on and on about “science and facts” can’t even bother to look into this issue enough to realize that this is not a ban on automatic weapons. there is already restrictions in place on automatic weapons.

This is addressing semi-automatic weapons. And it highlights the very reason the word assault-“STYLE” is being paraded around. Because to liberals ALL guns are assault weapons. Hell, to liberals WORDS are assault weapons. And so to embrace this vast generalizing vagueness around material property that people own is nothing more than an all out war on guns in general. They don’t like guns and they just want to take them away from you, regardless whether data and science support it.

John’s tweet just reeks of the same ignorance that gun owners hear around the clock by the media, mischaracterizing the entire reality of the situation. Just like when John always references Australia’s gun ban while totally ignoring that Australia doesn’t share a border with one of the largest gun producing countries in the world. The same border that is used to smuggle illegal guns into the country on a daily basis. Australia doesn’t have that border problem because it is an island, John.

London has a gun ban and are now effectively trying to ban all knives because of stabbings. It’s almost like there’s a criminal element at play that’s not getting discussed. And as innocent as your tweet appeared to be, John, maybe people are just sick and tired of others refusing to have the whole conversation. Not just the parts liberals want to talk about. So I’m sorry your words didn’t illicit the claps and props you liberals trade for currency. I’m sorry you didn’t get your daily dose of dopamine from the usual suspects who agree with everything you say.

Funny how when you’re away from the microphone sometimes it becomes your turn to listen and you discover that really you just like when it’s your turn to talk. But this is why I don’t have twitter. It’s too anonymous and encourages the worst aspects of tribalism and enables bullying and toxic mob justice group think. It’s not a legitimate consensus of reality nor does it facilitate effective dialogue. I’m not saying you deserved that abuse John, but I do think if you’re too tired to participate in the discussion then maybe you should just retire your position to a more honest broadcaster.

To write off 2.2 million gun owners because a handful of them are mean on twitter is the laziest excuse to write off a group of people you clearly already had every intention to write off. It genuinely pains me to see John Moore become just another partisan hack. I genuinely had a man crush on him when he was on the cocktail hour. I’m sorry that rant was way too long for the likes of John Moore but I think it speaks to my absolute heartbreak over just how much it hurts to see someone I always referenced and looked up to as a sense maker now fall from grace. But this is what liberals do when they realize they have lost the argument. They decry victimhood and attempt to discredit the opposition in place of forming better arguments. I guess that’s it, John, I’m done with you too.

 

Discerning between Evidence and Emotions in the Face of Tragedy

 

And I suppose the other elephant in the room we must address is what happened in Nova Scotia. And gun violence all together. Because none of this is to suggest in any way that we don’t have a gun problem. But what we have more precisely is an illegal gun problem. And this is the greatest sleight of hand played by the vast majority of Media. They report on firearms statistics as though there is no difference between illegal and legal gun owners.

Canada has some of the strictest gun regulations in the world. It’s not the wild west as the media portrays it as while showing footage of Americans shooting at hurricane Irma. Or they would infer that legal gun owners if anything facilitate the illegal activity. The reality is that the opposite is true. Convicted felons have more rights than legal gun owners. Pedophiles are not tracked like legal gun owners are tracked by police.

 

The Free White North Debunking the Gun Ban:

True North in discussion with CCFR Gun Lobby:

Bill Maher in conversation with Colion Noir about America’s gun culture:

TVO’s Steve Paikin sits down with Ed Burlew on gun rights:

 

In the Globe and Mail article, “Toronto Sees record number of shootings in 2019, but fewer deaths,” Tom Cardoso goes on to explain that Toronto alone saw 490 shootings in 2019. Contrasting that to 2005’s “year of the gun” with 262 shootings. What the article leaves out are how many of those shootings were from legally owned guns and which of those were illegal. I know anecdotally from the daily news I follow I have yet to hear of a single shooting that was from a legal gun owner. This is backed up by the account of retired OPP Mark Mendelson when speaking to Jerry Agar on news talk 1010. Mendelson had a 14 year career with Toronto Police as a lead homicide squad investigator and now owns a consulting firm. He claimed (anecdotally) that from his experience 99.99% of gun crimes committed were done so with illegal guns. Though Mendelson supports the gun ban he’s made clear that this ban will do nothing to curb gun violence as it only targets legal guns.

 

 

The Globe article goes on to point out that both the city and the police know exactly the neighbourhoods that are ripe with gang activity that is contributing to the black market of illegal guns and the gun violence that is terrorizing the city. The Jane and Finch community, the Rexdale and Regent Park communities. It was after the Danforth shooting that the province dumped millions into a special police task force to deal with gangs and guns. Aside from arrests and seizures Toronto Police also held 18 town halls across the city in 2019. Toronto Mayor John Tory initiated a gun buyback program which resulted in 3,100 firearms being turned in.

Some of the findings that came out of those initiatives was that Ontario courts need to reform bail. Police accounts of arresting individuals who have discharged an illegal firearm, booked them and brought them before the court for judgement just to, later on that day, respond to yet another shots fired 911 call only to discover the exact person whom they had arrested and booked previously that same day.

Gang bangers operate with such impunity and brazenous that in a townhouse complex (named Acorn place) 5 minutes from where I live. Despite John Tory and Mark Saunders proclaiming in their press conferences, “this isn’t Toronto, this isn’t the GTA, etc,” the reality is we’ve been trending upwards since 2014 with shootings spiking over the last 4 years. The reality is this IS Toronto, this IS the GTA. And the real problem here is a reluctance in this province to hold criminals to account. And continually legal gun owners are being blamed for the brazen actions of criminals with illegal guns.

Since 2014 we’ve seen many changes within the GTA. Political correctness has fostered a toxic anti-cop sentiment to grow through our communities. Cops have been booted from their presence in schools for the absurd reason that they “target” black students. Carding practices have been banned for accusations of racism. Let’s be clear, there have been credible accounts of abuses of power by police with citizens. We can have that discussion, not so dissimilar to the one had in New York around stop and frisk laws. But to write off the entire practice itself as systematically racist in nature rather than a rooted in the poor judgement of the individual officer enforcing it, is nothing more than grossly misrepresenting reality and ignoring all of the positive outcomes from the practice.

Peel Regional Police Chief Jennifer Evans spoke out herself to attribute the spike in violence to be directly related to the carding ban specifically. And of course you had all the media unilaterally come out to condemn her as a racist and a bigot and calling for her to be fired. Because it’s perfectly fine to entertain controversy or have difficult dialogue as long as it supports the agreed upon narrative. Because political correctness is apparently more important than saving lives.

 

CityNews, interviews Peel Police Chief Jennifer Evans on the Carding Ban:

https://toronto.citynews.ca/video/iframe/593482582001/SyxzIeNcgb/5803295136001?auto_play_switch=false

 

Coffee with Cops

 

So interested for me to watch this lockdown unfold with people cheering on gestapo-like police harassing people for just being outside of their homes. Yet when it comes to gang violence it’s just purely racist and fascist and cannot be tolerated. We can absolutely collapse our economy because “saving lives is more important than your mani-pedi.” But I guess lives are just collateral damage when it comes to police walking the beat in known problematic communities.

A virus justifies overcompensating to address the threat but when an Arab man shoots up the Danforth, with a little girl and teenager among the dead, we just have to shrug our shoulders and decry the plight of mental illness. Okay, fine, as long as we’re being consistent.

But there’s just no doubting at this point that these things have contributed to the problem rather than improving anything. The Pride Parade has banned police now for several years in a total rejection of police presence outside of security details for the event. There was no path forward laid out by pride. No road to redemption for a police force needing to improve it’s relationship with the community.

It was nothing more than a complete rejection of relationship building between the gay community and police. Sending the clear message that if you’re a gay police officer you don’t get to wear both hats. If you want attend pride you must do so without a uniform. You must closet your identity to conform with the community guidelines. Because that’s exactly what Pride is all about, right? How inclusive.

As if it wasn’t clear enough that this was the product of a complete ideological takeover of Pride by radicals who do not represent the entire LBGTQ community, you began to see police ban trends in the Vancouver parade and others across the country. And even across the globe in other countries. These divisions planted the seeds for more segregation and condemnation of police. Such as the protests that have emerged from positive events such as “Coffee with a cop“.

With the absolute toxic attitude towards police today who the hell would want to become an officer in today’s political climate? You’re no longer the hero, you’re the villain. Even when you do good you can rely on the media and activists with political agendas are going to represent you as the villain regardless. Between this and the struggles with the courts, police now have developed the habit of FIDO, “Forget It, Drive On.” Where if they see a situation that could possibly backfire on them or put their employment in jeopardy they just opt out entirely rather than doing their duty.

You don’t think any of this can be correlated to gang activity or to the surge in shootings? This is why so many people are arguing right now that these measures aren’t actually aimed at decreasing violence. Because none of these politically correct motivated initiatives have ever helped the situation. They’ve only made things worse. And if all police departments across the country unilaterally agree that the issue is illegal guns, not legal guns then why isn’t trudeau targeting illegal guns? Why isn’t he cracking down on the smuggling operations going through the border? Why is he granting a native exemption to the new law when we know the smuggling is occurring at the border along the native reserves?

These are questions that aren’t just ignored by the politicians implementing this legislation, these are questions that aren’t even being put to them by the media we are relying on to report accurately on these situations. And any independent journalists who are trying to ask these questions are getting blasted as hateful and discriminatory. Convenient.

 

The Time to Act is Now

 

The reality is we will always have mass murderers among us in the same way we will continue to have the mentally ill among us. The mass murderer problem is a complex problem but to call it a gun problem is missing the point. There’s a reason why, in the bible, the first humans to be born on the earth are Able and Cain. What modern liberals fundamentally do not understand is that people are not blank slates who merely need to unlearn the patriarchy that has fostered their toxic behaviors.

 

Jordan Peterson with message to school shooters: past, present and future:

 

It’s rules and boundaries that contain the depraved sinner within. We are just animals at our core and we are all capable of evil and to dismantle the structure that comes with those boundaries is to unshackle the monsters deep within. The mass murderer complex is a deep resentment of life itself and a death wish to seek revenge against God. This is largely documented by academics like Camille Paglia and Jordan Peterson.

There’s a commonality that you can find between mass murderers from the colombine kids, the parkland shooter, the vegas shooter and now the Nova Scotia shooter. And it runs far deeper than mere guns. The Nova Scotia killer burned people alive in their homes. Are we going to ban fire? The incel driver attack on Yonge street killed 6 and injured 13 before he was arrested. Do we ban rental vans?

It’s just so frustrating because this ban will be about as effective as reducing highway speed limits to try and minimize pedestrian collisions on side streets. Yes they both have to do with cars. Congratulations, you’re a natural born detective. Clap, clap, clap. To end my epic rant here I just want to reiterate that banning things is usually more of an indication that the banner isn’t really fully informed on what it is they wish to ban. Because bans largely do not work or fuel a backlash.

Most issues are more complex than that. But it’s a typical liberal concept that everyone but them are just idiots who need to be told what to do. I, and many like minded, freedom loving, real flesh and blood, living, breathing Canadians are just exhausted at the lazy liberal argument about whether or not we “need” this or that. Do we really need those guns to hunt deer? First of all, you’re not allowed to hunt deer with restricted firearms anyway. They can only exist in secured lock boxes and on RCMP regulated sports facilities.

Aside from that, why is it liberals can only formulate their arguments around what they personally deem to be necessary for how others get to live their lives? When do I get to have a say on the necessity of renewable energy, or bike lanes or carbon taxes? These are the same people who occupy condo boards and ban pets from the buildings becuase a few assholes don’t stoop and scoop. The same “Karens” who call and complain to the bylaw officers because they can hear kids bouncing basketballs.

And it comes from the same place in our own thought processes when we become so reliant on government intervention that when we can simply see litter on the ground our first reaction is, “someone ought to clean that up,” but we never come to the conclusion that that “someone” should be us. As Canadians we are far too dependent on government and we moralize social services to justify deficit spending but does that really come from a place of compassion or from a place of greed?

We want to improve our lives but the only person who can do that is you. And while we may actually like the structure that comes with being told what to do, is that really any sustainable way to live your life? And frankly if liberals are using the “necessity” debate then I have no faith that it will end with guns. People who love freedom and liberty need to push back against this authoritarianism and reject this far left modern liberalism.

Otherwise Trudeau and those like him will continue nudging us until we find ourselves up against the wall and they will argue that we actually wanted this because when they pushed us we did not do enough to prevent it from happening. That’s consent to a liberal. They will continue to socially engineer society by “unlearning” all the things that are problematic to their political agenda and they will continue to micro manage and lecture us about being the right kind of Canadian. Whether you own a gun or not, you are less free this week thanks to the liberal party of Canada.

 

Sign this petition to tell Trudeau HANDS OFF OUR GUNS

woman draped in a flag of canada
Photo by Andre Furtado on Pexels.com

 

 

The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.

-Thomas Jefferson

We need to talk about the lockdown

person holding sign
Photo by cottonbro on Pexels.com

China lied, people died. Let me preface what I’m about to say with this, this virus has caught the entire world off guard. Except for Taiwan. But otherwise the problems we are facing here in Canada is not so dissimilar from pretty much every other country in the world. I acknowledge that the measures taken by government is in many ways an experimentation in leadership and we’re doing the best we can with what limited options are available to us.

Though I often reference my belief that Trudeau is the worst prime minister in Canadian history and I stand by that, my intention here is not to play partisan games or whataboutism cheap shots. That’s not to say the feds or the province or even municipal government is above scrutiny. Questioning is necessary in these times. But we should all be taking off our partisan hats and prioritize the truth above all in these dire times. I just feel before I form my argument I first want to acknowledge all levels of government are working their asses off for us all and I deeply appreciate all the work everyone is doing. Especially front line workers like myself and all the healthcare professionals out there. Nothing I’m about to say takes away from any of that.

 

Leaving everything up to “the experts”

So I’ve been trying to pay as much attention as possible to this whole pandemic stuff and how it’s impacting the world. I’m no economist, I’m no healthcare professional, I’m no politician, I’m nothing more than a plumber. So take that for what it is. But the thing I can’t seem to wrap my head around with this whole lockdown stuff is what happens after the lockdown? First it was for 2 weeks. Then that became a month. Now cities are cancelling all events up to August.

All the politicians are citing the “science and facts” that they’re basing their decisions on. But to me there’s just something fundamentally flawed about deferring all policy making and security decisions up to unelected individuals. Especially when there is so much mounting evidence to suggest the experts are actually getting it wrong. So what will happen if they do get it wrong? “well what do you want? I’m leaving it up to the experts. Not my fault if they get it wrong. Well, yeah, actually it is. You’re the one promoting their guidance so you own it.

What advice is that expert going to give when they’re trying to cover their ass? The only people I see at these press conferences are more scapegoats than experts. But they wear many hats, I’m told. But it’s no surprise their advice is to shut it all down. Who wants to take the blame for when someone’s kid gets sick at school or someone’s grandparent collapses during lunch at the old folks home? And so they may be an expert but they are functioning mostly as bureaucrats. We elected the people in power to lead us. not to delegate all their responsibilities away. They rightfully fear the liability of risking public health but why is there no sense of responsibility for the health of the economy?

 

True North: The Economic Effects of Covid19 explained in 8 minutes

 

I get it, no one planned for this. This thing has caught us all off guard. But panic does not make for sound policies or pilot projects. This needs to be called out as the half baked plan that’s going to do more harm than good. And if it isn’t reevaluated now, I believe things will actually be worse off once this lockdown is finally ended, defeating the entire point of the lockdown to begin with. The lockdown may be winning a battle but it’s not even thinking about the war against this super virus. We need a long term plan, not just billions of band aids. I get it, there is no plan. That’s exactly the problem.

On top of that, with everyone harping on and on and on about misinformation, I’ve found Dr. Tam has been pretty misleading herself. First when the virus first arrived here the narrative was that it was very racist for people to avoid Chinatown and chinese restaurants like “Wuhan noodle” in Markham. To blame China for the virus would be to blame a culture for the virus and that’s just racist apparently. It was Dr. Tam who came out early and discouraged social distancing in this way and who claimed that border restrictions and travel bans were not helpful. And we all know in the coming days and weeks suddenly it became necessary to close the border and shut down travel. Duh.

According to Dr. Tam masks do nothing, in fact they actually increase the risk of contracting the virus because we’re all too stupid to figure out how to wear a mask. Now she’s had to back peddle and admit that if you have access to a face shield of sorts then it would be good to use one. If you ask any other doctor not standing at a podium they’ll tell you of course it’s helpful. Why are flight attendants wearing them? Why do the doctors and nurses start their shift with them? I think we all know what Dr. Tam is really saying. She just doesn’t want everyone hoarding the medical supplies like we have been with toilet paper. So just say that. But like most modern liberals, they believe we’re all too stupid and reactive for us to know the truth. So the best approach in a crisis is to lie.

Liberals told us to lock it down while people were still arriving into the country and not receiving testing or questioning. they were to self isolate and this was all done purely on honour system. There’s no coincidence that after march break things blew up, because of the absolute lack of guidance provided by our leaders. The legacy media decided to mock and sneer anyone wearing a mask in public. Now those people are working from home and preaching to us the importance of taking this seriously. I wonder how many people contracted the virus because they were too embarrassed to wear a mask. Oh but as long as the media has Trump to blame, they don’t have to take any accountability.

 

Rebel News: Arrivals to T.O. bring own masks from Argentina:

Rebel News: International arrivals to Canada given no Coronavirus gear:

Rebel News: Pakistani arrivals to Canada surprised no one took their temperature:

 

These are complex issues that demand dramatic change that not everyone has the capacity for. Most people aren’t plugged in to what’s going on in their own community let alone around the world. The hoarding actually isn’t our fault. Are there greedy, selfish people out there taking advantage? yes. But these people aren’t the majority. In fact these people are in the fringe minority. All it takes is for half of us to go to the store and pick up only one of anything before we would see shortages of that one item. Supply chains need to step it up to compensate and stores need to place purchase limits. Naming, shaming, doxing and ridiculing others who are distressed and acting irrationally, or who are mentally ill, not only does zero good but it’s actually detrimental. This is not the time to throw empathy out the window because we’re all being inconvenienced.

 

True North: Do Canadians like being controlled?

 

Self preservation instincts kick in when you’re vulnerable and afraid and have the ability to bring the best of us low like the worst of us. As a plumber I often deal with people in vulnerable positions and I can tell you it sure doesn’t bring out the best in them. You definitely find the best aspects of humanity once we are in a semi secure state of being but we’re just animals in a habitat like every other habitat on the earth. But really, why weren’t the stores limiting supplies from the start? They have no problem limiting the sirloin roasts when they go on sale. Why wouldn’t they limit medical supplies since day one?

This is an aspect of the plan we will have to develop to tackle future outbreaks. Pandemic planning needs to be at the forefront of every election now. Because the problem with war time measures is they are often in place with the consideration that this will ideally never happen again. However we could have another pandemic next year given the right cocktail of mutation vs poverty. The measures we are taking could actually destroy our entire country. I’ve been absolutely floored watching what’s been unfolding. This virus is all over the globe and varying strains from continent to continent. Even if we do come up with a vaccine it’ll only be effective until a new strain makes it’s way here thanks to globalization. There’s no turning that back, it’s unavoidable. So I’ve been paying attention and these are my thoughts.

The lockdown is only useful to give the hospitals time to prepare for the coming surge. To replenish medical supplies and to buy time for industry to provide new ventilators, masks, gowns, face shields, etc. That is worthy of a lockdown. For the sake of those who get sick and need hospitalization, yes, we all need to do our part to flatten the curve. But once the hospitals have been prepared and perhaps other alternative facilities established (such as converting some of these empty community centres or army relief camps) then we all need to go back to work. This country needs to begin it’s economic recovery literally as soon as possible. Or else we are fucked. I just don’t see it any other way.

It’s when we go back to work, we will be entering a new world. A world where social distancing is the norm. Look at Taiwan. Their first case was January 20th. Ours was Jan 24th. Our total cases per 1 million people is at 228 and deaths per 1 million people at 3. Taiwan’s total cases per 1 million people is 14 and deaths per million is 0.2. The total cases of covid19 in Taiwan is only 322 meanwhile here our total is currently at 8,612. Why is that? Taiwan, to my understanding, is far more densely populated than Canada. We should be the ones easily able to socially distance. So what are the Taiwanese doing that we’re not?

Just looking at Taiwan really reminds us that what we are dealing with here is a virus. It may be highly contagious and that’s scary and worth taking seriously but at the end of the day it’s just a virus. Like South Korea we need to ramp up our testing to make testing available to everyone and anyone at any time. We need to be able to identify who has the virus and those people need to be quarantined. And if we can manage to get this thing under control then perhaps we can do more than the honour system to ensure these individuals are in fact respecting the guidelines. The cases we see developing are indicating these people are not respecting the rules.

and I don’t even fully blame them, the government has been a complete wet noodle more concerned about identity politics than pandemic precautions since day 1. We need to ramp up our testing greatly. We also need to ramp up the production of PPE. This may require all of us to lend a hand in making our own protective gear for ourselves and for others. Let the official stuff go to the healthcare workers. They need it most.

And if we can start implementing new protective measures then we can start going back out into the world. Measures like clear physical barriers in food courts, transit terminals, etc. Floor/ground markings to indicate where to stand in line ups to respect social distancing. Sanitizer provided at virtually every single entrance and exit and hand wash stations available at places of business, parks, etc. And above all, individual responsibility. Hand washing before touching our face or eating. Then more hand washing! Some variation of mask to use in enclosed/confined spaces/indoors to protect from respiratory droplets. Showering every time we get home after being outside.

The police need to back the fuck off. If government wants scary headlines saying those not respecting social distancing will be fined $1000 then go ahead. But to actually fine people $1000 in a time when people are facing losing their homes? You’re a sick fuck and you apparently love robbing others of their civil liberties. If you’re throwing a 50 person party then yeah in these times of crisis I believe that would constitute a crime. A night or two in a jail cell should suffice for that sort of thing. That’s much less harmful than $1000.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-bylaw-parks-fines-1.5523154

But yet we see police handing out $750 fines to people just out, sitting on park benches. If you’re respecting social distancing then you’ve done nothing wrong. If police play this game too hard you are going to see a push back that will be really ugly. Desperate people loot, steal, mug, or worse. And this love for authoritarianism is going to blow up in all of our faces in a big way. We cannot abandon our principals and values just because it’s inconvenient right now. It’s precedent setting and you’re wrong if you think the goal posts will move back once this pandemic is over. This is a democracy and police exist to serve and protect. Period. This type of crime is best socially enforced, not legally. PERIOD.

And we need accurate, truthful, uncensored flow of information. I said it before and I’ll say it again. Censorship is nothing more than a partisan effort to control and bias the flow of information. We are really being let down by the legacy media right now. This is a direct result of narrative based activist reporting. The other day the Ontario press conference went on for an hour before someone finally asked a single question about the duration of the lockdown. I’ve heard more questions about Trump than anything about this lockdown or anything to guide us through it.

 

Viva Frei: The media is failing us now:

 

TVO: Data from Polly:

 

True North: More misinformation from public health:

 

True North: The media pushes fake news left, right and centre:

 

Rebel News: China’s Virus Lab Intentionally harvested bats for their virus potential:

 

Let’s be clear. The average Canadian, whether they like Trump or not, doesn’t give a flying fuck about Trump right now. What the Americans do is up to them. They can block aid but why don’t we have the necessary supplies as it is? Why aren’t we able to produce the most absolutely necessary protective gear? Why did we allow ourselves to become vulnerable in the first place? Ask those questions instead. And while you’re at it, find out when we can go back to work so we don’t lose our homes. Instead of seeking truth everyone is just bunkered down trying to find a way to interpret reality through their narrative filter. And it’s hurting the public.

The very media screeching about misinformation are the same media praising China over this outbreak. Claiming they did us all just such a huge favour by “buying us time”. I can’t even begin to explain why that is so incredibly ignorant and obviously aimed at people who don’t follow news at all and are only tuning in to be told what to think because they’re sheep. If China acted a month sooner the virus would’ve been 95% less impactful to the rest of the world.

 

True North: China Lied, People Died:

We need to take this next month to isolate for our healthcare workers and until we can get PPE restocked and distributed but after that we MUST GET BACK TO WORK. Otherwise we are utterly fucked. I very much fear for the future of this country if we don’t begin our recovery as soon as possible. I was suspecting our kids and grandkids would have a large financial burden but this is making the future look more like mad max than anything else.

And I do not doubt that one day we will be watching an HBO mini series next to Chernobyl called “Coronavirus” and even though it’ll be a different series, it’ll be the same story. Because it’s always the same story when it revolves around a communist regime that does not value human life. China does not value human life. We don’t even know totally whether or not this was actually intentional for China to reset the global economy with them on top, amid their Trump trade war and tariffs. This isn’t even close to being over yet. And we need to decide which team we’re on. Team America and Capitalism or Team China and Communism. If you love freedom and liberty you must be team America and Capitalism. Et tu Brute?

 

True North: The economic toll of the shutdown:

 

I’ve been thinking about how I’m going to even talk about this whole thing. I decided to just share my thoughts on what has been happening and my thoughts on where we need to go from here, for whatever that’s worth. But I think what I will be working on from here on out is a chronological timeline of this pandemic. That is truly difficult. There is so much happening every single day that there is just no way to capture every single detail or do so all in one single post. So I think what I’ll be doing is covering more actions than speculation and projections and offering resources covering these developments and presenting this timeline in the form of chapters like in a book.

Still not sure how it’ll play out but I do think these times are very important to document since I believe this pandemic will change the world. And so as I wake up every day and check for updates, I will seek to record these updates through my blog. So stay tuned as I struggle to document this ongoing challenge. Also follow my instagram @The301Champ for more optimistic, fun content which I think will serve as good medicine in these times.

What we don’t have is a 10 step plan for handling viral outbreaks in the future. I think what I’d like to do while compiling all this information is work on what MY 10-point plan would be for the future and see if we can discuss the effectiveness of such plans. Like a modern day zombie apocalypse strategy. By the way, here were some very good Joe Rogan podcasts that I found extremely helpful:

 

Joe Rogan Experience: Michael Osterholm

 

Joe Rogan Experience: Dr. Peter Hotez

 

 

The 301 Champ’s 5 step viral strategy:

Phase 1: A viral outbreak appears to be at or on the verge of an epicentre in a country.

  • This country must accept experts with peacekeeper escourts to observe the outbreak and gather data/assist with containment.
  • countries must send aid to assist with containment.
  • There must be weekly press conferences to update the world on developments.

Phase 2: The viral outbreak has broken containment and has began to spread outside of the epicentre.

  • Governments hold weekly press conferences informing people how to appropriately and responsibly stockpile 72 hours worth of goods in the event that anyone needs to self isolate (and how best to utilize food delivery services in the event of prolonged quarantine).
  • grocers implement shopping limitations on goods to prevent hoarding.
  • Governments- begins PPE resource stockpiling to prepare hospitals for possible outbreaks.

Phase 3: Cases appear on home soil.

  • Social distancing guidelines are made mandatory for places of businesses, public parks, etc.
  • weekly Press conferences held from municipal, provincial and federal governments to share all projections and available data on what is current on the outbreak.
  • commercials and ads are bought on which masks are appropriate for use and  to remind people when and how to wash their hands to avoid contracting viruses. also to inform people on what viruses are and how they are spread.
  • Restaurants and public events must set in place measures to respect social distancing guidelines. (such as dine in tables being spread 6 feet apart, markings indicating where it is appropriate to stand in line ups, etc)
  • The border and airports must conduct testing on all travelers entering and exiting the country. Social distancing must be explained to travelers and masks must be provided and made to be worn for those entering the country.

phase 4: An outbreak has escaped containment.

  • Social distancing guidelines are now enforced with threat of possible fines.
  • Restaurants must close dine in options and only operate take out and delivery options.
  • Border must be closed to non-essential travelers.
  • testing must be made mandatory and accessible to everyone. those who test positive must be connected with what is essentially a parole officer to ensure they are respecting the quarantine orders.
  • Travel bans may be implemented.
  • airports and transit terminals and grocery and department stores must embrace high security measures to disinfect public spaces on a regular basis daily and be able to provide sign off sheets to confirm cleaning is being done.
  • Government issues curfew orders for all businesses to be closed collectively at a certain time and for citizens to stay indoors after a certain time. (with an exception to essential services like plumbers, hvac, healthcare workers, truck drivers, etc)

phase 5: Projections anticipate hospitals about to reach max capacity with patients.

  • Military must be called in to set up relief care spaces and to provide aid in distributing PPE and other necessary resources.
  • Military set up safe off-site testing drive through facilities to begin testing the public regularly and constantly. This may involve retrofitting hotels, prisons, community centres or other local facilities.
  • Government issues self isolation lockdown orders
  • government declare essential services and provide strict timeline for lockdown. (any financial aid or compensation or tax cuts must be determined BEFORE the government calls for a lockdown)
  • Municipal, provincial and federal governments must conduct daily press conferences to update the public on all data and projections and modelling.
  • public amenities and all community centres and services must be closed to the public but as long as the curfew and social distancing guidelines are being respected, the public can enter parks, off leash dog parks, paths and green spaces.

 

 

I am just reflecting on measures that have been taken thus far and trying to think of how we could articulate these in more structured step by step initiatives. The government could create a website that goes into deeper detail between all 5 phases. But the problem with the slow trickle down of information and word salad that’s been going on at these press conferences is that in some cases they just cause more confusion than offer any clarity. In this regard a government could just simply say we’re implementing phases 1-3 and people would know what that means. or could at least easily look it up. maybe these 5 phases could be stretched into 10 to be able to highlight features better. I just feel the government really needs to improve their communications during a crisis. This is what we are learning today. Feel free to share your thoughts or add suggestions to the list.

 

 

 

 

Life isn’t valuable because of it’s abundance. It’s valuable because it is finite. It’s the brutality, challenge and unfairness of life that allows us to shine. Whether it’s watching the home run hit bounce out of the stadium, the figure skater landing that triple axel, the basket ball finding the hoop after dribbling off the rim. These moments of greatness come from our inner greatness. Covid19 is yet another trial for us. It wasn’t the first and it’s definitely not the last. I say good. We will endure it not because we want to but because we must. And we will emerge not just alright but better. Because we have the inner greatness and antifragility to shine through our adversity.

-Me

 

We need to talk about Meghan Murphy

20191029_194716

Gender Identity: What Does It Mean For Society, The Law and Women?

hosted by: Radical Feminists Unite

CBC: ‘I’m not going to reconsider’: Toronto’s top librarian refuses to bar speaker critical of transgender rights

CBC: Tory ‘disappointed’ in Toronto Public Library for hosting speaker accused of transphobia

CBC: Ontario writers blast Toronto Public Library for booking speaker accused of transphobia

NOW: Toronto Public Library facing Pride ban over Meghan Murphy event

NP: Event featuring Meghan Murphy ignites debate about libraries’ role as forum for free speech

Jonathan Kay: Meghan Murphy, the woman behind trans wars breaking out at the public library

NP: Hundreds protest as Meghan Murphy speaks on gender identity at Toronto library

Barbara Kay: How feminist Meghan Murphy fell victim to progressives’ double standards

Jonathan Kay: The silencing campaign against Meghan Murphy is a disgrace

 

20191029_202223

So who the hell is Meghan Murphy and why is everyone so upset? She’s an academic of women’s studies who writes for the website Feminist Current and others like Vice. Here are some of her works:

Canada’s New Prostitution Bill Is Far From Perfect

Japan Is Still Denying the Sexual Slavery of Chinese ‘Comfort Women’

Prostitution by Any Other Name Is Still Exploitation

It’s time for feminists and the left to support free speech before it’s too late

Women warned you: Yaniv’s human rights case is the inevitable result of gender identity ideology

 

So tonight was the Megan Murphy event and what looked like about a hundred protestors showed up and held signs that read: “Let us live, no hate in our city, binaries are for computers, Meghan Murphy hates women, fuck the binary, trans rights are human rights, fuck transmisogyny, no platform for hate, our library should be a safe, space not a hate space, turf the terf, no free speech for hate speech, support sisters not just cisters, etc.”

20191029_194223

They chanted things like “who’s library? Our Library! Trans right are human rights! Terfs go home! Hey, hey, ho, ho, these terfs have got to go! Trans women are women!” and others. Things got a little tense when the crowd swarmed the back exit when discovering the police were escorting people out the emergency exit. But luckily there were no violence or vandalism that I could see. No altercations between police or attendees.

I am not one who will ever recommend anything that comes out of feminism, regardless what denomination of feminism it comes out of. However I am not prepared to silence anyone, that includes feminists. I warn of the dangers coming out of academia but to suppress anyones free expression is to deny them their civil rights. I would not be defending someone like Meghan Murphy if we weren’t living in the upside down clown world we find ourselves in today but here we are.

Where I do agree with Meghan Murphy is that there is something disingenious going on with this latest trans movement. The thing with Trans people is that, well, they’re transitioning. You know, from man to woman or woman to man. They align on the same binary that the rest of us work with. These activists who seem to find themselves at the helm of every complaint, grievance and (micro)aggression seem to all have something in common. They’re self proclaimed “non-binary”. Which apparently means that they do not fit within biological norms. Even though most of them do.

It appears to me that this is the true defining difference within the LBGT community. The non-binary seem to be a signal of their position that biological sex is a social concept. And all that power junk that’s deeply imbedded in neo-marxism and the socialism rhetoric peddled by the far left. If this is true then Meghan Murphy has every reason to fear these people. Even the modern “feminism book” points out on page 287, “a new type of feminism,” that “cisgender feminists exclude trans women, saying they cannot know what it is to be a woman” and as such are agents of “division”.

20191029_192807

So if you believe in biological differences between women and men then you are without a doubt a perpetuator of patriarchy and white supremacy. This is what happens when progress peaks. It progresses until it inevitable progresses backwards. Modern feminism is not the bra-burning, sexual liberation movement that it was for our parents. Today’s feminism is just an extension of socialism and intersectionality. What the protestors are really saying is you’re either with us or against us and if you’re with us then you must swear allegiance to a socialist revolution of the west.

So by default if you stand for womens’ rights, for free speech, for freedom and liberty for all then you are in the conservative camp. Which may be the inevitability for progressivism. I mean, once you’ve accomplished all the things you’ve been progressing towards, you would then seek to preserve those values. When I was younger the issues were of equal rights between the sexes. Gay marriage, equal opportunities, etc. We have that now. Now in order to have pride we find ourselves celebrating pedophilia and beastiality. The LBGT community has become an umbrella party for even the most obscure deviants and once they are under that umbrella you cannot criticise any of them over anything they do at any time. Because fuck you.

Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against trans people. I follow several trans people over social media such as blaire white and I’m personally intrigued around trans people and trans issues. And I am happy that despite all the craziness going on, it’s still never been a better time to be trans. Everyone deserves our respect and trans people are no exception. I’m glad society has become so empathetic towards trans people. And I just hope all this assault on free speech doesn’t actually hurt trans people by painting them all with the same brush. Make no mistake, the non-binary crowd hate you, me and the entire western world and it will never stop. At least not until we begin calling out the callout artists themselves.

So I support Meghan Murphy and I applaud her for having the resilience to take a stand in such crazy times. I also believe that the protestors have the right to peacefully protest, her detractors have the right to call her a piece of shit. That’s all free speech. But no one has the right to prevent the other from talking. If what she has to say is so shit then that’s for others to discern from her speech. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. However these activists need to ask themselves why exactly she’s only gaining more followers. Maybe they’re the ones who are on the wrong side of history.

20191029_192058

Oh and Meghan is not the first career feminist who is being utterly defamed and destroyed by cancel culture. Check out these other feminists and you tell me if modern feminism REALLY has womens best interests at heart. What do they all have in common? They’re biological reality is what makes them unique and special. Sounds like what Christians preach. Sounds like conservative traditions. Sounds like women who want what’s best for women should find themselves networking within the Conservative tent.

Conservatives are the only ones who will advocate for you now. Your liberal partners have unpersoned you and exiled you along with the straight white men that you worked so hard to cancel. One says “trans-exclusionary” but another hears “pro-lesbian”. Not everything is so black and white. And we need to be able to make up our own minds about these issues. Under a conservative government you will have the freedom to express yourself. So you choose. Stand with Meghan. Stand with women.

 

Christina Hoff Sommers

Germaine Greer

Melanie Phillips

Camille Paglia

 

20191029_192753

 

 

“If we don’t believe in free expression for the people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”

-Noam Chomsky

We need to talk about Greta Thunberg

greta 4

Greta Thunberg is a 16 year old Swedish environmental activist who became famous after media coverage of her habit of skipping school to protest the Swedish government to do more about climate change. Since then she’s been hosted by multiple countries to deliver speeches about her activism and embarked on a 15-day sail boat voyage to New York City to raise awareness of climate change.

Her comments stir up reactions from all along the political spectrum. Some cheering her on for her harsh critique and others questioning how much of this is Greta’s idea or if those in her inner circle are using her as a political pawn for their own agenda. Lately conservative pundit Michael Knowles has been banned from Fox News, according to the Washington Examiner, for calling Greta “mentally ill” in a recent interview. This, although not exclusively, has sparked a debate over how one contends with Greta through the conversation she, herself, is trying to initiate. Broadcasters like John Moore and others on newstalk 1010 along with others on the political left have taken the position that to criticise Greta in almost any capacity is nothing more than a personal attack on her and amounts to bullying a minor.

 

Watch the Washington Post video about Fox News because apparently YouTube’s algorithm will only recommend content through Liberal media:

 

When black face photos surfaced of Justin Trudeau, liberals experienced cognitive dissonance.  Black face is clearly racist. Justin Trudeau was clearly an ally of racial minorities. But then how could Justin Trudeau wear blackface at multiple occasions and still not be a racist? While some of the same broadcasters and journalists who preach to us on a daily basis that Donald Trump’s racism needs to be called out, for this, they were more than keen to “listen” to what people had to say about it. While Trudeau continues to struggle to get his campaign back on track, those on the political left miss the entirety of what made his black face controversial.

Nobody believes Trudeau is a racist. Has he done or said racist things? Yes, we can now definitively say yes, he has. But is Trudeau a racist? No. He is a hypocrite. And this is something those on the left fail to even perceive. Hypocrisy is the main theme among the leftist movement as a whole. And this is why those on the left cannot understand how anyone could disagree with Greta Thunberg. So any critique of her must only be personal prejudice.

Liberals today just don’t understand anyone who disagrees with them. And contrarianism threatens them because it questions them. Maybe reading a news feed that has been 100% tailored to your individual worldview can have that effect on a person. Rationality threatens the cause and so all dissenting opinions must be suppressed at all costs. That is why instead of answering questions or making arguments they merely slander their opposition. That’s why everyone and everything is racist and bigoted. That is why anyone who disagrees with or disapproves of Greta Thunberg is attacking a minor.

nick sandman.png

Like everything else, we need context. So I think of the Covington debacle. Nick Sandman was the name of a minor who participated in a pro-life rally called the March for Life. He decided to wear a MAGA hat during the event. After the event had wrapped up and Nick gathered with his classmates to wait for their bus to take them back to their school another group of protestors confronted the group of school children. A native group and a group called the black hebrews were also there protesting that day. The MAGA hats being worn by nick and others had caught the attention of these other groups and they converged on the students.

One native protestor who was playing a native drum had noticed Nick and singled him out. He confronted the minor, banging his drum, within inches from Nick’s face. One of the black hebrews captured this image with his phone and uploaded the photo to Twitter. There for the world to see was a MAGA wearing, white man facing off with a native man. Without any context the image quickly became a symbol and it garnered explosive outrage across social media from all regions of the world. It was received as Trumpian racism and ignorance facing off against a community of marginalized, vulnerable individuals. Even if that wasn’t the reality of the situation, it’s how it was communicated.

Since CBC thinks sharing tweets counts as journalism, I will also share with you some hard hitting, in depth, journal-isms. This was some of the fallout that happened over social media regarding Nick Sandman. Remember, Nick was a minor at this time:

covington 9

The highschool had to be shut down for several days because they received multiple threats. The Sandman family experienced a multitude of harassment and had to lawyer up after media decided to feature his face and identity in their news reports. Nick and his family, and the school itself, is still dealing with the fallout of the incident. Twitter, who operates under a self imposed hateful conduct policy, did not ban any of the verified accounts who incited violence or doxing against the students or the school. They have, however, permanently banned Megan Murphy for misgendering Jessica Yaniv. The point is that some of the same people who are condemning people for criticizing Greta today are the exact same people who called for violence against Nick Sandman.

covington 1

Watch Viva Frei break down the WaPo lawsuit dismissal:

 

I also think about Omar Khadr. He traveled to Iraq, pledged allegiance to the Taliban and after helping build improvised explosive devices he was arrested and pleaded guilty to killing an American medic and blinding another American soldier with a grenade. He was 15 at the time. To us, here in Canada, he would be legally considered a minor. In Iraq he would be considered a full grown man where many that age would be either starting a family or on track to start one. He committed the worst crime possible and did so under the flag of a terrorist group who has called for the deaths of all Canadians.

Omar Khadr now lives in Canada, enjoying ten million dollars given to him from a settlement out of court by the liberal government. But that’s it’s own story not worth glossing over too many details for the sake the of conversation I’m trying to have about Greta here and now. We are also living in such a different world today than the world we lived in before september eleventh. Both in government policy, socially and technologically.

When I was in highschool I did stupid things like ride the top of my buddy’s car and steal street signs. We would make stupid jokes about everything to try and shock one another. Jokes about everything. Back when “edgy” was something that can get you arrested for today, at least in the UK. But those jokes and that behaviour is not online. Even by adjusting our conduct today to match the standards of the day, we are still the subject of scrutiny from anything that can be dug up and exposed today. In today’s climate, context does not matter.

Justin Trudeau can use his “privilege” as an excuse for a “blind spot” to justify his lapse in judgement but I guess for everyone else whos daddy wasn’t prime minister we get no second chances or get out of jail free cards for our mistakes. We get fired. We get banned. We lose our friends. Maybe rightfully so. This is exactly why we need to be extremely careful about our conduct. Because you never know what will come back to haunt you in an uncertain future.

The whole reason why there are publication bans on court cases involving minors is purely to protect the identity of those minors. So nothing can be held against these individuals before they enter adulthood. Where they will be held accountable for their actions. Their actions as adults. But social media has made that an impossible standard because everything we do online is now saved, archived, recorded and sold to anonymous third parties. On a regular basis.

Raising a child in this environment in a way that won’t affect their future is almost impossible. You can’t just cut your child off of technology until they’re an adult. You’d be raising an illiterate mess who is incompatible with almost any workplace they will enter. let alone damage their ability to socialize with others. You also can’t expose your child to everything without scandalising them. The parental tight rope gets thinner and thinner every year. So it’s easy to see how so many people view Greta as a victim.

I do not know Greta and I am not trying to speak on her behalf. I, like most everyone else, is trying to just understand where we stand today as a society. Is Greta a victim of child abuse? Is she being used by those around her? Will everything she says and does be held against her in her future? She has admitted to having aspergers and we know that people’s mental illnesses work against them in job interviews. So I think we can say there is evidence that her inclination to polarize may work against her in certain situations. And I think we can all agree that she’s too young to really appreciate the implications of that. So I think there is actual credibility in peoples concern for her.

Ultimately we will need to wait and see what becomes of young Greta. Where she ends up. If she ends up becoming some politician, this will serve to her advantage. But what if Greta kills herself? Some of us rejoice in hearing her brutal critique of governmental indifference but some also hear a hysterical young girl who has become too cynical about the world in a time when she should be smiling and laughing with friends. Does she at least have a therapist to help her cope with her cynicism, depression and celebrity status? What do you think goes on in the mind of a girl who says, “you’ve stolen my dreams and childhood from me”? Or when she talks about extinction?

There is value and developmental benefit of children having a chance to lead happy, fun, worry-free lives before entering adulthood. That may be too late for Greta and I think we could all agree we would rather our children be competent than just simply safe and you don’t do that by raising a naive child. But I can’t help but feel like some people are using Greta to help them struggle with their world view, is anyone helping Greta struggle with hers?

 

Watch Emma Gonzalez speech at the “March for our lives” rally:

 

It also reminds me of David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez. The two main student activists that rose to fame with their appearances after the parkland school shooting. In an interview with 60 minutes Emma Gonzalez mentioned that when they first gave their speech before the Parkland community they had no conceptualization that they were being broadcast for the entire world to see and react to. Now they find themselves thrust into the public spotlight. The whole thing felt coerced to me. A local rally could serve to be a part of the healing process but it’s another thing to have CNN hold a town hall and get children to go on stage and yell at politicians. And then later be given an award for journalism. It’s no wonder so many people are confused about the reality we’re living in.

There’s no doubt that Greta has achieved a certain type of celebrity status and maybe that itself is healing to her. But It sure comes with a boat load of implications that need to be considered. The reality of the situation we are faced with is simple. You cannot enter discourse without expecting there to be discourse. We can all agree that discourse should be civilized and much of it is. But as always you have liberals taking the fringes of discourse and using it to write off the whole conversation.

Regardless how you feel about Michael Knowles referring to her as mentally ill, that is actually what she is. Aspergers is now considered part of the autism spectrum and is in fact a disorder. He didn’t call her deranged or crazy, he called her mentally ill. And it brings into question the conduct of parents of children with mental illness. Parents who seem to have no problem subjecting her to the world stage. I have no doubt if this were regarding a social conservative cause such as pro-life these parents would have their children taken away. You know, like when Kathleen Wynne made it a removable offense for parents to misgender their own children. And made it so teachers must exclude a student’s parents from discussions around sexual identity. And no I can’t find a citation right now so take it or leave it.

 

Watch Matt Walsh discuss whether climate alarmism is child abuse:

 

My take on all of this is that it is absolutely wrong to attack this girl on any superficial level. She is asking for debate, so contend with her ideas. Leave out the comments about her appearance or her gender or age. We can all appreciate young people becoming more engaged politically than ever before. But it is equally as uncivilized to refuse to participate in the debate she is literally asking for. To disqualify any argument or opinion as nothing more than attacking a minor is a lazy response to genuine reaction. What it’s actually saying is that their ideas and arguments are above scrutiny. Nothing is above scrutiny. Not even Greta herself.

You can’t treat Greta like an adult when she wants to speak and then infantilize her when it’s her turn to listen. The only way we’re going to navigate our way through this culture war is by doing as much listening as we do talking. Questioning climate activism isn’t climate denial and propping up children to take the place of science only hurts climate initiatives. A child can never be the face of the public relations battle for trust. And by hurting real conversations around actual change, we are working against Greta’s ambitions, not towards them.

Trudeau’s blackface isn’t a question about racism but of integrity. The concerns around Greta Thunberg doesn’t actually revolve around the environment. And in hypocrisy the only thing you will ever find is comedy and that’s why hypocrisy hurts trust. I disagree with Greta that the environment is our number one issue. Not because the environment isn’t an issue. Because she claims we are doing nothing about it. We are. At least here in Ontario, Canada where we currently have more forestry today than we did two hundred years ago. These issues aren’t solved overnight and as long as you keep demanding they are, we’ll never find a solution.

 

I disagree with Greta but I do admire her. I am glad people are becoming more engaged with issues that impact our daily lives. I just hope Greta can live a happy life. You know how it goes, childhood celebrities never ever develop any issues into their adulthood.

 

 

 

“The Earth is what we all have in common.”

-Wendell Berry

Justin Trudeau is the Trump of the North

Trudeau Black Face

Time Magazine releases a yearbook photo of Trudeau at an “arabian nights” themed gala

Why are we talking about black face? Because it’s 2019. Time Magazine has exposed old yearbook photos which feature Justin Trudeau wearing black face in a gala themed “Arabian Nights”. Turban, robes and all. Now is it distasteful? Yes. Do I really give a shit about a mistake made 20 years ago? No. I do not believe skin colour means anything. I believe culture isn’t skin deep. Our similarities and differences transcend pigment. But by the rules of intersectionality, it’s not my place to have an opinion. It’s my job to shut up and listen. So I will humbly not make this about myself and hold Mr. Trudeau to his own intersectional criteria.

So, what does this mean? Well by the criteria set by the Liberals MP themselves, this doesn’t just make him a racist. This is a dog whistle to white supremacy, therefore it propagates white supremacy therefore Trudeau himself is a white supremacist. And now everyone who has ever taken a photo with Trudeau is now also a white supremacist by proxy due to guilt by association. They expressed these views at a free speech hearing where Liberal MPs told Lindsay Shepherd that because she appeared on a podcast with someone who has been deemed a white supremacist then she herself possessed guilt by association. Also anyone who has been found in a picture with Faith Goldy has also been deemed a white supremacist by association.

But let’s be real. Trudeau isn’t going to be held to that standard. Even if the media does slam him on this, Liberals are just going to shrug this off like everything else Trudeau has done. There is literally nothing that Trudeau could do to prevent his base from endorsing him. Even if they secretly hate him, they will support him. Because we are so entrenched in our hyper partisan tribalism that the ends justify the means and he is just a necessary evil so we can defeat “the enemy”.

Well I hate to break it to you but no evil is ever necessary and there are no actual enemies here. We’re all Canadians. But we are no longer voting on issues or policies. We are using our votes to fight the culture war. The more I watch things unfold the stronger I believe that this is no longer actually a culture war but a full blown civil war. I’m sorry, we are subverting our elections to be used to wage battle against the caricatures we have created out of our own hyperbole. This is a civil war. I just hope it stays within the boundaries of strategic voting and social media shit posting. The best case scenario is we butcher our democracy without butchering each other. I won’t even entertain what the worst case scenario could look like.

Trudeau and Trump may be on polar opposites of the political spectrum but they are both symptoms of the same problem. And in that sense they are the same. Trudeau is our Trump and I’m going to explain to you exactly how. Trump shocked the world when he won the election of 2016 after he had said and done so much that many felt had disqualified his candidacy. Time and time again Trump demonstrates that despite the controversies and the unorthodoxy of his presidency, it only ever seems to empower his base. Likewise, Trudeau has faced scandals, conflicts of interest, controversy and yet nothing seems to disqualify him for anything nor does it appear that Liberal voters are willing to hold him accountable to any degree.

  • Trump had the Billy Bush tape and the Stormy Daniels affair and God knows what else, Trudeau has the Kokanee grope.
  • Trump initiates a Muslim ban and Trudeau on the opposite end of the spectrum welcomes back Islamic State fighters like Abu Huzaifa al-Kanadi.
  • Trump makes himself a laughing stock while visiting other countries, hurting America’s relationship with other governments. Trudeau gave us the whacky India trip where the Indian government snubbed him for dressing up like a bollywood clown. Despite all the PC culture he spews he had no problem “culturally appropriating” a bunch of ceremonial attire, while actual government officials were just walking around in three piece suits. He brought along Jaspar Atwal who was convicted of attempting to murder an Indian dignitary. And then when he came back to Canada he accused the Indian government of trying to sabotage his trip. That’s not even to mention his strained relations with the Philippines. Not that the garbage issue was his creation but the Philippines did declare war on us over it technically. For whatever that means. But I suppose the UN adores him so there’s that.
  • Trump gets accused of anti-semitism all the time but at least he did what many presidents before him promised to do but never delivered on. He moved the embassy to Jerusalem. Held a vote in support among allied countries and Canada abstained from the vote thanks to Trudeau. On top of that Trudeau’s team brought forth the motion 103 to investigate “Islamophobia”. Opposition moved to amend the motion to include anti-semitism and other forms of hate crimes and the Liberals used their majority power to veto the amendment. Now if I said that this was evidence of anti-semitism your Liberal apologists would call me a conspiracy theorist. But we all know that under intersectionality, in which he adheres to, Muslims are seen as superior to Jews. Jews have white privilege, don’t you know. Since 1942.
  • Trump shocked people when he praised Kim Jong Un but, again, people shrugged when Trudeau openly grieved Castro’s death and delivered an emotional outpour of support on behalf of all Canadians. I guess it’s understandable, Castro never did anything wrong, right?
  • Trump is largely criticised for un-presidential conduct when operating within government. A lot of people argue he’s abusing his powers with all his executive orders. But Trudeau’s Liberals have consistently used their majority power to shut down corruption probes and has now interfered with the RCMP trying to investigate criminal corruption charges. Rob Ford was criticised for turning city hall into a circus with some of his antics. Like the time he stormed through council to aid his brother and fellow councillor Doug Ford, knocking over Pam McConnell. This confirming in most people’s minds that Rob Ford was just the worst. But more shoulder shrugging when Trudeau man-handles two opposition members in the house.
  • Trump’s wall is synonymous with Trudeau’s pipeline.
  • The media has been obsessed with whether or not Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. However an extensive investigation and report by Robert Mueller failed to link Trump to an indictable offense. At least America got a Mueller report. Trudeau’s Liberals blocked any further probing into the SNC-Lavalin scandal where The Globe and Mail broke a story alleging the PMO had directly and consistently attempted to politically interfere with the attorney general. Allegedly under the direction of the PM himself. After an investigation of the ethics commissioner he found the PM was indeed in a conflict of interest. So I guess at least Trump had plausible deniability if there was any guilt on his part at all. Trudeau actually was guilty of political corruption. So I guess in that sense Trump isn’t as bad as Trudeau.
  • Trump may make up words like covfeffi but Trudeau is a gaf master himself if you manage to catch him in a scrum about exactly the topic he doesn’t want to talk about.
  • Trump cancelled a meeting with the Taliban in light of the 911 anniversary and people called the whole thing disgusting. Don’t get me wrong, I totally understand that. But it’s not like Trump gave a convicted terrorist $10 000 000 in a settlement out of court. Oh that’s right, that was Trudeau’s Liberals who just gave Omar Khadr $10 000 000. The man who was convicted of killing an American medic and injuring another American soldier. Oh, I almost forgot. Trudeau also apologized to him.

Justin Trudeau is the Trump of the north. They have both done things that should absolutely disqualify them but what we see is their base double down, rally around and openly endorse them. He’s just as populist. He campaigned in the last election to end hyper partisanship but the country is more divided now than ever before and political discourse has devolved to witch hunts where social justice is mob justice. The political correctness he peddles is hurting this country. With 311 shootings this year alone in the greater Toronto area all politicians can do is spew more rhetoric around gun bans because even they are afraid to be labelled a racist for suggesting all neighbourhoods may not be equal.

What I see are unprecedented developments from and unprecedented government who is unashamed of how they have disgraced this country and at every chance they get they double down again and again and again. And people just dismiss it. “All politicians are bullshit,” they say. Liberals will vote liberal, conservative will vote conservative and I fear everyone else is just going to stay home and probably watch something 20 years old, when times were simpler and fun.

Justin Trudeau is the worst Prime Minister Canada has ever seen and he has set this country back at least 15 years in regards to unification and what progress use to mean. Of course Trudeau did black face. Of course he’s a bigot. He’s a spoiled trust fund preppy boy who had life handed to him. Identity politics is nothing more than a game to him where attention is the currency of the day, it was never about any actual standards or code of conduct. Voting Liberal in the last election was the biggest mistake of my life and I’ll always regret it. I’ve never been more ashamed to be a Canadian. And the part of all of this that depresses me most is that people seem more concerned over whether or not black face makes a person racist rather than the verified ethical violation by the prime minister of canada. Why? Because it’s 2019.

 

 

“Identity politics is a sick game. You don’t play racial, ethnic, and gender identity games. The Left plays them on behalf of the oppressed, let’s say, and the Right tends to play them on behalf of nationalism and ethnic pride. I think they’re equally dangerous.”

– Jordan Peterson

Crowder Vs Maza? Free Speech Vs Censorship? Private Company Vs Public Utility? I don’t know anymore.

M v C

 

Watch a Mary Ham break down the situation surrounding Carlos Maza and Steven Crowder (4:56):

Watch Phillip Defranco covering the situation:

Watch Tim Pool’s report on the situation:

Watch Tim Pool follow up on of the adpocalypse:

Watch Lauren Chen cover the situation:

Watch Joe Rogan’s reaction to the situation:

CNN business interviews Maza over situation:

Watch 1791 profile Carlos Maza:

Watch 1791 follow up with “The Aftermath”:

Watch Glenn Beck’s reaction to the situation:

Watch Glenn Beck interview Steven Crowder:

Watch Jimmy Dore react to the situation:

Watch David Pakman break down the situation:

Watch Secular Talk break down the situation:

Watch Sargon of Akkad react to the situation:

Watch the Quartering react to the situation:

Watch Ben Shapiro cover the situation:

Watch Steven Crowder in his own words, “I’m not sorry”:

 

It may be Steven’s right to say whatever he wants but let’s not kid ourselves, there is speech that you just can’t defend. Using the word “fag” on a t-shirt you sell as merch, that’s not a hill worth dying on. Nor is it something I would want to support or sympathize with. He’s used the word fag regularly like in events held with Milo. Youtubers are more than just commentators, they’re role models to their audience. But when you look at what crowder actually says about Maza it’s always in the context of rebuttal.

He’s never said anything remotely close to anything like “this is the problem with the gays” or “people like Maza” or “he’s like this because he’s gay”. No. It’s always been an attack on Maza himself as an individual. And I’m sorry but when you create political commentary content where you’re whole shtick is criticising others, it’s just plain fair game that others are going to react to what you say. What is Maza actually asking for here? And by going after youtube Maza is demonstrating the very mob behaviour and targeting that he claims youtube enables in others. Critics have been parodying each other forever. Crowder denounces all forms of doxing and online bullying. This is not just to formally cover his ass, he knows and makes clear that is is exactly what people like Maza want so they can claim that sweet, sweet victimhood and it plays right into their narrative. Online bullying is never ok and never helps anyone. Crowder understands this and always denounces it. The responsibility of creators for their followers is another conversation.

When he exaggerates Maza’s excentricisms, is that homophobia? If you’re someone I don’t like, I might call you a cock sucker. If you were gay but I didn’t know, would I be a homophobe? If I did know you were gay and still called you that, would I be a homophobe? If you subscribe to intersectional doctrine then yes, as a CIS, white male I have no right to criticise anyone above me on the hierarchy. And my insult will be found to be discrimination of some kind. If it’s directed at a gay man, it’s homophobic. If it’s directed at a woman it’s misogynist. If it’s aimed at a “person of colour” then it’s racist. And if it doesn’t comfortably meet the definition of racism then we’ll just call it coded language to dog whistle white supremacy.
In the context of intersectionality, CIS white males will inevitably be found to be guilty and tainted and problematic because that is the status of my identity group. Despite the fact that when I’m using such language, I’m never thinking about the act itself. Nor am I using it to bring about visuals of such acts being performed by the people such comments are targeting. I’m probably just using that language because I think it’ll offend you. And if I’m using that language I probably want to offend you. I’m just intending to piss you off, nothing more, nothing less. But thoughts, actions and the intention around them are irrelevant. If you are not a member of the protected class then you will face the consequences of your actions and cited as an example of things like “genocide”. That all being said… did I have to call the person a cock sucker in the first place? Probably not.
This leads me to an email I sent to Steven Crowder about 2 years ago. I had just created a youtube account to investigate this whole youtube thing after the Trump election and crowder was one of the first channels I discovered. After so long following him closely I felt the need to email him a critique. I wrote to him that I felt he was wrong to use words like Faggot. Even if it is in talking to Milo Yiannopoulos through mutual respect. I don’t recall him ever using the word Nigger but he’s always engaged in real spicy language. I told Crowder that he may have every right to say absolutely whatever he wants but the reality is having an audience makes him a role model as much as he is a comedian or commentator. And his advocacy for conservative values and free speech is noble. But his careless use of spicy language really just makes him look like a bully and that he only wants free speech to be an asshole.
I believe in absolute freedom of expression but free speech doesn’t mean freedom against consequence. However this regulation should always be socially enforced and not legislated into law. The government regulation of speech will always be a gross conflict of interest. If you’re not scared of a liberal telling you what’s acceptable to say or do, try having a conservative telling you what you can say or do. This is not the role of government. Public discourse is best left up to the public. And the amendments we currently have on free speech is already borderline too much but fair enough. Defamation, incitement of violence, etc. Fair enough. People will get in line with their tribes based on what’s socially acceptable to say. This plays out every day as we all self censor over controversial issues.
So I warned Crowder that if he insisted on using, what I have been calling, “indefensible speech” then one day he would be targeted and his arguments would be reduced to  holding him to account for this spicy language. Using words like Faggot isn’t a hill worth dying on. And freedom of individual expression is far too important to be taken down by such shallow defenses. These are words that are so morally powerful they bind and blind people and recruit free speech opposition quicker than any advocacy argument could ever back them off that cliff. And here we are today, Crowder being accused of hate speech. Not because of his “change my mind” segments or his one-on-one interviews or his comedic sketches or his collaborations. It’s over the word fag.
He can be as ‘not sorry’ as he wants, the damage is already done. Not from his base but to his credibility to those sitting on the fence. The more he frames things as “us versus them” and the more he appeals to tribalism the more he contributes to polarization. And that’s why Crowder is in the wrong with this issue. I can play devils advocate for Crowder in this situation and I believe Maza is also wrong and also disingenuous but that doesn’t mean Crowder is right. They’re both wrong for their own reasons. These issues need to be contended with responsibly and with the seriousness they deserve. Crowder is not doing this and no amount of “some of my best friends are fags” style defense will ever make him right.
He’s making money and gaining subs despite his demonetization so if money is the only measure of success then sure, he’s winning. I only see an empty victory. Is Crowder a comedian? Not in the traditional sense of a comedian but if Stephen Colbert, Fallon and Kimmel pass as comedians then Crowder does as well. But their partisanship doesn’t grant them the kind of pass I would grant people like Kevin Hart or Bill Burr, etc. Crowders show is clearly intended to be a political commentary dressed up with entertaining sketches and bits to make it more palatable. That does not exempt him of scrutiny nor has he ever shied away from challenges. Provocation is part of his style and that is aimed at shock value and intended to challenge you. This is also not a defense for indefensible speech.
When I engage in road rage on the highway I don’t stop and think rationally of what the most appropriate wording of outrage would be to use so that I don’t offend my perpetrator. Instead of “dumb bitch” I use “silly goose” and instead of “mother fucker” I say “non-gender-conforming parental guardian consentual fornicator”. Look, I’m not equating delivering a speech to the world to the same standard as road rage but sometimes an emotional reaction can result in impulsive inappropriateness. And as Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
My point is Crowder doesn’t like Maza. Why would he give a shit about Maza’s feelings? Sure, you’re a content creator and you shouldn’t appeal to outrage. And in an ideal world we would all be polite to one another. But Maza does the exact same thing by demonizing those he criticizes. Maza’s advocating for one identity group being a protected class over another identity group. Again, it always comes down to socialism with these guys. Political correctness is just fascism with manners. If social media wants to start promoting some content while censoring other content then how does this not make them a publisher? News media relies on all social media for their reporting now, it’s cited as a publisher source constantly. But everytime they favour one voice over another they are actively in conflict with constitutional rights. You guys want to end discrimination? Then there can be NO protected category of ppl over other ppl. period. Every time any protected class is favoured, all those outside the protected class are discriminated against.

Now as for Maza. All I can say is the guy isn’t real journalism, it’s the exact activist based narrative propaganda that he himself is so critical of. Crowder isn’t fooling anyone by using the word “Figs” instead of “Fags” on his shirt. Maza isn’t fooling anyone by advocating for acosting people with milkshakes isn’t an incitement for violence. I’ll tell you right now if you ever threw a milkshake at me I’d beat the ever living fuck out of you. I have my own hateful conduct policy. Kill me or regret it. So he violates actual laws but you’ll never see it enforced because society is adhering to this social justice rhetoric around protected classes.

I can appreciate that he may call himself a gay wonk and that doesn’t automatically exempt others from scrutiny for engaging him with the same language. I believe the word Nigger is reprehensible and should never be used. However I don’t care when I hear it in a song or in the context of news and the like. But the main point here is that Maza has entered the public domain to target and criticize others. This is his career. He gets paid to do this. This puts him squarely smack dab in the middle of the marketplace of ideas. His ideas and opinions are just as up for scrutiny as those he targets. He, himself, engages in the same demonizing language he’s critical over Crowder using.

He thinks he’s right based on his race and sexual orientation and Crowder is inherently wrong as a measure of his race and sexual orientation. Maza is wrong. He claims Youtube doesn’t care about it’s LGBTQ creators. This is a lie and his calls for protest are all simply aimed at damaging youtube and the creators on their platform. He even admits himself this isn’t really about Crowder. And he chose to do all of this at the same time of a vox walkout and during pride month. It’s calculated, manipulative and disingenuous. His proclamation of victimhood is, in my opinion, purely aimed at harming others. The mainstream hit pieces that have followed reinforce my feeling that this is just another attempt to reclaim lost ground against alternative media.

 

He’s doing it for the clicks clap

He’s doing it for the clicks clap

He’s doing it for the clicks clap

 

 

Watch Philly D cover new main stream media hit pieces:

Watch Tim Pool’s coverage of Media hit piece:

Watch The Quartering react to the media hit piece:

Watch 1791 cover the media hit piece:

Watch Secular Talk cover the media hit piece:

Watch Ben Shapiro’s coverage of the media hit piece:

 

So in closing, I need to ask. What exactly are we talking about here? Is this just a fight between Crowder and Maza? Well neither knows each other personally and it’s pretty clear that both parties have their own personal agendas behind their faux feud. So this really isn’t a conflict between these two. Is this a conversation about censorship? Maza makes clear that it’s not enough to demonetize creators channels, citing websites like patreon. Youtube has nothing to do with Patreon. Is it not enough to censor a creator? Must there be a collaborative effort to destroy the lives of those we deem ‘problematic’? Youtube can change it’s policies every hour if they want, I don’t think that’s what the issue is really about.

I think this all comes down to the big question of what is social media? Is it a private company that is allowed to ‘hire’ and ‘fire’ anyone they deem harmful to their brand? Is it a publication that produces us with news? Well all mainstream media has no problem citing social media for anecdotes in their work. All media utilize social media for their content to reach far beyond the municipal boundaries of their broadcast. Is social media really just a company that aims at only making money?

Well if social media wants to continue to regulate content then it increasingly fulfills the role of publisher as it guides our attention and calculates it’s recommendations. Maybe a better question is what is social media to us? Internet in general is now considered a basic human right as more people do their banking, communications and coordination through their smart devices or computers. Trying to live without a phone or access to internet truly does present very real barriers to thriving in a society that demands instantaneous communication.

Here are a few other good questions. If you cannot network, plan, promote, advertize or advocate on social media, how does that impact your professional and/or social life? Would you suffer damages by being barred from utilizing social media? What advantages would others have over you if you were not allowed access to social media while running for political office? While others have access to it but you don’t. How would that impact the election of your riding? Better yet, could you ever become president/prime minister without a presence on social media? I don’t think you could run a competitive campaign without some degree of social media activity.

How significant is our online avatar? Is our online presence as significant as our physical self in real life? If you disappeared from social media, would it have a measurable impact on your real life friendships? Could that lead to falling out with certain friends? Your profile, your avatar, your page, your library. Are these personalized home pages shares? Does holding a personal account/home page equate to holding a share within the company if it’s profitability is derived from your account/content? Is there an argument there that your account is a form of equity? Canadian government ruled that points accumulated on reward cards like air miles is a form of equity that is owned by the card holder, not air miles. This after Air Miles attempted to retroactively apply an adjustment to terms and conditions around accumulated points. Government ruled that unconstitutional. They ruled that digital equity could be property. Does my participation on social media produce equity that I should be entitled to?

Are these companies monopolies? What relationship do we have with social media? Is it addictive? Could it be so intrinsic to our functionality that social media can become a symbiotic relationship with us? It may be true that social media are private companies. This also means they are unelected officials regulating the centre of public discourse. So what responsibilities do these companies have in the symbiotic relationship their products have with our lives? Are these platforms an open forum? I don’t have the answers but I think after seeing just how far you can flesh out the significance of social media it tends to feel more like a public utility than merely a private platform. Perhaps how it functions goes beyond it’s intended design. But if it meets the definition of a public utility then we cannot ignore the conversation around civil rights. And if access to these platforms is a civil right then it’s pretty clear the conversation around regulation is far from over and far more complex than it seems.

 

 

“A lie told often enough becomes the truth”

– Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

Apparently beheading the premier isn’t hate.

queens park 2

This week there was yet another protest outside Queen’s park because #fuckford. It will forever be the conservative burden to inherit deficits in the billions, make the unpopular decisions necessary to balance the budget. Then they inevitably find themselves dethroned by tax and spend liberals who go back to running up deficits. We have created a culture in our politics where funding is commensurate with compassion. And unless we’re spending money on it, we don’t care about it.

By the way, ignore the marxist flag donning the hammer and sickle. Marxism is a conservative conspiracy. It doesn’t exist on the left or in academia or anywhere. The marxist lie is a conservative straw man. It’s probably photoshopped, right? PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN!

queens park 1

If teachers experience cuts, the PC government must hate teachers. If healthcare experiences cuts, the PC government must hate doctors and nurses. If cut taxes then this must only mean the PC government loves evil corporations. Are we really making the case that government has been 100% efficient and there is no room at all for cuts of any kind? Are we really arguing that while the rest of us in the private world have to endure the fluctuating risk the economy threatens us with every day, those who work for the government, whose payroll exists off of the taxes we pay, should never have to worry about their job security? Are we really arguing that there is NO wiggle room for innovation  to find efficiencies in government at any level?

What’s been really bothering me since the election is to see the change in Andrea Horwath. The language she’s been espousing has been increasingly unparliamentary and she now has taken a position to simply oppose anything and everything proposed by this conservative government. The latest example was her absolute opposition to free dental care for seniors. I believe Horwath is now in part responsible for an increase in vitriolic anti-government activism we’re seeing unfold.

TVO featured “Ontario’s new political landscape” where a panel reacted to the election results where Brittany Andrew-Amofah of the broadbent institute literally said, “what happened last night was a false majority that can only be produced under a first-past-the-post system.” Keep in mind that the conservatives took 76 seats out of the total 134 seat legislature, the NDP won 40, the Liberals 7 and the Green 1. To form majority a party only needs 63 seats. With 76 seats awarded to Doug Ford’s PC government, I have no problem speculating that even if we had used a different method besides first-past-the-post we likely still would’ve seen a conservative majority.

What Brittany is really saying that unless they have a political party who promotes their ideologies then that government will be illegitimate in their eyes. In the panel discussion Steve Paikin asks Brittany, “Are you prepared to give this guy a chance or do you see job one right now as defeating him?” This was Brittany’s response:

I see job one right now as amplifying the need for progressive movement within our province and also discussing what will potentially be at stake. So the search for efficiencies is a very scary search. Where are we going to be cutting from? Where are the efficiencies going to be coming from? And I think that needs, that deserves interrogation and hasn’t been interrogated enough. When we talk about efficiencies are we talking about social services? Are we talking about the money that is being given to our shelter system?

Steve: Well you do know he’s got a pharma care plan. It might not be as good as the other two parties but he’s got something. He’s got a childcare plan. You may not like it as much as the other two parties but he’s got one. He’s got a mental health spending plan as well. He’s got a transit plan. It may not be –

Steve’s interrupted by Brittany, “as in depth as it probably should be.”

“Or might be,” Steve continues, “but he’s got something to say about these things. Does that help you at all?”

Brittany, “no, because this party has been focussed on talking about efficiencies and talking about cleaning up what’s happening at Queen’s Park. Yes, Wynne has gone wrong and maybe several different areas when it comes to hydro, when it came to a number of different issues but there are a lot of progressive gains that need to continue to be made and that needs to be built upon from when Wynne had left. So I think that’s a risk here and if we’re focussing solely on his (she then performs air quotes) “search for efficiencies” then I don’t know how true those statements are.

Let me remind you that the recording of this episode took place the day after election day. This is her reaction to the conservatives the DAY after election day. What we see here isn’t a realistic critique of job performance or policy legislation, this is her simply disqualifying the new majority government as elected by the people due to nothing more than their political identity. This is what hyper partisanship looks like. She sits there and equates budget cuts to punishment and uses it to fear monger that this government will use their power to punish the weak and marginalized. It’s not a political analysis, it’s a post-modern style deconstruction framed around intersectional narratives. Notice her inability to acknowledge minority group support for Doug Ford and Ford Nation? Because it’s counter narrative, which could never be true, so it’s obviously just lies. Conservative Rhetoric. Misinformation. Fake news. Far-right conspiracies. etc, etc, etc.

This was the rhetoric coming out of those left of the political spectrum the day after election day. The NDP put forth more radical candidates than ever before. Like Laura Kimiker who ran in my riding of Mississauga Center was a self described Marxist and called Poppies war glorification. I’ve greatly respected Andrea Horwath throughout her role as opposition throughout my lifetime watching provincial politics. She’s a veteran in the game and I truly believe she sincerely advocates for truly vulnerable people and for opening opportunities to everyone. However she’s seen how greatly her party benefited from a more populist, radical campaign message and she’s changed her tune to appeal to exactly this populism.

That’s why Andrea Horwath today has no problem openly calling Doug Ford a ‘dictator’. Which if it came from a conservative, would be called a dog whistle promoting violence and hate. So what is it when it’s done on the left? Oh, NOW it’s just free speech. Horwath has the freedom to express any view she wants. And I’m equally allowed to call her a silly fucken hack for choosing to do so. I believe the more she shifts towards the social radical marxist types, the more she will dispossess the grass roots supporters of the parties who just wanted better health care, not a marxist reform. My prediction is once the party is nothing but radicals then this will simply disqualify them and I think we will see more surge in Green support as an alternative to what has been the alternative for decades. I think Green will replace the NDP.

Horwath

She’s had no problem throwing out slurs, parliamentary disruptions, calls to activism and yet she refuses to take responsibility for how discourse has been changing around Queens park. If you only pay attention to the mainstream news outlets, CTV, CBC, Macleans, etc, you’d believe that the only reason conservatives are surging in support around the country is believe of Facebook fake news and white supremacy. When in reality we’ve seen, in my opinion, more openly hateful protests against conservatives than anyone else.

doug ford 1

The following images were taken from the office of MPP Laurie Scott’s office upon amending the minimum wage bill.

Labour Minister Laurie Scott 3Labour Minister Laurie Scott 1Labour Minister Laurie Scott 2doug ford 2

 

Several months ago truckers from around the country rallied and drove to Ottawa to show their support for pipelines. They donned yellow vests inspired by french protests against their carbon taxes. They felt Trudeau has turned his back on Albertans and waste billions of dollars and Saudi Oil rather than cycling it back to the Canadian economy. There were online forums where these people organized and shared talking points. Apparently some have shared anti-immigrant sentiments. Faith Goldy and Rebel Media also attended the protest. The media took these details and slandered the entire protest as one of promoting hate and violence. The convoy was portrayed as just a group of white supremacists. The usual slurs aimed at disqualifying dissent and aimed at banning wrongthink.

united we roll

The only point I’m making here is simply this. Populism is increasing as polarization increases. This is not just happening among conservatives but also with liberals. If not more. We all need to hold ourselves accountable at the individual level. But this is just another example of the media’s bias against conservatives. Conservatives simply show up to peacefully protest and they’re labelled racists. But if you’re protesting conservatives, that’s just your civil right. Despite how inappropriate your conduct is.

Like, what exactly are they trying to say here? If you question social justice initiatives you disqualify yourself from public discourse? Well, that seems to be the case from what I’m seeing media wide. You watch how the media treats Scheer or Ford versus how they treat Trudeau and Horwath and it’s easy to see. If you have anything to say about Trudeau’s #welcometoCanada? Guess what, you’re a nazi. Bring a guillotine to Queens Park and behead an effigy of Doug Ford? That’s just you’re civil right.

Do these people have a right to call for the death of politicians? Actually no, that’s incitement of violence. Murder and policy critique are two very different things. If I followed the same logic that the social justice leftists follow then Andrea Horwath would be a Marxist for having posed for pictures with a group who had Marxists among them. However I don’t follow social justice logic so, no, I don’t think Andrea Horwath is a Marxist by association. But when she’s posing next to a skeleton and signs reading #fuckford then I simply have this to ask you. What if roles were reversed and it was Doug Ford protesting an NDP government by posing with skeletons and hashtags #fuckhorwath. All media everywhere would be reporting this as a KKK rally. So if it would be inappropriate to one party, it should be equally condemned on the other front.

queens park 3

But what we’re seeing here isn’t any effort to consider any of that. Even if this conservative government for some reason matched the same policies as the previous liberals and their government mirrored one another, you would still see vitriolic protests. There is nothing this government can do to appease the angry social justice mob. It’s not about the cuts or the budget. It’s about capitalism and hatred. Hatred for everyone who disagrees with the social justice narrative. Feminist narratives of empowering women fall short when conservative female MPPs need to hire security over death threats. It is literally and metaphorically a call for the death of our political system and a call to complete reform to socialism. And while the conservatives come under constant attack on all fronts, they’re tasked with saving this province from itself. Remember this in 3 years when we’re back at the ballot box.

Even Slavoj Zizek himself thinks that political correctness is exactly what perpetuates prejudice and racism. So put that in your Marxist Vape Pens and smoke it 500 metres away from any public entryway.

 

 

“one needs to be very precise not to fight racism in a way which ultimately reproduces, if not racism itself, at least the conditions of racism.” – Slavoj Zizek

CBC interviews terrorist on EASTER SUNDAY

Watch the True North Initiative recap the events of Omar Kadhr:

Watch CBC episode on Omar Khadr:

 

Dear everyone who claims there is no culture war going on and everything is a conservative conspiracy, why is CBC choosing to interview a convicted terrorist who fought alongside a terrorist organization responsible for killing hundreds of Christians every year? A terrorist who pleaded guilty to murdering an american medic and injuring another american soldier?

Why, out of 365 days in a year, does CBC choose EASTER sunday to hold this interview with this terrorist? Is there a place and time to hold this conversation? Sure. I don’t like it but sure. But EASTER SUNDAY? from now on anyone who wants to cite any CBC article to me, you can expect me to simply refer you to this as my response. CBC is completely morally bankrupt at this point as far as I’m concerned.

I can appreciate the exploration of grey areas but this is pretty black and white to me. I have no problem seeing what’s obviously wrong with this. But I’m not surprised by it. And this is why it’s clear to me that the CBC should no longer receive federal subsidization. Let their ideas face the free market and see if anyone will support their trash out in the real world alongside all the other media.

how is this not a direct assault on Christians? and a slap in the face to all of our veterans? You want to talk about dreaming of an ordinary life? Why don’t you ask that of the widow and children of the medic HE MURDERED? Just when I thought the Omar Khadr affair couldn’t stoop any lower, CBC proves me wrong. Wow. Defunding the CBC just became a huge voting issue for me.

 

american back view burial cemetery
Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

 

 

“Terrorism works better as a tactic for dictatorships, or for would-be dictators, than for revolutionaries.”
― Christopher Hitchens

Rule #4: Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today. An Easter reflection of my journey to better understand God.

black and white cemetery christ church
Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

In a few months I will have been attending church for a year now. But I haven’t admitted this to any of my close friends. There’s just so much stigma attached to church-goers that I worry that it will actually damage my friendships. I’ve justified keeping it to myself by trying to form good arguments to defend why I would do such a thing. Aimed at challenging the stereotypical preconceptions and typical tropes against Christianity.

But I think this also may just be an excuse to hide behind my own embarrassment. Which, I think, comes from a place of insecurity. I never grew up with any religious upbringing and I used to be that guy who mocked religious people as brainless cultists. Sam Harris would’ve been proud. So I feel like a complete imposter when I find myself sitting in a pew.

That being said, there I find myself, watching an easter play about Jesus saving us. So how did I get here? I never grew up with any religious upbringing. I’ve never studied the bible before now nor have I ever attended any sort of Catholic school. I grew up on Star Trek, The Next Generation. They were having conversations around AI, finite resources, authoritarianism, democracy, genocide, racism, social hierarchies, trauma, foreign aid, foreign conflict, and so much more. Hell, if Picard broke the prime directive I lost sleep! What if their interference changed that civilization forever?

It represented a future where we truly transcended all the petty issues which hold us back. All of Earth was united by what was the greater good for humanity as a whole. Though the planet united under one federation it didn’t stand in the way of national pride or prevent the celebration of individuality and local culture. People got to choose their career paths out of sheer self interest and for pride in serving humanity. Secular values could unite where our individual differences could divide.

We would be a shining example of diversity, inclusion and equality. And because of our values we would shock the universe by our adaptability and our ability to outpace other planets who did not share the same ethics. We had the ability to look to our past as it truly was and learn from it. Exploration of Earth came with it colonization that could reap dramatic consequences to foreign peoples in foreign lands. From this we would establish the prime directive, the law against intervening with any underdeveloped planets. And instead the exploration was focussed more on the pursuit of knowledge and truth than that of conquering and assimilation.

Finally, the utopia was here. This vision of the future would be the basis of my optimism as I grew up. And then 911 happened. And it would set in motion a series of events that would, I believe, take us to our current culture war which threatens the future of the entire western world. A war that, if lost, will make the burning of the library of Alexandria look like a dumpster fire by comparison. And here I sit, pondering how we got here from when Gene Roddenberry dreamt up his grand dream.

 

Watch Inspirational speeches of Star Trek:

 

The reality is he took for granted the actual complexities around what a meaningful life represents. He dismissed the narratives of the Bible as “the dark ages of superstition”. Roddenberry underestimated the narratives in the Bible which provide a framework to guide us through life. It is ancient wisdom which provides a context from which we can discern reality. Truths that predate science. Symbols and interpretations which can provide helpful perspective.

Nietzsche proclaimed that God was dead and in his estimate he believed that we would need to produce our own new system of values from which society could function. But there’s this odd assessment from people in today’s society that the only rule we need is just simply to just ‘be good’. ‘Care’. Because if we all just agree to love instead of hate then we will never have differences or disagreements. While being totally naive to the fact that we almost ended the world in the 20th century over our philosophical and ethical disagreements.

The cold war revolved around communism over democracy. The second world war revolved around one single man’s warped Darwinian conceptualization of a master race. Social hierarchical restructuring that resulted in genocide and concentration camps. Paranoid conspiracies that would divide nations from within. And in a post-theistic world, we now see the creation of more religions today than there ever were. If you don’t know what I’m talking about do yourself a favour and read a couple books. Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago, Christopher Browning’s Ordinary Men or Friedrich Nietzsche’s Beyond Good & Evil. It probably also wouldn’t hurt reading books from Ayn Rand or about Ayn Rand.

The point I’m trying to make is that secular values may claim to consist of logic, empathy and reason but people widely believed that the enlightenment was a breaking off from religion however it ignorantly dismisses the foundation religion provided which influence logic, empathy and reason. With a Christian context the basis for logic, empathy and reason was nested in virtues the Bible impressed upon us. The sovereignty of the individual, the discipline to identify the vices that make us weak and relationship building that allowed us to be better neighbours, family members, spouses, friends, colleagues, etc. Through this foundation our logic would be sound, our empathy wouldn’t be misplaced and our reason would remain reasonable. Without that foundation the only thing we have is self interest.

Logic, empathy and reason is not presented to us by a world of objective truths, it is concluded based on the motivations of our worldview. Or the ideology from which we subscribe. And this means we do not live in a world of objective truths, we live in a world of narratives and we map out the world by projecting those narratives onto it. I can pick up a tree branch and depending on the circumstance that branch can be firewood. Or it could be a weapon. Or a tool. Maybe it can be all three but is it equally all three despite the circumstances around it?

We underestimate how subjective logic, empathy and reason are. Some of the best work documenting this, I feel, is Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind and I think Amy Chua’s Political Tribes also offers a lot of great insights into this. Globalists hold different values than nationalists, liberals hold different values than conservatives, socialists hold different values than capitalists. Adolf Hitler was a nationalist but so were other people George Washington, Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. Socialism has resulted in the deaths of millions of people but that’s not to say incorporating certain socialist concepts can’t be beneficial, such as universal healthcare or variations of it.

This is why the cake of utopia was always a lie. There are certain differences between cultures and ethnicities around Earth that make it impossible to unite under one single umbrella. In this post truth world there’s no way we would ever achieve a united earth federation like that from Star Trek. But that’s not to invalidate Roddenberry’s dream. His vision of the future may not be exactly as he foresaw but it serves as blueprints towards building whatever is next to come. If we can manage to survive today’s culture war and whatever comes from it’s fallout.

 

Watch Mark Osborne’s short “MORE”:

 

But going back to how I, personally, found myself on this path today. I grew up in a relatively significantly dysfunctional household. However compared to how the majority of how everyone else grew up I am reluctant to even acknowledge it as really much of a deviation from norm. I am no historian but I’d gamble that families have never been more dysfunctional today than ever before. Children are growing up in single parent households where they reach adulthood without having even seen a two-parent household. The rate of fatherhood was better in slavery times than they are today. Despite all the incentives and welfare programs that were put in place to make poor families stronger.

We are anti-fragile beings who can adapt to whatever tragedy comes our way but it’s malevolence that traumatizes us, destroys us. Without a foundation to assist us with reacting to the malevolence of the world we are vulnerable to disaster fatigue. Without inspiration we can become bitter and cynical about this malevolent world. Because life is suffering. If you have nothing to offset your suffering you can easily slip into apathy and nihilism. The kind of apathy that places you behind the wheel of a vehicle after too much to drink and ends with wiping an entire family off the face of the Earth. The kind of nihilism that finds you bringing a gun to school or workplace. Misery loves company it’s far easier to tilt the world towards hell than it is to tilt it away. It’s easy to find a devil behind a transformation like this. And we all hold the capacity for evil like this.

I used to be the champion of the grey area argument. I prided myself on my centrism. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. A man’s man with a soft side. But now I see a society obsessed with the grey area. Where all rules are oppressive and must be torn down to mean nothing. Everything must be open ended and all variations of the truth must be valued as an equal truth. Like in today’s gender debate. Where radical leftists actually believe that biological sex does not exist. To the point where Twitter will now ban you for misgendering an individual and doctors are being compelled to not specify the sex on the birth certificate of newborns.

It’s gotten so out of hand that it has actually fractured the feminist community to where women who now advocate for women-only spaces are being discredited as “radical feminists” and labelled as “TERFs” (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). So if you believe we should have a woman-only gym or shelter to protect women who have been sexually assaulted and traumatized by male genitalia then you are being deemed a bigot for simply not qualifying a trans-woman as a legitimate woman and insisting they be segregated based on their genitalia. Some people now actually referring to biological women as “bleeders” in an attempt to be “inclusive” to trans-women. How about you? You ready to sit your daughter down and explain to her that she is a “bleeder”? All in the name of progress.

These ideas are nowhere near as fringe as I would’ve thought. I saw this in my own friends who are all well educated people. Justin Trudeau initiated a new rule at Service Canada where staff are no longer to refer to parents as “mother” and “father” because those terms are now deemed offensive. Yet my friends react to these things with this odd acceptance almost as a way of signalling how accepting and compassionate they are. Compassionate to who, exactly? We ALL have a mother and a father regardless whether or not that relationship extended to our upbringing it was the very product of our conception. This remains true through the animal kingdom. All Mammals have a mother and a father. So how the fuck would that ever not apply to anyone existing on planet Earth today? There is no exception to that rule.

But such is the consequence of conflating subjective identity with biological realty. Because the social construct argument denotes reality itself. Which means legislature accommodating such beliefs are actually legislating law that actually contradicts factual reality. All in the name of appearing progressive by accepting ALL world views. Even though the worldviews you’re attempting to accommodate for actually hold you in contempt and actively seek to cause you direct harm. Because it’s not gay as in happy, it’s queer as in fuck you. Google it.

This virtue signalling doesn’t prevent us from calling our own parents mom and dad. This acceptance of biological fluidity doesn’t prevent us from wearing our girly clothes or guy accessories. It doesn’t prevent us from seeking partners that are identifiably attractive based on their biology. It doesn’t stop women from loving their chick flicks or guys from building their man caves. But we’re expected to constantly contest any form of stereotype that reveals itself to us. As if adopting the progressive narrative has become more important than just living in reality. It’s scary to see the level of self flagellation we will embrace towards seeking the approval of others. Of complete strangers.

We are all expected to condemn masculinity in all it’s forms and deem it toxic but then we turn around and reminisce of our hockey days and how much fun it was scrapping with the opposing team. But we must advocate against exactly these fond memories to the next generation, without a single mindful thought on how shaming and social engineering children for their sex differences would impact their growth into adulthood. Despite the declines we are seeing in sexual relationships, academic success and overall competence among boys growing up today. Warren Farrell documents these declines in his book The Boy Crisis and Christina Hoff Sommers in her book The War Against Boys.

But we put seeking approval above actually improving the quality of life. Above fixing the world. I mentioned 911. After 911 it’s like we awoke to a reality we never really knew existed. I started watching news for the first time and I never stopped. I felt naive and vulnerable that I didn’t know what the Trade Towers were and I wanted to develop a sense of defense by understanding the world around me better. Images of Muslims celebrating the attack filled the news coverage of the day. The assault on America was an assault on the entire western world and, to paraphrase Jordan Peterson, the question wasn’t what fell but what remained standing.

The loss of thousands from that attack would have a ripple affect around the entire world but largely within all of America. Every single American and many Canadians were either directly or indirectly attached to a family who suffered a loss on 911. That tragedy would transform into anger. We needed someone to blame in a situation where those directly involved were already dead and we needed to make sense out of a situation that would never make sense.

We discriminated against people different than us. We mocked and attacked Indian Sikhs when the people who committed the crime were Wahabi Muslims from Saudi Arabia. But that didn’t stop us from calling Sikhs diaper heads or terrorists. Nor did it stop America from doing billions of dollars in business with Saudi Arabia. A large portion of the American public believed that Barack Obama was disqualified to run for president simply by the fact his middle name was Hussein, like Saddam Hussein, and his last name was Obama, similar to Osama (Bin-Laden).

Luckily this alone did not prevent the rest of America from voting for America’s first black president. Twice. But this was right at the same moment the great recession hit the world economy. And in those 8 years of Obama’s presidency we started seeing a cultural shift. As social media grew more powerful and attractive it drew in everyone around the world from all the corners of the internet into one single place where we would now all be faced with one another. Websites like Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, Tumblr, YouTube and Instagram would centralize public discourse.

Now the fringes of the internet like 4chan would be more accessible than ever before with all it’s content, good and bad, constantly being shoved in our faces by trolls and clickbaiters. And all our cleeks and tribes would clash in ways like never before. And for the first time we had to take a hard look at ourselves for how prejudicial and ignorant we ALL are. The fallout of this would spark real world movements like black lives matter and occupy wall street.

However a new form of progressive politics would emerge out of these movements. Early in things like #gamergate and later in things like #Metoo. Other more specific moments like when Kathleen Wynne would tell Ontario media that systemic racism did exists and was thriving well. Moments like Justin Trudeau making it mandatory to be pro-choice in order to sit on the Liberal caucus and initiating a gender parity cabinet “because it’s 2015”. By all accounts the data shows that America was left more polarized and prejudicial after Obama’s 8 years in office. Coming up to the 2019 Canadian federal election I would say the same is true for here in Canada after 4 years of a feminist Prime Minister. And this is to not even mention the Brexit vote in the UK or any of the events coming out of the Asylum seeker crisis. And then Donald Trump.

Donald Trump, in many ways, represents a boiling point when everything in our culture just erupted in chaos. In many ways on both sides of the political spectrum. I truly believed that Trumps reputation alone was enough to disqualify him for president so when I saw him win the republican primaries I was stunned and thought this would be a shoe in for Hillary. Not to my pleasure, I have never been a fan of Hillary Clinton. But I believed she was the obvious choice in comparison to Trump, at least. But I was wrong.

And in 2016 after I watched Trump win his presidency when all polls claimed a landslide victory for Clinton, I decided that I was in a bubble and I needed to start doing more listening and looking for my news beyond the usual ABC, CNN, CBC, BBC, PBS, TVO. I came to the realization that ignorance was no longer an old world concept that would die out with the aging generation of yesterday but it was thriving in today’s youth in ways I was blind to. I would seek out truth and call out ignorance wherever I saw it. But to my further shock, the most manipulative, audacious ignorance I would find would actually be on the left-wing. Not the right-wing.

Right-Wing media would report with it’s obvious right-wing bias. This is why I’ve always dismissed Fox News as not actual news because they couldn’t be objective. However other channels like CNN and MNSBC went absolutely bonkers, reporting actual lies on top of a new doubled down left-wing bias like never before. The language I see coming out of those on the left is more dehumanizing than I’ve ever seen before.

And these views really are only from a fringe minority but they are propped up by the left-biased media to create the perception that these are majority views. An effort to kowtow everyone into their respective lanes where they are expected to stay and shut the fuck up. I fell in love with Stephen Colbert when he roasted Bush at the 2006 white house correspondents dinner. Now he is more of an embittered Trump fact checker than anything that passes for comedy. I’ve never seen more vitriol than jokes in comedy than what I’ve seen since Trump won presidency. Which, fair enough, but what is the role of a comedian when they stop being funny? I won’t even address the changes going on in the Comedian world.

This is true with Brexit, it was true with Trump and it was True in Ontario with a super majority conservative provincial government lead by Doug Ford. But the reaction to this was not humility and introspection, it was of doubling down with identity politics and intersectional narratives coming out of academia and political circles. One of the most successful and outspoken proponents against tribalism and ideological possession would have to be Jordan Peterson. He warns about the dangers of equality of outcomes and censoring free speech. And it’s because he’s been so successful in his lecture based world tour he has become the single largest target of fake news hit pieces next to Donald Trump himself.

Jordan Peterson and his book 12 rules for life helped me see the errors in my own thinking. He taught me just because the ideal judged me, that did not mean the ideal was not worth striving towards. To merely condemn it out of my own insecurities would only produce more suffering than it would prevent. And in his 4 part debate with Sam Harris he truly challenged my preconceived notions around both the Bible and of reality itself. This was where, I believed, he proved that in order for us to come to the proper logic, empathy and reason we needed the proper context behind it. That context was best provided by the Bible. Ancient wisdom that was designed to unlock deep truths about ourselves. Thousands of years in refining and interpretation, the Bible was much deeper and thorough than anything drummed up since the enlightenment.

 

Watch Jordan Peterson on the meaning of life:

 

I learned that we truly need that context. Or as the marxists call it, the ‘lense’ from which our reality is shaped. Because the reason why smart people buy into stupid, dangerous, regressive ideas are because you can convincingly argue the reasons why. If you live in nothing but grey area then you have no foundation in which to oppose these bad ideas so you are compelled by logic, reason and empathy into submission.

That’s why everything in the social justice movement is presented to us in the guise of compassion. More similar to the compassion a mother bear has for her cubs when she has to decide whether you are friend or foe. But compassion nonetheless. So who doesn’t want to look empathetic, caring, kind and ‘inclusive’? But in your submission in guise of your compassion is also consent for a worldview you are now subscribed to. You don’t get to be a mom or a dad in social constructionism. That’s biological essentialism and that’s bigoted. You’re not a bigot, are you? Even if you like to play one at home, the people you propped up will condemn you for doing so.

No one is realizing that if speaking out about these issues represents protest then silence and complicitness is by the same logic consent. And we are dealing with a movement that by design pushes you to the cliffs edge of your comfort zone and only lets up when you push back. Otherwise you will find descending the cliffside and it will be considered consensual. But the problem with arguing with these ideologies is that you as soon as you play the game by their rules you are destined to fail. In their game they decide the rules of engagement. This is how they eliminate the grey area and all forms of centrism. There is no intersection for that.

As a “CIS white male” I am disqualified to have opinions about anything outside the boundaries of “CIS white male” issues. There’s a reason why people seek “allyship” and not membership. Because you do not belong and you will always be the enemy. It’s just a political correct form of racism, discrimination, ignorance and hate. Fascism is something we all agree must be opposed but make it look progressive and it’s just the latest hipster movement. In that is a deep seeded ignorance which is a product of the arrogance that comes from conventional education but with a lack of knowledge about the history of the systems we rely on to function in daily life.

We are born into this world and we only live to a point and the accumulated knowledge and wisdom we obtain in that life dies along with our body. We only trust that the legacy we leave behind can be utilized by the next generation to pick up where we left off to improve the future in the same way for the next generation. Of course society grows, evolves, changes as we also grow, evolve and change as individuals and not all rules of yesterday can work in the society of tomorrow. But in today’s culture war we are faced with a very judgemental ideal and instead of contending with this ideal we are attempting to burn it down. With complete lack of appreciation that you can only hit the big red reset button so many times before there is no recovery. We attempted that enough in the 20th century to prove this point to be true.

When I look down the road to where this all leads us, what the naive utopians see as a renaissance, I see as a cultural collapse. We have a resentment of our father and we are conspiring to erase him. But the truth is we need to journey into the abyss to save him otherwise we will share his fate. I mean that we need to truly understand the history we come from and view that history accurately. In the context that we are those people from our history. We are as capable of the atrocities they committed but also as capable of the miracles they performed. To see yourself as both the nazi camp guard but also as Mother Teresa. That’s the only way to truly understand history. And to appreciate our role in carrying the torch before passing it on.

I believe there is no reasoning, no logic, no empathy without a strong foundation to provide a sufficient context. And so how do I participate in this culture war without becoming the same beast that I am opposing? How do I not find myself slipping into some tribal group of just a different variation of mob justice? This is how the real white supremacists are recruiting. But out of all the ideologues I have noticed that it’s the Christians who seem to be the boldest in their opposition to the SJWs, best at discerning right from wrong and best at drawing clear boundaries around virtues and vices. Though they worship as a tribe, as a community, they operate as individuals.

It’s that acknowledgement that we are all made equal under God that I believe can serve to be the best method of inoculation against this regressive movement of hate and division. The entire structure to intersectionality is predicated on segregating us based on our superficial differences and sorting us out on an artificial social hierarchy where those who are deemed guilty and tainted have no human rights and those higher up the ladder are deemed righteous and operate as a protected class. This movement has been tried and defeated before. It was a sentiment held by the Nazis, the communists, Islamists and it’s always been defeated and it will always be defeated. Because this notion that each human being is not of individual intrinsic value equal to that of the next individual human is just wrong and it always will be wrong. None among us are perfect, therefore there are none among us who are above scrutiny. Period.

 

Watch a reading an conceptualization of “Tarantulas” by Friedrich Nietzsche:

 

Fighting this battle as a CIS white male from the bottom of the hierarchy is a fight that has been lost from the start. But as a man created by God, with a destiny of my own, I can refute your reality and invite the dispossessed among you back into the fold through offerings of a meaningful life of love and happiness. Because good Christians love their enemies. Good Christians attract others from the inner peace they radiate outward into the world. Because love will always conquer hate. Seeking the approval of man will only result in conflict whereas seeking the approval of God will only bear fruit.

The utopia is a lie. There are no entitlements in this world other than the guarantee of suffering. And you cannot transfer suffering, you can only create more. And there are a lot of people who are tilting this world towards hell. And I believe this is the only way to correct for what is going wrong. That is what has put me on the journey for deep truth so I can equip myself with the tools I need from the narratives of the Bible to bring peace. The peace can only begin from within so this is where I start.

It’s also clear to me that by now that none of us ever stopped worshipping. I think worship is far deeper ingrained in our DNA than we realize. Even atheists who denounce religion still operate in terms of idolization and engage in the sacred. Only the idols we worship on mass today in the west are things like iPhones and clothes brands. We engage in sacred language as we emphasize on things we view as pure and other things we regard to be tainted or corrupted.

I believe this has also manifested itself in the trend of organic foods, GMO free foods and other dietary quirks. We are desiring purity. This is also evident in how trendy yoga has become. There’s a taste of spirituality to it. Look at Sam Harris, the most outspoken atheist out there next to Dawkins himself. One of the 4 horsemen. Constantly promotes the benefits of meditation. Well what is meditation? What are you actually doing? You don’t believe in a man in the sky by apparently you can connect to the universe by sitting cross legged and square breathing? Get real dude, if this isn’t the biggest case of denial, I don’t know what is.

I truly believe we are a body which requires sustenance, we are a mind which requires stimulation but I now also truly, deeply believe we are also a spirit which also hungers. And the more we deprive ourselves of spiritual fulfillment the more we seek it out. Like desiring a food containing a vitamine you’re deficient in. So instead of eating junk food you’re serving yourself better by eating higher quality food. A baby cries because it’s hungry. If it’s not hungry there is something wrong. This is literally true about us, symbolically true about us and metaphysically true about us.

Just looking at how political parties are treated in the US shows that party membership is synonymous with religious communities. Families are not coming over for holiday dinners over how they voted in the last election. It has devolved into religious warfare. Intersectionality operates just the same. Original sin to the SJWs is the white man and whiteness, colonization and european traditions. You are inherently guilty and tainted if you fit in this identity group membership. If you speak out against the narratives being put forth, if you are Terry Cruz questioning whether or not Liam Neeson is a racist then you are guilty of wrongthink and you are henceforth a heretic until you repent. You spoke out against the group consensus and deviated from your ‘lane’. We all know you must stay in your lane and shut the fuck up. It absolutely has rituals in which people engage. Just look at land acknowledgements.

What we have are two incompatible sacred values in society and until one value system wins the culture war will continue to rage on. And there’s no telling how bad things can get. The grey area is wrong and centrism has no home anymore. So I will look at where I see the persecution and I will identify with the persecuted as God revealed himself to the lowest of man, the sheppard. I believe there is no coincidence that my pursuit of truth has lead me away from secularism and on the path to God.

 

Watch Jonathan Haidt discuss incompatible values in universities:

 

However now I have the huge task ahead of me of understanding what it means to build a relationship with God. I don’t think I even really understand what worship is, what that means or what it looks like. I have never prayed, at least not in the way I see others pray. Because I don’t understand what it means to speak with God. But I do know that when I’m watching the sun come up as it beams rays of light through the clouds, it sure feels like God talking to me.

I’ve been really enjoying speaking with members of the church I’ve been attending about what God means to them and how their relationship with God has improved their lives. In a time where I see nothing but self interest and deep narcissism and cynicism about the world, I found myself at church surrounded by people who could not be more grateful for simply having another day on this planet. Grateful for the gift of life and even the trials that life presents us. And the courage to trust God in the face of adversity. It was something that reduced me to tears to witness. It felt like affirmation that this is what’s correct.

On this Easter weekend I reflect on my life and realize that I’m becoming a new version of myself as I follow this path. But part of growing up, part of becoming wise is burning off the dead wood that was your old self. Our life and society itself constantly goes through a state of life, death and rebirth. That is how I see the resurrection to be real. I don’t have all the answers nor do I claim to have. I don’t even understand God and may never really have the capacity to conceptualize God anymore than an ant can conceptualize man.

I do know that I’ve witnessed enough of this natural world to believe there is a design to it. And you simply do not have a design without a designer. Whatever that may be. So my challenge ahead is to embrace this path and solidify my beliefs. And stand in the light wearing my truth in the open unafraid of petty, superficial trials. I went into this to battle conflict, so I can’t allow myself to shy away from it. I seek to do right by all those around me. I will carry my burden and ascend to the city of God where I will take my place in the greater destiny of the world. I encourage you to contemplate on this and at least step outside of your grey area to stand for something. Because if you stand for nothing you fall for everything. Happy Easter.

 

brown wooden crucifix photography
Photo by Peter on Pexels.com

 

 

“He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces.” (Isaiah 25:8)

Jordan Peterson is Marilyn Manson From 1998

Screen-Shot-2019-03-21-at-7.14.06-PM

Having had some time to digest Christchurch I couldn’t help but think back to the gutted feeling I felt back when I heard about the columbine shooting. Which brought on the question, “was bowling for columbine the first documentary that got me into documentaries?” Good old Michael Moore. And then I thought of my favourite part of that movie. The scene where he sat down with Marilyn Manson, who was largely being blamed as responsible for the Columbine shooting because of the manipulative nature of his “evil” song lyrics. Parents were deranged by the Marilyn Manson hysteria, thinking his music would seduce their children into becoming Satanists. Even my mom didn’t want me listening to Marilyn Manson. She was afraid it would radicalize me.

Watch Michael Moore interview Marilyn Manson in Bowling for Columbine:

That’s when it hit me. Jordan Peterson and other alternative media content creators who are finding themselves being blamed for the Christchurch shooting is all based on the same ignorance that came from blaming Marilyn Manson for Columbine. Perhaps there’s a link there. And I think there is. Perhaps it’s the ‘ignorance’ part. Back when I was a kid Marilyn Manson was accused of radicalizing teens into Satanists. Pokemon and Harry Potter allegedly corrupted children’s minds because wizardry was the work of the devil. Seriously, anyone my age remember this?

Watch old video on the evils of Pokemon:

Now, for all the pointing and laughing I did at these people I find myself today looking at shows like Sabrina on Netflix and literally hoping parents don’t let their kids watch such a morally ambiguous, ultra-dark, adult-themed show. But let’s be real, this fucken show is 100% aimed at robbing children of their innocence. It’s completely fucked up. I am a guy who loves his adult themes and dark side to humanity but Sabrina is darker than dark. It’s actual occult indoctrination. And that’s fucked up. Can’t wait to see the next generation post generation Z.

Next I will be the one holding the signs at the street corner preaching the end is Nye. Bill Nye. When morals are politicized and dictated to us by the morally ambiguous.  After the Christchurch shooting one of the first people to find himself a target of the SJW mob was Jordan Peterson. The greatest intellectual of our time that we don’t deserve. Only in today’s world could a self help book be banned in the wake of a mass shooting by a white supremacist. But you still have complete access to mein kampf. With a lazy excuse cited regarding someone Jordan took a picture with.

Watch We the Internet TV debunk Bill Nye (+ Is Bill Nye Thanos?):

Having attended one of Jordan’s lectures as he tours the world, I happen to know in order to get a photo like this with Jordan you need to buy a VIP ticket. Then at the end of the talk you line up with all the other VIPs and one by one each person gets about 15 seconds with Jordan to say a quick hello and take a photo then you move on and are issued a password to log onto the website later to search for your photo. Jordan has done this with literally THOUSANDS of people and frankly whether or not he was aware of what this shirt read is totally irrelevant.

What’s he going to do? Tell the dude who paid $200 for a VIP ticket to go change his shirt? To leave? Sure, he could, if he was a dick. Do you take responsibility for every single person’s political and moral views before you take a photo with them? Oh but sure, let’s hold others accountable for a standard we don’t hold ourselves to. Let’s all get out our yearbook and now own the guilt by association of everyone from that class photo who went on to commit wrongdoing. No holes in that logic. None at all. I genuinely do not understand this guilt by association concept. As if you need to justify why you follow a certain individual.

JBP1

I watch people like Tim Pool, Styxhexenhammer, Ben Shapiro and others. Does that mean I automatically agree with everything they say? Not at all. These are all guys who have a knack for thinking about things in very different, creative ways than how I’m use to looking at them. And I value that. Ben Shapiro in particular has challenged my views on abortion in a very big way. And it’s shown me that there is a lot more to consider before making up my mind. I appreciate having my ideas challenged.

Jordan Peterson challenged my simplistic views of the bible and of western society. And after reading his book I’ve applied his rules to my life to the best of my ability and I’m seeing my life improve dramatically. If this doesn’t work for other people, fair enough. But why does that make ME a bad person? Why does any of this make Jordan a bad person? It doesn’t. Is it better to follow people like Kim Kardashian and live a superficial, mediocre existence?

People are more engaged in real issues today more than ever and that’s only a good thing. If the only reason we shouldn’t be following people within the Intellectual Dark Web is because they’re contrarians and disagreeable people make you feel bad then frankly it’s time to grow the hell up. Bill O’Reilly reacted to the tsunami in Japan which caused the Nuclear plant meltdowns by saying, “God remembers pearl harbour.” People didn’t say shit then nor do they care now. Rush Limbaugh has said shit that would probably actually justify comparing him to Hitler. There’s a reason why people don’t give a shit about those ACTUAL far-right wing figures. They’re not very influential. Because that brand of extreme politics actually isn’t very popular.

JBP10 (2)

And the majority of people who tuned into their shows were old, retired, hard leaning conservatives. The “get the F off my lawn” crowd. That brand has nothing to do with the IDW crowd. Yet the IDW crowd continuously gets labelled as “alt-right”. And I really do believe that the reason things are so polarized now is frankly because of Trump people are only paying attention now. Most elections don’t see a large voter turnout. If you’ve discovered politics for the first time then, yes, I understand the hysteria. Politics is ugly. And if you don’t understand how politics work then you’re just going to act like chicken-little screaming about the sky falling. Which pretty accurately describes SJWs. Oh if I don’t get a gender neutral bathroom then that’s genocide. How about we drop you off in the Congo, todays Congo. And if you can survive the month, you’ll come home as grateful as you should be and you will kiss the dirt ground.

Richard Spencer and his brand of legit ethno-nationalist views are what true “alt-right” is. He’s the one who coined the term. No one in the IDW sits down with Richard Spencer (because his ideas are just not interesting and no one is interested in ethno-nationalism). In fact now that Milo has progressed further right, interacting with the ethno-nationalists, has caused the IDW to no longer sit down with Milo either. Nor is anyone in the community pushing to hear from either of them. Yet the media still labels the community as alt-right.

It’s not meant to accurately describe the community, it’s just meant to slander. And frankly anyone who fails to see this clear as day is just selectively ignorant and obviously perfectly happy mischaracterizing good people and are totally cool with supporting the billion dollar corporations who seek to amend our rights until we’re essentially living in our own social credit system like China. The IDW is the last non-conformist movement left and it’s under constant assault by people looking to strip the world of all differences. In the name of diversity. Maybe we need to check what you think diversity actually means.

1463811059412

*Rare image of the pope co opting the ok symbol to signal his white supremacy to billions of nazis*

But believe it or not, to a large mass of people, this makes a lot of sense. So what do these people have in common with the Pokemon, Harry Potter, Marilyn Manson blasphemy law enforcers? Their ignorance. None of those people really actually looked into pokemon or ever read harry potter or actually listened to what Marilyn Manson was saying. They allowed their emotions and assumptions the bias of their individual worldview to guide their judgements. In this same way, most people who buy into these cheap insults of Peterson aren’t actually familiar with any of his content. It’s no coincidence such lazy thinking leads to people actually believing that Peterson promotes ‘enforced monogamy’.

Watch Jordan Peterson explain ‘enforced monogamy’:

That’s exactly what’s going on with those who condemn people like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Bret Weinstein. Slander is dressed up as “critique” where activist based narrative news media refer to these people as “alt-right, problematic or grifters”. Because these terms are intended to disqualify without requiring a cohesive argument to contend with the credentials behind the person espousing such ideas. When in reality it’s, as they call it, a ‘dog whistle’ to signal that these individuals and the content they represent is pure blasphemy. There’s a reason why replacing the word “alt-right” with the word “heretic” ends up meaning the same thing. Because the SJW mob is just a modern day witch hunt.

mansonwhitcoulls

Where disagreeability represents the embodiment of sin when ideology becomes worshipped as sacred. The calls to ban in 1998 were no different than the calls to ban in 2019. We are now the exact ignoramuses from our youth. And instead of engaging in honest discussion over the ideas that people like Peterson share people fall back on a misconstrued clickbait article or sound bite that allows them simply defame the man so they don’t need to contend with the ideas. But with now over 3 million copies sold around the globe, Jordan Peterson isn’t going to be losing sleep over any of it anytime soon regardless. But I sure would appreciate someone explaining to me the difference between modern day book bans and old school book burning.

peterson hit pieces

Going back to my main point, I think it was wrong to blame Marilyn Manson for Columbine, but blame they did. I think it’s also wrong to blame people like Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro (who constantly call out ethno-nationalists) for what happened in Christchurch. And while I’m in a reflective mood, if I think back to what’s been going on during this culture war. I suppose it really kicked off when Pepe became officially deemed hate speech by the SPLC. In a world where text dominates human interaction it’s no surprise that memes have been used as a form of expression to convey reactions, thoughts and feelings. And sometimes when peering into that abyss, it takes us to dark places. And there could be no better example of this then that of Pepe.

I also believe that it’s worthy of noting the symbolism of the frog itself. For many cultures the frog represents transformation, change, adaptation. Like tadpole to frog. It can represent the transient nature of life itself. Often a positive sign of fortune or wealth. As an omen, it can indicate a pending disaster in the future. Pepe did exactly this. Transforming from one conceptualization to another based on the individual poster, creating an actual auction market for unique Pepe art but also valuable to each individual using the meme to articulate a reaction or feeling or identity in a way that they couldn’t with words. And possibly foreshadowing the coming culture war that would revolve around exactly these reactions, feelings and identities. RIP Pepe.

rocHPZ-dLF5g3UyD7C_LFw_Pepe+Funeral

I think the most notable next major meme evolution must be the NPC meme. Inspired by things like Trump derangement (orange man bad) and exactly the bad faith hit pieces I’m mentioning here, Memers created the NPC meme. I believe around the same time this simulation theory became popular. Where people actually believe that this world isn’t real and everything is just a simulation like the Matrix with Keanu Reeves. A conspiracy seducing even the smartest among us as Elon Musk mused over it with Joe Rogan.

The point being everyone starts looking the same and sounding the same and ideas start becoming less and less interesting when all you see everywhere around you are the same narratives being preached by the same ‘bad actors’. This is why all those who manage to break free of the narratives and see the world for what it really is, is considered “red pilled”.

NPC-header-1-640x480

Watch Jimmy Dore covering Rachel Maddow; All Russia. All the Time:

But now we are seeing a new meme emerge and it seems to be sticking. It’s a type of clown world meme where Pepe is now donning clown garb. It’s being used to convey feelings of dismissal over the hypocrisy and hyperbole people see at every angle from all sides. It may be perceived to be a way of making light of the heavy times we live in. But I think it’s actually deeper than that. It’s a product of deep nihilism where you laugh off serious things that are not jokes. It’s a way of opting out, shutting down and closing our eyes from real things that really matter.

honk honk

Watch Paul Joseph Watson discuss the clown world meme:

A guy who by all accounts disqualifies himself for presidency goes on to become president. A feminist Prime Minister boots 2 powerful women from the party caucus for a scandal HE initiated. He lies about the scandal and about both women but then threatens to sue the critical opposition for “telling lies”. A nazi shoots up a mosque and a self help book gets banned but you can still buy Mein Kampf. Police show up at the doors of those who misgender people on Twitter.

Public trust in news media is at an all time low then time magazine names the news media people of the year. It’s easy to understand why people feel the world is upside down. But the honk honk comes from a place of deeply seeded apathy. And that’s a really dangerous place for dispossessed people to be. Is this the blue-pill alternative to the red-pill? Or is this pill black?

Watch Styxhexenhammer discuss the blackpill generation:

The reason why I enjoyed Bowling for Columbine so much when I was younger was because of the interview with Manson I featured at the start of this blog. When it seemed like EVERYONE had an answer to why the columbine shooting happened, Manson was the only one to say that what HE would do was just listen to the kids, because that’s what no one else was doing. And it’s a sentiment that rings true to this day. The teen angst of the 90s society of high expectations is the same as today’s wrongthink in the post truth era.

The tools of censorship, used by conservatives in the past, are the same tools now used by the leftists. Only in today’s social media world the stakes are higher than ever before when it comes to exactly what gets censored. There is overwhelming evidence that the way to actually de-radicalize someone who’s gone too far is to allow them to feel free to speak their mind, make them feel heard and open opportunities for them to walk outside of their bubble.

When dealing with deeply rooted tribal individuals you must present them with an even greater tribe for them to identify with. Like most people with most issues, all they really need is a simple change of perspective. These are paranoid individuals. You do not want to back a paranoid individual into a corner. But people are happy to do it regardless, because revenge is more fun than justice. Honk honk.

Watch Daryl Davis speak at TEDxNaperville:

Watch Aaron Stark speak at TEDxBoulder:

Watch Theo E.J. Wilson speak at TEDxMileHigh:

Watch The Agenda with Steve Paikin on Life After Hate:

I believe, symbolically, this represents a numbness that comes from disaster fatigue. When people become overwhelmed by bad news. Similar to compassion fatigue. Where we begin to drown in our own empathy by grieving vicariously through other victims or  unfortunate situations totally detached from our own individual lives. I, myself, needed a couple of days to tune out after the Christchurch shooting. Sometimes you just need time for your heart to grieve. I think there’s something healthy about feeling grief for others’ suffering. Almost like the heart’s way of saying a little prayer for someone else. But having the awareness to identify these feelings and embrace them by providing an outlet for them is the healthy way of handling it.

Watch TEDx with Juliette Watt; Compassion Fatigue: What is it and do you have it?

I believe it’s when you try to repress such feelings is when you run the risk of burning out or even worse, lashing out. And let’s face facts, it’s the lashing out part we are all concerned about when people feel that they are at their limits and ready to burst. In my opinion I think the clown world meme represents being burnt out but the fact it is a circulating meme tells me it’s acting as an outlet so I can only hope that after a few chuckles people can return to their seats at the table for dialogue so we can continue to move forward together.

Maybe the whole Trump derangement stuff is just that, disaster fatigue without a sufficient outlet. Certainly lying about good people like Jordan Peterson isn’t going to help anyone. It’s just going to further polarize society. And it’s the polarization that’s the real threat to society and the real people and families trying to live their lives. Jordan has worked miracles in bringing meaning to people’s lives. And he’s done more to actually de-radicalize individuals than ANY mainstream media or government body anywhere.

Not to suggest that Peterson ought to be exempt from any scrutiny, of course not. And many people have taken aim at him. His debates have been a large part of how he’s risen to international fame. But when people read something from the New York Times they expect a certain level of journalistic integrity and intellectual rigor. But instead what we receive is mischaracterizations, misleading statements, slurs and literal baseless lies. It’s pretty precious that these are the same institutions who preach to us the importance of truth and accuracy. But worse yet, they are refusing to actually utilize Peterson’s growing influence to spark a real dialogue which actually could serve some good in the world. But that’s not happening because these people don’t want to make things better, they only wish to tear things down in utter contempt.

One critique of Peterson is that his world-tour lectures attract a lot of “young white men”. Well if that’s a point of contention with you then that only tells us more about you then it does about Jordan. I’ll just leave it at that. In a video critique of David Pakman he claimed, without any citation, that Jordan’s ideas around hierarchies have been ‘widely debunked’. Like really dude? If anyone hears that and thinks there’s any legitimacy in it you need to give your head a shake and start exploring outside of your bubble. Because Jordan has never claimed that hierarchies were ever HIS idea in the first place.

Watch a fan-made parody impersonation of the odd nature of the Peterson critiques. A comedic attempt to demonstrate how manipulative taking speech out of context can be:

The whole point to chapter 1 in his book: Stand up straight with your shoulders back, is to simply point out that lobsters, one of the world’s oldest creatures have operated along a social hierarchy system. This means that evolutionary trait would’ve dated back to when WE would’ve been fish. That means hierarchies are older than the existence of trees. Not hundreds of years old, billions. We see other creatures in the animal kingdom play out other hierarchical orders as well. The “stand up straight” part is to reference the evidence that suggests when we do just that, we feel more confident. Because this is a self help book, after all.

This whole point was simply to rebut the lazy notion that capitalism invented social hierarchies simply to dispossess and marginalize people. It has nothing to do with capitalism. No one is proud to see we have homeless among us. Or that others live in poverty. It’s a multi-varied social phenomenon that will not be solved by merely altering our politics. These are not otherwise PERFECTLY ‘normal’ people who are simply oppressed by the patriarchy or of capitalism. According to ScienceDaily.com roughly 50% of homeless men had at least one traumatic brain injury in their lives. And that’s just one contributing variable to consider.

The point is social hierarchies aren’t a product of politics. It’s deeper than that. But sure, you can go on calling Jordan the crazy lobster guy. He’ll continue profiting off of that by selling his lobster merch. So go ahead, ban his book. But if you think you’re hurting Peterson by doing that, you’re wrong. It’s everyone else who have reasons for buying a self help book that will be the ones to suffer. So it’s no surprise to see the clown world meme emerging from an ever more ignorant world developing around us.

Maybe if we all just wrapped out heads in Hijabs and joined in Muslim prayer that would solve all the world’s problems. This is the real problem with guilt by association. If you let the boundaries around such blanket sweeping conditions become too loose then it’s just a matter of time until you’re assigning ALL people of a group identity as guilty and tainted for the sins of a minority among them. Merely on the basis of their biological makeup. Bringing nothing but shame to otherwise completely innocent people. Not to say there isn’t a place for discussions around culture but to infer that white supremacy, ethno-nationalism and mass murder are all products of ‘white culture’ is profoundly ridiculous and just straight up racist. Not only are these sentiments shared in other areas around the world but these are very fringe minorities who subscribe to such ideologies. The western world was founded in exactly the opposite of such sentiments. Where the individual was of unique infinite value and therefore was entitled to rights and freedoms as an individual sovereign entity. But you don’t hear about that anymore

Watch the New Zealand Prime Minister wearing a Hijab:

Unless the New Zealand Prime Minister is Muslim, why would she wear a Hijab? It’s not like she was “off duty”. A Prime Minister is never “off duty”. So what message is she sending to her country or the world? Should we all convert to Islam? Are we bad in some way if we don’t at least attempt to conform to Muslim Culture? Whites are wrong? Muslims are right? The only thing weirder than how Justin Trudeau looked on his India trip would’ve been if he looked that way here in Canada. That’s no knock on Canadian-Indians but even the Indians over there were standing around him in suits like, “dude what the fuck are you wearing”.

Aside from this breaking the PC narrative around cultural appropriation, how is this not an attempt to politicize a tragedy? Maybe she had good intentions but she’s ignorant if that’s all it was. If this was one of the hundreds of Islamist attacks that go on every year killing people all around the world, would it ever be acceptable to hold all Muslims culpable for the actions of Islamists? This is not a false equivalency argument either. Islamists are a real threat. Just like white supremacists are a real threat. If what we want to work towards is true equal rights and opportunities for all people then we must hold everyone to the same ideal standards.

There is no harm in calling out inconsistencies anywhere they may occur. Because the funny thing about ‘the ideal’ is it judges us. To differentiate others based on ignorance is a form of prejudice. Assumptions based on preconceived notions. Usually rooted from anecdotal evidence rather than the scientific method. But repentance for actions that are not our own can also be based in prejudicial ignorance. Both serve to develop stigmas against groups of people rather than holding individuals accountable as the deviants they are. Don’t get me wrong, we should all seek repentance but forgiveness can only be granted to us as individuals over our individual actions. No amount of finger pointing ever granted anyone righteousness. Prejudice is prejudice is prejudice.

Jordan Peterson has nothing to do with nazis nor does he radicalize anyone. And as long as we keep playing this stupid game of pin the tail on the alt-right we actually end up doing what the Christchurch shooter actually wanted from what he reveals to us in his own manifesto. Further polarization. Because what happened in Christchurch wasn’t the end game for this man. It was a recruiting tactic for his cause. And he was smart enough to understand that if you can’t recruit by seducing people into your tribe with your ideology then you just need the other tribes to exile their own.

And when those people have nowhere else to turn, the ideas won’t matter anymore. And the media is doing a fine job carrying out this man’s wishes. Which, at best, is a disgrace to the families and community who suffered at the hands of this monster. And, at worst, is nothing more than an attempt to ignite an actual civil war in the western world. Rule #6: set your house in perfect order before you criticise the world.

Watch Jordan Peterson in his own words:

 

“Yes, I’m reckless and sometime express no concern for my own well being, and I express a misanthropic view of the world, but to have an opinion, you can’t be a nihilist.”

– Marilyn Manson