In an age of delusion, I aim to provide Christians with the tools needed to counter the enemy's lies. Postmodernism, Critical Race Theory, Diversity, Inclusiveness, Equity, WOKE, Net-Zero Carbon are all variations on a Neo-Marxist theme. Namely the belief that life is a zero-sum game, a Malthusian nightmare where resources are so finite that the state must redistribute them. This channel is dedicated to providing you with the meat of the Word of God sorely lacking in Christian circles today.
The state of the nation as we face the collapse of the
Trudeau led LPC government:
#JustinTrudeau along with his minions and supporters have
made a mockery of Canada's parliamentary democracy proving that there is not a
single functional or fit for purpose aspect of it in its present form. But most
of all, Trudeau's cabal of illiberalism has made a mockery of the Canadians he
was elected to serve! “The government has squandered our fiscal advantage,
hollowed out our military, shattered our immigration system and shown little
interest in our anemic productivity while economic, geopolitical and security
threats to Canada rise to DEFCON levels,” Kevin Lynch wrote in a column
published in The Globe and Mail on Jan. 2. We have an unelected appointed
Senate poised to oppose Poilievre and the Conservatives if and when the godless
tyranny and fiscal imprudence of Trudeau ends in an election which Poilievre and
his party will almost certainly win. But this only takes me back to my most
frequent assertion regarding our socioeconomic crisis, namely that we are not
merely facing a socioeconomic crisis. Rather we are in a spiritual battle between
good and evil. There cannot be a political solution to a moral, philosophical
and spiritual crisis! Nevertheless, never let the perfect become the enemy of the
good. So let us dig deeper to flesh out what can be done as we face an
existential battle for Canadian democracy.
Our present situation throughout the Anglosphere:
When I was young, I never imagined that Great Britain and
Commonwealth countries like Canada would be holding political prisoners whose
only crime was to peacefully and publicly express legitimate concerns about
their government, its policies, particularly regarding unvetted immigration and
the resulting crime. Both Great Britain and Canada have provided concrete proof
as to just how authoritarian radical leftists will become even as they hide
behind a false front of tolerance and inclusivity. I have been warning about
the dangers of Postmodern Cultural Relativism and Cultural Marxist Critical
Race and Gender Theory since no later than 2013 while I was still living in
uber WOKE Norway. I have been labelled with the most horrible epithets by the
ideologically possessed who are causing our socioeconomic crisis, yet there is
one thing that they've never been able to explain. Precisely why has everything
I have been warning about come to pass? My detractors appear to be
pathologically divorced from reality due to ideological possession. Until we
figure out how to deal with what is arguably a critical mass of insanity, we
will never be free of the damage idea pathogens are wreaking on functional
social order. Because of those possessed by them Neo-Marxists like Trudeau have
brought us to the brink of irreversible ruin. For his entire tenure I've been
tormented with the certain knowledge where his policies would lead us. Despite
this, many still cling to their ideological delusions. I have lost, if I ever
had any, all faith in humanity. Apparently, our present selves delight in
murdering our future selves in the vain hope that God can be cheated.
Why have Canadians become so prone to accepting delusional
ideation?
Canadians suffer from an appalling ignorance of the actual
nature of the problems we face as a society. There is an old saying in the
Icelandic Eddas, "A witless man believes everything he thinks between the
mountains where he dwells"! Many are living their lives devoid of real
perspective. This is partly due to many being far too willing to accept the
deconstruction and misrepresentation of truth fed to them by the government as
well as the government’s puppets in the state funded 4th Estate. Not only are many
Canadians subjective experiences woefully inadequate, but many are also devoid
of curiosity. For it is curiosity that is required to actively look for
alternative opinions that will challenge the commonly accepted narrative. This
is particularly true for those who are comfortable living in their own
preconceived echo chambers. For there their ears reject anything which
challenges their misconceptions. Interestingly those who are most prone to holding
these biases also believe themselves to be enlightened. Simultaneously they dismiss
those who challenge the official narrative’s blatant falsehoods as troglodytes.
This would be hilarious if it were not so damning.
We must remember that a fish rots from the head down. Canadians
have been completely betrayed by their leadership and the entitled
sanctimonious political class. Our system of education has been hijacked by leftist
radicals who deliberately feed their students lies to indoctrinate and proselytize
our youth in a radical “progressive agenda” which is accomplishes anything but bringing
us progress. This has been a year when the size of the state has metastasized
like cancer while the democratic will of the citizen has been dismissed as unworthy
of consideration. It is time to prepare for war, not merely on an ideological
front but also on a spiritual one!
My prayer for 2025:
In 2024 two idea pathogens have merged to create the perfect
ideological storm. Postmodern Cultural Relativism and Cultural Marxist Critical
Race and Gender Theory caused us to reach a point where Canada is committing
socioeconomic suicide out of parasitical empathy. May 2025 witness the death of
these mind viruses which threaten the bedrock of Western civilization. But I
warn you, ideological possession comes out only with much prayer and fasting.
These Neo-Marxist beliefs form the basis of the Gnostic mystery religion of
which Trudeau appointed himself the high priest. His nihilistic ideas form the basis
of the pathological Zeitgeist which will destroy us. Our only hope is to repent
so that we may receive the Divine deliverance which God wishes to bring to Canada,
but only if we return to Him!
The very great problem we have in combating totalitarian
regimes is that we have never come to terms with how truly hideous are the
ideologies which possess our enemies. There can be no underestimating the hold
that parasitical ideas have on people's minds nor can what people believe be
defeated politically. Like dogs returning to vomit totalitarian ideologies have
been kept alive in Canada by the very institutions we have entrusted to protect
us from them. All the worst ideas that originated in the 19th Century which led
to the murder of millions in the 20th Century are still possessing the lecture
halls of the Academy in the 21st Century. They have captured the hearts and
minds of far too many Canadians today. We are facing an ideological disaster
where our families and friends have become our ideological enemies! Remarkably these
ideologies require that we surrender our individuality and autonomy to the
state run collective despite what label the elite political class may apply to
them!
I swear by the Almighty as long as God gives me breath and
the right words to use to defeat the type of ideological possession which has captured
the minds and hearts of so many Canadians that I will never be silent. My
ancestors came to Canada long before we became a Dominion to help create a unified
Christian nation under God built on peace, order, and good government!
A love letter to my nation (not my government)
from an avowed Anglophile and an old stock Canadian
As 2024
draws to its close I would like to share my thoughts on our present
socioeconomic crisis under a Trudeau led coalition government which destined to
fall and take the nation down with it. We face significant challenges in the next
several weeks and months. The current government in Canada is in utter,
complete, and perfect chaos. Trump has
declared that he wants Canada to become the 51st State. He even had
his son post a meme of the Donald purchasing us on Amazon. Canada, one of the
most resource richest nations on the planet, on Amazon like we are whore to be prostituted
as though America was her “John”. You may think that this is merely clever or funny,
or even a good idea given the fact that America’s economy is infinitely
stronger than ours and will become even greater under an administration
dedicated to reducing waste, cost, and variation. DOGE led by Vivek Ramaswamy
and Elon Musk will implement a modern version of what General Douglas MacArthur
did in Japan when he unleashed Drs. Deming and Juran on them to help fix their postwar
economy. Both are now lauded as heroes of industry by the Japanese for their unmitigated
successes in transforming their industries.
But back to
Canada and the US. Why not join the Union? After all taxation is much lower in
the US than it is in Canada. Canadians under the Trudeau government have become
poorer than even the citizens of Mississippi which is the poorest state in America.
But you are likely forgetting two things, that the US is still being informed
by the Monroe Doctrine and the American belief in Manifest Destiny. Moreover,
if you do not know what either are and how they relate to how Canada came into being
as an autonomous nation and an independent member of the British Commonwealth
you know literally nothing of the history of your own nation. Today I heard, “That
was then, this is now”, to which I answer the oldest adage regarding history ever
written, namely that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. Of
course, each repetition will have its own peculiar variation.
But first
let us examine the Monroe Doctrine and its coefficient of Manifest Destiny. The
Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny are two significant concepts in American
history that are closely related in their impact on U.S. foreign policy and
territorial expansion. So, the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny therefore had
significant impacts on Canada, shaping its history and development in various
ways right up until today.
The Monroe
Doctrine:
The Monroe
Doctrine, declared in 1823, primarily aimed to prevent European interference in
the Americas. While it was focused on Latin America, it indirectly affected
Canada by reinforcing the idea that the Western Hemisphere was under the
influence of the United States. This doctrine contributed to a sense of
American dominance in the region, which influenced Canadian policies and
attitudes towards its southern neighbor.
Manifest
Destiny:
Manifest
Destiny was the belief that the United States was destined to expand across
North America, and it had a more direct impact on Canada. This ideology fueled
American expansionist ambitions, leading to tensions and conflicts with British
North America (now Canada). Some key effects include:
1. Territorial
Expansion: The idea of Manifest Destiny led to American interest in
annexing Canadian territories. This was particularly evident during the
mid-19th century when there were calls for the U.S. to expand into British-held
territories in Canada.
2. Canadian
Confederation: The threat of American expansionism was a significant factor
in the push for Canadian Confederation. The provinces of British North America
united in 1867 to form the Dominion of Canada, partly to strengthen their
defense against potential American aggression.
3. Border
Disputes: Manifest Destiny contributed to several border disputes between
the U.S. and Canada, including the Oregon boundary dispute, which was resolved
in 1846 with the Oregon Treaty.
4. Cultural
and Political Influence: The expansionist ideology also influenced Canadian
culture and politics, as Canadians sought to distinguish themselves from their
American neighbours and assert their own national identity.
Overall, the
Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny played crucial roles in shaping the
geopolitical landscape of North America, influencing Canada's development and
its relationship with the United States.
But first
we must go back to the political beginnings of Canada as a nation distinct and separate
in identity from that of the USA:
Our start as
a parliamentary system under English Common Law and British constitutionalism after
initial settlement by Loyalists setters from America in Upper Canada (now
Ontario) and their insistence on having English Common Law as opposed to French
Civil law of Lower Canada (Quebec).
John Graves
Simcoe, the first Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada (now Ontario), had
several reasons for establishing a new province under English Common Law:
Political
Stability: Simcoe
aimed to create a stable and orderly society in Upper Canada, distinct from the
revolutionary fervor of the United States. By implementing English Common Law,
he sought to ensure a legal system that was familiar to British settlers and
loyalists who had fled the American Revolution.
Economic
Development: Simcoe
believed that a well-ordered society based on English Common Law would attract
settlers and promote economic growth. He introduced freehold land tenure, which
allowed settlers to own land outright, encouraging investment and development.
Social
Order: Simcoe wanted
to establish a society based on aristocratic and conservative principles, with
a strong Church of England presence. He believed that English Common Law would
support these values and help create a loyal and cohesive community.
Abolition
of Slavery: Simcoe
was instrumental in passing legislation to gradually abolish slavery in Upper
Canada, making it the first British colony to take such steps. This move was
part of his broader vision of creating a just and equitable society.
Simcoe's
efforts laid the foundation for the development of Upper Canada as a distinct
entity with its own legal and social structures, separate from both the United
States and other British colonies.
The War
of 1812: This was indeed a significant challenge to Canadian autonomy and
played a crucial role in shaping Canada's national identity.
Key
Impacts on Canadian Autonomy
1. Defense
Against Invasion: The
War of 1812 saw multiple American invasions into Canadian territory. The
successful defense against these invasions by British forces, Canadian militia,
and Indigenous allies helped solidify a sense of Canadian identity and unity.
2. National
Identity: The war
fostered a sense of national pride and identity among Canadians. The collective
effort to defend their land against American forces brought together people
from diverse backgrounds, including English and French Canadians, Indigenous
peoples, and Loyalists.
3. Military
and Civilian Cooperation: The war highlighted the importance of civilian soldiers in defending the
territory. This cooperation between military and civilian forces became a
defining characteristic of Canadian defense efforts.
4. Indigenous
Alliances: Indigenous
peoples played a crucial role in the war, forming alliances with both British
and Canadian forces. Their contributions were vital in several key battles,
although their sacrifices were often overlooked in the aftermath.
5. Political
and Social Impact: The
war's outcome reinforced the need for a strong defense and contributed to the
eventual push for Canadian Confederation in 1867. It also influenced Canadian
policies and attitudes towards its southern neighbour.
Overall, the
War of 1812 was a pivotal moment in Canadian history, marking the first
significant challenge to Canadian autonomy and laying the groundwork for the
development of a distinct Canadian identity.
William
Hamilton Merritt was
a significant figure in Canadian history, particularly known for his role in
the development of the Welland Canal. His contributions had a profound impact
on both defense and trade in Canada. Merritt was a businessman, politician, and
soldier born on July 3, 1793, in Bedford, New York. He moved to Upper Canada
(now Ontario) with his family and became involved in various business ventures
in my hometown of St. Catharines, Ontario. Merritt had fought in the War of
1812 and was captured by American forces, which influenced his later endeavors.
Merritt’s
great legacy, The Welland Canal
The Welland
Canal was Merritt's most notable achievement. He first proposed the idea in
1818 to create a canal that would connect Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, bypassing
the Niagara Falls. The canal was crucial for several reasons:
1. Trade:
The Welland Canal
facilitated the movement of goods between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic
Ocean, significantly boosting trade in the region. It allowed ships to bypass
the Niagara Falls, making transportation more efficient and less costly.
2. Defense:
The canal also had
strategic military importance. During times of conflict, such as the War of
1812, controlling the waterways was crucial for defense. The Welland Canal
provided a secure route for moving troops and supplies, enhancing the region's
defensive capabilities.
3. Economic
Development: The
construction and operation of the canal spurred economic growth in the
surrounding areas. It created jobs, attracted settlers, and led to the
development of towns and industries along its route. Merritt's vision and
determination were instrumental in the canal's construction. He organized local
meetings, raised funds, and enlisted government support to bring the project to
fruition. The Welland Canal remains a vital part of Canada's transportation
infrastructure and is a enduring testament to Merritt's legacy.
Funding
the Welland Canal:
Merritt
faced numerous challenges in securing funding for the Welland Canal. Initially,
he hoped for government support, but when that proved insufficient, he turned
to private investors, including those from the United States. American
investors were interested in the canal because it promised to enhance trade
routes and economic opportunities between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic
Ocean.
How this
impacted Canada’s Factories and Mills:
Investment
and Control: By
accepting American investment, Merritt inadvertently allowed American
businessmen to gain a controlling interest in some Canadian mills. These
investors were keen on ensuring their investments were profitable, which often
meant taking an active role in the management and operations of the mills.
Economic
Influence: The
influx of American capital brought with it a degree of economic influence.
American investors sought to maximize their returns, which sometimes led to
decisions that prioritized their interests over those of local Canadian
stakeholders.
Technological
Advancements: On the
positive side, American investment also brought technological advancements and
expertise to Canadian mills. This helped improve efficiency and productivity,
contributing to the growth of the Canadian economy.
Trade and
Commerce: The
Welland Canal itself facilitated increased trade and commerce between Canada
and the United States. This interconnectedness meant that American businessmen
had a vested interest in the success of Canadian industries, including the
mills.
Overall,
while American investment in the Welland Canal and Canadian mills brought
economic benefits, it also led to a degree of foreign control and influence
over Canadian industries, so much so that most of our factories and mills became
wholly owned subsidiaries of American parent corporations. This dynamic played
a significant role in shaping the economic landscape of the region during that
period.
Why the
building of the Rideau Canal coincided with that of the Welland Canal:
The Rideau
Canal and the Welland Canal were both constructed in the early 19th century,
and their development coincided due to several strategic, economic, and
political reasons.
Their Strategic
Importance
Defense: After the War of 1812, there was a
heightened sense of vulnerability in British North America (now Canada). The
Rideau Canal was built between 1826 and 1832 to provide a secure supply route
between Montreal and the naval base in Kingston, bypassing the potentially
vulnerable St. Lawrence River. This was crucial in case of another conflict
with the United States.
Military
Transport: Both
canals were designed to facilitate the movement of troops and supplies. The
Welland Canal, completed in 1829, allowed ships to bypass Niagara Falls,
providing a safer and more efficient route for military and commercial vessels.
Economic
Development
Trade
Routes: While the
Welland Canal facilitated the movement of goods between the Great Lakes and the
Atlantic Ocean, the Rideau Canal, which was initially built for military
purposes, also became an important commercial route. It connected Ottawa to
Kingston, enhancing trade and transportation in the region.
Political
Factors:
The
influence of Great Britain: Both canals were part of British efforts to strengthen their influence
in North America. By improving infrastructure and transportation, the British
aimed to secure their colonial territories and promote economic growth.
Settlement
and Development: The
construction of these canals encouraged settlement and development in the
surrounding areas. Towns and industries grew along the canal routes,
contributing to the economic prosperity of the region. In summary, the Rideau
and Welland Canals were built around the same time due to their strategic
importance for defense, their role in facilitating trade and transportation,
and the political objectives of strengthening our British ties in North
America.
The 1837-38
Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion as a reaction to American expansionism and British
Colonialism:
The
Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion, also known as the Rebellions of 1837-1838, was a
significant event in Canadian history. It was driven by frustrations with
British colonial rule and the influence of American expansionism.
Background:
The
rebellions took place in both Upper Canada (now Ontario) and Lower Canada (now
Quebec). Key figures included William Lyon Mackenzie in Upper Canada and
Louis-Joseph Papineau in Lower Canada. Both leaders sought political reform and
greater autonomy from British control.
Reaction
to British Colonialism:
Political
Reform: The rebels
were frustrated with the lack of political reform and the dominance of the
British-appointed elite. They demanded responsible government, where the
executive council would be accountable to the elected legislative assembly.
Economic
Grievances: Economic
hardships and land issues also fueled discontent. Many settlers felt that the
colonial government favoured the interests of the elite over those of ordinary
citizens.
Influence
of American Expansionism
Republican
Ideals: The American
Revolution and the subsequent expansion of the United States influenced the
rebels. They were inspired by republican ideals and sought to establish a more
democratic system of government.
Support
from the U.S.: Some
rebels received support from American sympathizers. For example, Mackenzie
established a short-lived "Republic of Canada" on Navy Island in the
Niagara River with the help of American volunteers.
Outcomes:
The
rebellions were ultimately unsuccessful, and the British military crushed the
uprisings. However, they led to significant changes:
Lord
Durham's Report: The
British government sent Lord Durham to investigate the causes of the
rebellions. His report recommended the unification of Upper and Lower Canada
and the establishment of responsible government.
Act of
Union 1840: The Act
of Union merged Upper and Lower Canada into a single province, laying the
groundwork for the eventual creation of the Canadian Confederation in 1867.
The
Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion was a pivotal moment in the struggle for Canadian
self-governance and highlighted the tensions between colonial rule and the
desire for democratic reform.
How the
liberal party was birthed in part by Mackenzie and Papineau
The Liberal
Party of Canada has its roots in the reformist movements led by figures like
William Lyon Mackenzie and Louis-Joseph Papineau. These leaders were
instrumental in advocating for political reform and responsible government in
the early 19th century.
William
Lyon Mackenzie was a
prominent figure in Upper Canada (now Ontario). He led the Reform movement,
which sought to challenge the power of the Family Compact, a small group of
elites who controlled the government. Mackenzie’s efforts culminated in the
Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837, which, although unsuccessful, highlighted the
need for political reform and greater democratic representation.
Louis-Joseph
Papineau was from
Lower Canada (now Quebec). Papineau led the Parti Patriote, which similarly
sought to challenge the dominance of the British-appointed elite and advocate
for the rights of French Canadians. The Lower Canada Rebellion of 1837-1838,
led by Papineau, also ended in defeat but underscored the demand for
responsible government and political change.
Influence
on the Liberal Party
The efforts
of Mackenzie and Papineau laid the groundwork for the development of the
Liberal Party. Their push for responsible government and democratic reforms
resonated with many Canadians and set the stage for the emergence of a
political party that would champion these ideals. The Liberal Party, officially
founded in 1867, drew on the legacy of these reformist movements and leaders,
advocating for a more inclusive and democratic political system.
The
American Civil War and the Fenian Raids influences on Canadian independence
from Great Britain
The American
Civil War (1861-1865) and the Fenian Raids (1866-1871) both played significant
roles in shaping Canadian independence from Great Britain.
American
Civil War:
Military
and Political Tensions: The Civil War heightened tensions between Britain and the United States.
Britain's neutrality and its support for the Confederacy due to the cotton
trade angered the Union, leading to incidents like the Trent Affair, where a
British ship was seized by the Union Navy.
Canadian
Sympathy for the Union: Many Canadians sympathized with the Union cause, partly due to their
opposition to slavery and their close economic ties with the northern states.
Increased
Military Presence:
The threat of American invasion led Britain to station troops in Canada, which
underscored the need for a more unified and self-reliant defense.
Fenian
Raids:
Irish-American
Veterans: The Fenian
Brotherhood, composed of Irish-American Civil War veterans, launched several
raids into Canada to pressure Britain to withdraw from Ireland. My own
great-grandfather was a veteran of the conflict and received a grant of land in
some god forsaken part of Ontario on the Canadian Shield in case he had the
sudden urge to go farm rock. My cousin Roy Rymer still pays the taxes on that
property. Great granddad once told my father that the only thing he shot during
the Fenians Raids was a farmer’s cow to feed the boys from the Lincoln and
Welland Regiment in which he had served. It was a two-day march from St.
Catharines to Ridgeway where the engagement took place.
Canadian
Unity: The raids
exposed weaknesses in Canada's defense and highlighted the need for a unified
military and political structure.
Path to
Confederation: The
threat of Fenian attacks and the desire for a stronger defense were key factors
that led to the Confederation of Canada in 1867.
Both events
underscored the vulnerabilities of British North America and accelerated the
movement towards a more independent and unified Canadian nation.
The Charlottetown
Conference and the need of Confederation to establish Canada as a nation
capable of self-government
The
Charlottetown Conference, held from September 1st to 9th,
1864, in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, was a pivotal moment in the
journey towards Canadian Confederation. Originally planned as a meeting of
representatives from the Maritime colonies (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and
Prince Edward Island) to discuss a possible union, the conference took a
significant turn when delegates from the Province of Canada (present-day
Ontario and Quebec) were invited to join.
Key
Outcomes of the Charlottetown Conference:
Discussion
of Union: The
conference shifted focus from a Maritime Union to a broader union of all
British North American colonies. The delegates discussed the benefits of
uniting the colonies to create a stronger, more self-sufficient entity.
Agreement
on Principles: While
no formal decisions were made, there was a general agreement on the principles
of union, including the need for a federal system that would allow for both
regional autonomy and a strong central government. This is distinctly different
from the American system which emphasises State’s right and their autonomy.
Social
Interactions: The
conference included social events, such as dinners and banquets, which helped
build relationships and trust among the delegates.
Path to
Confederation:
The
Charlottetown Conference was followed by the Quebec Conference in October 1864,
where a more detailed plan for Confederation was drafted. This plan, known as
the 72 Resolutions, laid the groundwork for the British North America Act,
which was passed by the British Parliament and came into effect on July 1st,
1867, creating the Dominion of Canada.
Significance:
The
Charlottetown Conference marked the beginning of a series of negotiations that
ultimately led to the formation of Canada as a self-governing nation. It was a
crucial step in the process of Confederation, demonstrating the willingness of
the colonies to work together towards a common goal.
"Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as the counterpoint to "Peace,
Order, and Good Government"
"Life,
Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" and "Peace, Order, and Good
Government" are two foundational principles that reflect differing
philosophies and priorities in the founding documents of the United States and
Canada, respectively.
"Life,
Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"
This phrase
is from the United States Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas
Jefferson in 1776. It encapsulates the core values of American political
philosophy:
Individual
Rights: Emphasizes
the importance of individual freedoms and personal rights.
Self-Governance: Reflects the belief in the right of
people to govern themselves and seek their own paths to fulfillment.
Rejection
of Tyranny: Stresses
the need to break away from oppressive governments that do not respect these
fundamental rights.
"Peace,
Order, and Good Government"
This phrase
is from the British North America Act (now the Constitution Act, 1867) and
highlights the priorities of the Canadian Confederation:
Collective
Well-Being: Focuses
on the overall stability and welfare of society.
Rule of
Law: Emphasizes the
importance of legal order and governance structures that maintain peace and
prevent chaos.
Public
Interest: Prioritizes
decisions that benefit the collective, often through a strong and proactive
government role.
Contrasting
these Philosophies
Individualism
vs. Collectivism:
The American principal underscores individual rights and personal freedoms,
while the Canadian principal emphasizes collective well-being and social order.
Liberty
vs. Stability: The
U.S. approach values personal liberty as the highest good, whereas the Canadian
approach values peace and stability, often requiring a balance between
individual freedoms and societal needs. It is the stability of our system of
government that has allowed Canada to avoid some of the more violent extremes
of civil discord so common in America. The belief in stable, calm, responsible
government is an unreconcilable difference between how our two nations are
governed, that is until the erosion of Canadian values which have occurred largely
but not entirely under the Liberal Party of Canada since the mid 1960’s due to
parliament pursuing a “progressive agenda”
Government
Role: The American
ideal tends to advocate for limited government intervention in personal lives,
while the Canadian ideal supports a more active government role in ensuring
public welfare. Again, I must point out that this intervention in individual
freedom largely began with Pearson’s vision of more state intervention in our
lives. It was also Pearson who was instrumental in bringing Pierre Trudeau to
the fore. A moment in our political history which began our downhill slide
toward the tyranny of his son.
Nevertheless,
these differing principles reflect the unique historical contexts and cultural
values of each nation. The American focus on individual liberty arose from a
desire to escape British colonial rule, while the Canadian emphasis on peace
and order emerged from a need to unify diverse provinces and maintain stability
under the British crown.
My conclusions:
We face the
possibility of prorogation in the coming weeks to delay the fall of the current
corrupt government. This will only serve to further abuse Canadians who are already
suffering. All of this is due to our rejection of Christianity as the
underpinning principle upon which any functional government’s value, principles,
legislation and laws must rely. For without Christ Canada cannot exist as a
nation that exists to fulfill our most fundamental constitutional principle of “peace,
order, and good government”.
So here we
are, once again being bullied from the south in a two-century old fulfillment
of America’s quest for Manifest Destiny. Trump is being lauded as our saviour by
many Canadians on my social media feed who claim some affiliation with
conservativism. I often wonder whether real conservatives and true liberals exist
at all. I am being given constant proof of the failure of our education system due
to our progressive school boards. This failure has virtually erased the
knowledge required to understand what either of these political philosophies
mean.
For Trump to
suggest that Wayne Gretzky could simply “become” the next Prime Minister with
out first becoming the leader of a political party capable of winning an election
showed his massive ignorance as to how the Canadian system of governance functions.
Trump referred to Gretzky as a good
candidate to become the “Governor of Canada”, an offer which the “Great One”
promptly turned down due to its insulting impossibility. I was forced to study
American history as a lad, something which at the time I found boring. Today I
am grateful that I was offered perspective as to why the USA still operates on
principles that threaten our autonomy. It is not a Godly move to interfere in
the sovereign government of another nation. It is not for America to tell us
how to fix our own problems brought on by Neo-Marxist “progressives” (a term
which I despise due to its meaninglessness) who have weakened us once again to
the point where we are made vulnerable to American expansionism and threats to
our sovereignty.
For those of
you who may think based upon what I have stated here that I am not pleased
Trump won would also be missing the point since I am pleased. Frankly the
reason you are missing the point is due to the fact you lack a proper
historical perspective of how and why our situation is so dire. Due to ungodly hubris,
we often think that we know more than we do. Donald Trump is not Canada’s saviour,
Jesus Christ is! If you claim to be a Christian, then you need to stop
worshipping at the false god of political messiahs. We must pray that Trump’s new
administration will serve God’s will in America and that the parliamentary system
we have inherited from our ancestors will right itself since its traditions
have served us so well until the “progressives” corrupted it with their godless
agenda.
December 25th is Christmas day (Christ's mass), but
for the first 300 years of Christianity, it wasn't so. When was Christmas first
celebrated? In an old list of Roman bishops, compiled in A. D. 354 these words
appear for A.D. 336: "25 Dec.: natus Christus in Betleem Judeae."
December 25th, Christ born in Bethlehem, Judea. This day, December 25, 336, is
the first recorded celebration of Christmas.
No one knows for sure on what day Christ was born. Dionysus
Exiguus, a sixth-century monk, who was the first to date all of history from
December 25th, the year of our Lord 1. Other traditions gave dates as early as
mid-November or as late as March. How did Christmas come to be celebrated on
December 25th? Cultures around the Mediterranean and across Europe observed
feasts on or around December 25th, marking the winter solstice. The Jews had a
festival of lights. Germans had a yule festival. Celtic legends connected the
solstice with Balder, the Scandinavian sun god who was struck down by a
mistletoe arrow. At the pagan festival of Saturnalia, Romans feasted and gave
gifts to the poor. Drinking was closely connected with these pagan feasts. At
some point, a Christian bishop may have adopted the day to keep his people from
indulging in the old pagan festival.
Historian William J. Tighe offers a different view, however.
When a consensus arose in the church to celebrate Christ's conception on March
25th, it was reasonable to celebrate his birth nine months later.
Origin of Christmas Traditions:
Many of the pagan customs became associated with Christmas.
Christian stories replaced the heathen tales, but the practices hung on.
Candles continued to be lit. Kissing under the mistletoe remained common in
Scandinavian countries. But over the years, gift exchanges became connected
with the name of St. Nicholas, a real but legendary figure of 4th century Lycia
(a province of Asia). A charitable man, he threw gifts into homes.
Around the thirteenth century, Christians added one of the
most pleasant touches of all to Christmas celebration when they began to sing
Christmas carols.
No one is sure just when the Christmas tree came into the
picture. It originated in Germany. The 8th century English missionary, St.
Boniface, Apostle to Germany, is supposed to have held up the evergreen as a
symbol of the everlasting Christ. By the end of the sixteenth century,
Christmas trees were common in Germany. Some say Luther cut the first, took it
home, and decked it with candles to represent the stars. When the German court
came to England, the Christmas tree came with them.
Puritans forbade Christmas, considering it too pagan.
Governor Bradford actually threatened New Englanders with work, jail or fines
if they were caught observing Christmas.
In 1843, in Victorian England, Charles Dickens published his
novelette "A Christmas Carol." It became one of the most popular
short works of fiction ever penned. Although the book is more a work of
sentiment than of Christianity, it captures something of the Christmas spirit.
The tightfisted grump, Ebenezer Scrooge, who exclaimed "humbug!" at
the mention of Christmas, is contrasted with generous merry-makers such as his
nephew, Fred and with the struggling poor, symbolized by Bob Cratchit and Tiny
Tim. The book's appeal to good works and charitable contributions virtually
defines Christmas in English-speaking lands.
Whatever the ins and outs of Christmas, we are still
unwrapping the gift of God's Son--and what an incentive to generosity and joy
that gift is!
Bibliography:
"Christmas." Encyclopedia Americana. Chicago:
Americana Corp., 1956.
"Christmas." Encyclopedia Britannica. 1967.
"Christmas," "Dionysius Exiguus," and
"Philocalian Calendar." Cross, F. L. and Livingstone, E. A. The
Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford, 1997.
Hutchinson, Ruth and Adams, Ruth. Every Day's a Holiday.
New York: Harper, 1951.
People's Almanac. Edited by David Wallechinsky and Irving
Wallace. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1975.
Tighe, William J. "Calculating Christmas."
Touchstone, December, 2003. http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/
16.10docs/16-10pg12.html
But what are the roots of our Christmas traditions and
why do they continue to be important?
Before that we had Yule which is the English spelling of the
Norwegian Jul which is a mid winter celebration of Odin the “All-Father” riding
his eight-legged horse Sleipnir leading a procession of the undead on a hunt for
poor souls who couldn’t find a hiding place.
The Wild Hunt of Odin is based on the Wild Hunt motif from
folklore. In the Scandinavian tradition, the Wild Hunt is often associated with
the god Odin. It consists of a terrifying procession that hurl across the sky
during midwinter and abduct unfortunate people who have failed to find a hiding
place. In the Norwegian material, figures other than Odin who have been named
as leaders of the hunt include Lussi, sometimes identified as Adam's first
wife, and Guro Rysserova, a supernatural female being with a mysterious male
companion. The folklorist Christine N. F. Eike has argued that the motif might
have its origin in European traditions where young, unmarried men wear masks
and move in processions during Christmastide.
The Wild Hunt and The Danger of Seeing The Phantom Army
Of Odin
The Wild Hunt was a popular folklore found in Scandinavian
and Germanic myths, as well in later folklore in Britain and northern European
countries, which changed over the centuries.
The group of hunters were variously known as the Furious
Host or Raging Host. The hunt usually took part during winter, with a spectral
host of horsemen riding through the stormy sky, with their ghostlike hounds.
The chilling sound of the hunting horn could be heard reverberating through the
woods and meadows.
In the Norse myths, the original leader of the hunt was the
god Odin, known in Germanic myth as Wodan. Odin rode his eight-legged horse,
called Sleipnir. His company of hunters were the Valkyries and the dead
warriors who resided with him in Valhalla.
The hunt began on Winter Nights (October 31) and didn't end
until May Eve (April 30) of the following year. These two nights were special,
because lights went out on all Nine Worlds and the spirits and goblins were
free to roam on the earth's surface. However, the height of the Wild Ride fell
on the night of midwinter festival, known as Yule (December 21), traditionally
the shortest day of the year in Scandinavia and Germany. That is to say, today
so beware!
Canada’s wild Valkyrian ride into perdition:
If you have not found a place to hide from the undead who
are leading the political procession the aim of which is drag us into hell is
echoed in every aspect of the wicked alliance between Jagmeet Singh and Justin
Trudeau since Trudeau is a dead man walking but worse, still passing laws that
are ruinous. So let us review his litany of hellish corruption and this list
will only deal in part with the fallout of an administration where he has
ensured that no one will be left anywhere to hide from the damage he has
wreaked both socially and economically.
Here’s a short list then written by liberty heroin Tamara
Lich on what the current government with the support of the leader of the NDP
and local law enforcement is responsible for doing to Canadians:
- colluded with gov’t funded Canadian media to paint
Canadians as crazy, unhinged, angry lunatics
- called Canadians terrorists, racists, misogynists
- lied about foreign funding (donations)
- lied about desecration of the Terry Fox statue
- lied about truckers stealing food from homeless shelters
- lied about truckers disrespecting our War Memorial
- lied about Russian interference
- illegally spied on its own citizens
- accused truckers of being rapsts
- lied about arson attempt of an apartment building
- lied about law enforcement advice to invoke emergency act
- lied about legal advice advising to invoke emergency act
- lied about violence
- unlawfully froze bank accounts
- stole fuel & food
- threatened to apprehend pets
- threatened to apprehend children
- accused us of using children as human shields
- had our crowdfunding campaign frozen after contacting GFM
and telling them we were d0m3stic teRr0r1sts
- beat Military Veterans
- beat peaceful protestors with the butts of their rifles
- shot Canadians with rubber bullets & tear gas
- shot a reporter at point blank range with a gas canister
- trampled a first nation’s woman with heavy horses then
lied and laughed about it
- arrested peaceful Canadians, left them in cold paddy
wagons for hours, dropped them off on the outskirts of Ottawa in the middle of
a snowstorm.
- joked about sending tanks to remove peaceful Canadians
- claimed “Honk Honk” was an acronym for (you know what)
- planted a nasty flag, sent gov’t photographer out to snap
a photo
- seized donations in the same manner they would a drug
cartel
- violently arrested a senior citizen who drove past and
honked his car horn
- threatened to “hunt down” anyone involved
- unlawfully, unconstitutionally invoked emergency as
determined by a judge
(What did I miss?!?!?)
All of this in order to avoid a conversation with everyday,
tax paying, blue collar Canadians.
Not one of them has been fired, not one of them held to
account.
~ Tamara Lich
Ms. Lich was a key player in the Freedom Convoy protest has
shared her story on the world stage. Freedom Convoy organizer and fundraiser
Tamara Lich spoke this week in the European parliament in Strasbourg, France to
discuss the treatment of Canadians during the pandemic. She just recently received
the 2024 Women Fighting for Freedom Award presented to her by Madame Christine
Anderson MdEP in the European Union and fellow of the Europe of Sovereign
Nations Group in Strasburg.
As the Liberal government grapples with political upheaval
following the exit of Chrystia Freeland from the federal cabinet, a new Ipsos
poll shows most Canadians now want an early election.
That comes as support for Conservatives is surging and
support for the Liberals is at a near-historic low this week — putting Prime
Minister Justin Trudeau just one point above the record-low support seen by
former Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff in 2011.
Ignatieff led the party to its worst defeat in history in
2011, which saw the Liberals reduced to third-party status behind the NDP as
official opposition and the Conservatives winning a majority government.
Ipsos polling done exclusively for Global News and released
Friday shows over half of Canadians (53 per cent) believe opposition parties
should defeat the government "at the earliest opportunity" and
trigger an early election.
Meanwhile, 46 per cent believe opposition parties should
work with the government on a case-by-case basis to avoid an early election.
This is a near-reversal of the data released on Monday
morning before Freeland's resignation, which shared responses gathered in early
December.
That poll said 54 per cent did not want an early election
and 46 per cent did.
The popular vote share for the Liberals has dropped one per
cent since last week and six points since September to 20 per cent, tying them
with the New Democrats.
NDP support has dropped one point since last week but has
risen four per cent since September.
The Bloc Quebecois has maintained its support at seven per
cent, while the Green Party is up one per cent since last week.
Trudeau cabinet shuffle: 8 new ministers sworn in
Missed the political tumult in Ottawa? Here’s how it
happened, day by day
NDP will vote to topple Trudeau and propose confidence vote,
Singh says
The prime minister’s personal popularity has gone down five
per cent since the last Ipsos poll, with only 23 per cent overall saying they
think Trudeau deserves re-election, and 77 per cent saying they think it’s time
for a new party to take over.
Since renewed calls for him to step down this week, 73 per
cent respondents said Trudeau should step down while 27 per cent want him to
continue as prime minister and lead the party in the election in 2025.
Trudeau likens Freeland’s departure to a family spat, calls
Poilievre the ‘Grinch’
There was a sharp drop in the percentage of respondents who
thought Trudeau was best suited to deal with Donald Trump in trade
negotiations.
The polls said 14 per cent believe Trudeau would do the best
job representing Canada’s interests with a new Trump administration, compared
to 39 per cent who said Poilievre would be best suited for that role.
The gulf between perceptions of both leaders has only
widened since the last Ipsos poll when 22 per cent said Trudeau was best suited
for the role compared to 34 per cent for Poilievre.
What led to Freeland’s sudden resignation? Why Trudeau she must
blow past her already enormous deficit by over 20 billion dollars then asking
her to present it to parliament!
Ipsos poll findings:
These are some of the findings of an Ipsos poll conducted
between December 19 and 20, 2024, on behalf of Global News. For this survey, a
sample of 1,001 Canadians aged 18+ was interviewed online. Quotas and weighting
were employed to ensure that the sample’s composition reflects that of the
Canadian population according to Census parameters. The precision of Ipsos
online polls is measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll
is accurate to within ± 3.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, had all
Canadians aged 18+ been polled.
In conclusion:
What am I to state in the face of such a perverse corruption
of parliamentary democracy which has had but one goal, to continue abusing the
Canadian people at a time when we need a calm strong voice to counter Trump’s threats
to kill our economy with tariffs. We need an election now and may the walking
undead who have been damned by their own behaviour suffer the full weight of
their own wicked hubris!
1.The
mental process of knowing, including aspects such as awareness, perception,
reasoning, and judgment.
2.That
which comes to be known, as through perception, reasoning, or intuition;
knowledge.
3.The
act of knowing; knowledge; perception.
What is Postmodernism and why is it a rejection of our cognitive
abilities?
Criticism of postmodernism is intellectually diverse,
reflecting various critical attitudes toward postmodernity, postmodern
philosophy, postmodern art, and postmodern architecture. Postmodernism is
generally defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection towards
what it describes as the grand narratives and ideologies associated with
modernism, especially those associated with Enlightenment rationality (though
postmodernism in the arts may have its own definitions). Thus, while common
targets of postmodern criticism include universalist ideas of objective
reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, science, language, and social
progress, critics of postmodernism often defend such concepts.
Postmodern scholars promote obscurantism, are hostile to
objective truth, and encourage relativism (in culture, morality, knowledge) to
an extent that is epistemically and ethically crippling. Criticism of more
artistic postmodern movements such as postmodern art or literature may include
objections to a departure from beauty, lack of coherence or comprehensibility,
deviating from clear structure and the consistent use of dark and negative
themes.
Critics of postmodernism frequently charge that postmodern
art/authorship is vague, obscurantist, or meaningless. Some philosophers, such
as Jürgen Habermas, argue that postmodernism contradicts itself through
self-reference, since its critique would be impossible without the concepts and
methods that modern reason provides.
Christopher Hitchens in his book Why Orwell Matters
advocates for simple, clear, and direct expression of ideas and argues that
postmodernists wear people down by boredom and semi-literate prose. Hitchens
also criticized a postmodernist volume, The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary
Theory and Criticism: "The French, as it happens, once evolved an
expression for this sort of prose: “la langue de bois”, the wooden
tongue, in which nothing useful or enlightening can be said, but in which
various excuses for the arbitrary and the dishonest can be offered. (This book)
is a pointer to the abysmal state of mind that prevails in so many of our
universities."
In a similar vein, Richard Dawkins writes in a favorable
review of Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont's Intellectual Impostures: “Suppose you
are an intellectual impostor with nothing to say, but with strong ambitions to
succeed in academic life, collect a coterie of reverent disciples and have
students around the world anoint your pages with respectful yellow highlighter.
What kind of literary style would you cultivate? Not a lucid one, surely, for
clarity would expose your lack of content.”
Dawkins then uses the following quotation from Félix
Guattari as an example of this "lack of content" and of clarity: “We
can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between linear
signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this
multireferential, multi-dimensional machinic catalysis. The symmetry of scale,
the transversality, the pathic non-discursive character of their expansion: all
these dimensions remove us from the logic of the excluded middle and reinforce
us in our dismissal of the ontological binarism we criticised previously.”
Let us begin with the nature of the term itself:
Relativism:
Criticism of postmodernism has also been directed at its
relativist positions, including the argument that it is self-contradictory.
Partly in reference to post-modernism, conservative English philosopher Roger
Scruton wrote, "A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all
truth is 'merely relative,' is asking you not to believe him. So don't."
In 2014, the philosophers Theodore Schick and Lewis Vaughn wrote: "The
statement that 'No unrestricted universal generalizations are true' is itself
an unrestricted universal generalization. So, if relativism in any of its forms
is true, it's false."
Christian philosopher William Lane Craig has said "The
idea that we live in a postmodern culture is a myth. In fact, a postmodern
culture is an impossibility; it would be utterly unliveable. People are not
relativistic when it comes to matters of science, engineering, and technology;
rather, they are relativistic and pluralistic in matters of religion and
ethics. But, of course, that's not postmodernism; that's modernism!"
Analytic philosopher Daniel Dennett said,
"Postmodernism, the school of 'thought' that proclaimed 'There are no
truths, only interpretations' has largely played itself out in absurdity, but
it has left behind a generation of academics in the humanities disabled by
their distrust of the very idea of truth and their disrespect for evidence,
settling for 'conversations' in which nobody is wrong and nothing can be
confirmed, only asserted with whatever style you can muster."
The historian Richard J. Evans argues that while
postmodernists usually identify with the political left, denying the
possibility of objective knowledge about the past is not necessarily left-wing
or progressive, as it can legitimize far-right pseudohistory such as Holocaust
denial.
Epistemology:
Another line of criticism has argued that postmodernism has
failed to provide a viable method for determining what can be considered
knowledge.
Richard Caputo, William Epstein, David Stoesz & Bruce
Thyer consider postmodernism to be a "dead-end in social work
epistemology." They write: “Postmodernism continues to have a detrimental
influence on social work, questioning the Enlightenment, criticizing
established research methods, and challenging scientific authority. The
promotion of postmodernism by editors of Social Work and the Journal of Social
Work Education has elevated postmodernism, placing it on a par with
theoretically guided and empirically based research. The inclusion of
postmodernism in the 2008 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards of the
Council on Social Work Education and its 2015 sequel further erode the
knowledge-building capacity of social work educators. In relation to other
disciplines that have exploited empirical methods, social work's stature will
continue to ebb until postmodernism is rejected in favor of scientific methods
for generating knowledge.”
Marxist criticisms:
Alex Callinicos denounces notable postmodern thinkers such
as Baudrillard and Lyotard, arguing postmodernism "reflects the
disappointed revolutionary generation of 1968, (particularly those of May 1968
in France) and the incorporation of many of its members into the professional
and managerial 'new middle class'. It is best read as a symptom of political
frustration and social mobility rather than as a significant intellectual or
cultural phenomenon in its own right."
Language wielded only as a tool to gain power over others:
Postmodernism also remains relevant because much of current
thinking is rooted in Postmodern ideas. This goes beyond just academic circles:
it is easy to catch Postmodern ideas in everyday discourse, and certainly in
the policies being promoted by current governments. Nothing is unusual about
hearing someone retort in an argument “Well, that’s subjective,” or if they are
more well versed and a little bolder “That’s just interpretation, there’s never
really any one meaning.”
These ideas originate from Postmodern language theory in
particular. What is referred to as “Postmodernism” refers to a specific idea of
language and how it functions. These ideas were shaped by numerous thinkers in
the 1960s and 1970s: most popularly through French thinkers like Michel
Foucault and Jacques Derrida, who took the core ideas on language and related
them to concepts of power, oppression, and freedom.
A critique of language of all things may appear benign and
simply technical at first, but the challenge undermines confidence in our
ability to have knowledge and the possibility of truth. Let us explore both,
but first I will need to explain the Postmodern understanding of language which
I have been alluding to. I do warn that in discussing “Postmodernism” that
there is a risk in generalization. The term remains elusive and the various
thinkers who are characterized as Postmodern are not totally unified in their
views. I will stick to explaining the broadly agreed upon problems Postmodern
thinkers find in language and dabble with some responses.
Postmodern theories of language challenge the belief that
language provides a stable way of understanding the world. When you use
language, you are partaking in the act of representing things in the world
through concepts. This does not have to be simply through speech, when you are
thinking or simply identifying an object you are representing the world through
language. If you are for instance looking at a red apple, you will have the
corresponding thought “That is a red apple,” which frames the experience and
allows you to understand it. In that case, language is being used to formulate
a claim which represents something out there in the world, namely that the
apple is there and that it has the characteristic of “redness”. “There” is used
to represent a concept of space–namely where the object is–and “red” is used to
represent a concept of colour. Real things are therefore represented with
concepts in language.
Postmodernism is essentially the claim that (1) since
there are an innumerable number of ways in which the world can be interpreted
and perceived (and those are tightly associated) then (2) no canonical manner
of interpretation can be reliably derived.
That’s the fundamental claim. An immediate secondary
claim (and this is where the Marxism emerges) is something like “since no
canonical manner of interpretation can be reliably derived, all interpretation
variants are best interpreted as the struggle for different forms of power.”
There is no excuse whatsoever for the secondary claim
(except that it allows the resentful pathology of Marxism to proceed in a new
guise).
The first claim is true, but incomplete. The fact that
there are an unspecifiable number of interpretations does not mean (or even
imply) that there are an unspecifiable number of VALID interpretations.
What does valid mean? That’s where an intelligent
pragmatism comes into it. Valid at least means: “when the proposition or
interpretation is acted out in the world, the desired outcome within the
specific timeframe ensues.” That’s a pragmatic definition of truth (from within
the confines of the American pragmatism of William James and C.S. Pierce).
Validity is constrained by the necessity for iteration
(among other fators). Your interpretations have to keep you, at minimum, alive
and not suffering too badly today, tomorrow, next week, next month and next
year in a context defined by you, your family, your community and the broader
systems you are part of. That makes for very tight constraints on your
perception/interpretations/actions. Games have to be iterable, playable and,
perhaps, desirable to the players– as Jean Piaget took pains to point out, in
his work on equilibration.
RELATIONSHIP TO MARXISM:
It’s not as if I personally think that postmodernism and
Marxism are commensurate. It’s obvious to me that the much-vaunted “skepticism
toward grand narratives” that is part and parcel of the postmodern viewpoint
makes any such alliance logically impossible. Postmodernists should be as
skeptical toward Marxism as toward any other canonical belief system.
So the formal postmodern claim, such as it is, is radical
skepticism. But that’s not at all how it has played out in theory or in
practice. Derrida and Foucault were, for example, barely repentant Marxists, if
repentant at all. They parleyed their 1960’s bourgeoisie vs proletariat
rhetoric into the identity politics that has plagued us since the 1970’s.
Foucault’s fundamental implicit (and often explicit) claim is that power
relations govern society. That’s a rehashing of the Marxist claim of eternal and
primary class warfare. Derrida’s hypothetical concern for the marginalized is a
version of the same thing. I don’t really care if either of them made the odd
statement about disagreeing with the Marxist doctrines: their fundamental
claims are still soaked in those patterns of thought.
You can see this playing out in practical terms in fields
such as gender studies and social work (as well as literary criticism,
anthropology, law, education, etc.).
There are deeper problems as well. For example:
Postmodernism leaves its practitioners without an ethic. Action in the world
(even perception) is impossible without an ethic, so one has to be at least
allowed in through the back door. The fact that such allowance produces a
logical contradiction appears to bother the low-rent postmodernists who
dominate the social sciences and humanities not at all. Then again, coherence
isn’t one of their strong points (and the demand for such coherence can just be
read as another patriarchal imposition typifying oppressive Western thought).
So: postmodernism, by its nature (at least with regard to
skepticism) cannot ally itself with Marxism. But it does, practically. The
dominance of postmodern Marxist rhetoric in the academy (which is a matter of
fact, as laid out by the Heterodox Academy, among other sources) attests to
that. The fact that such an alliance is illogical cannot be laid at my feet,
just because I point out that the alliance exists. I agree that it’s illogical.
That doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
It’s a very crooked game, and those who play it are neck
deep in deceit.”
My conclusions:
If all we have left is using our words in an attempt to manipulate
and shame others to force them to agree with us without using human cognition,
reason, facts, and civil discourse then we have devolved into the living
manifestation of the DEVO tune Jocko Homo. "Jocko Homo" is the B-side
to Devo's first single, "Mongoloid", released in 1977 on Devo's own
label, Booji Boy Records and later released in the UK on Stiff Records. The
song was re-recorded as the feature song for Devo's first album, Q: Are We Not
Men? A: We Are Devo! on Warner Bros. Records in 1978. The original version
peaked at No. 62 on the UK Singles Chart.
The title was derived from a 1924 anti-evolution tract
called Jocko-Homo Heavenbound by Bertram Henry Shadduck, while its "Are we
not men?"/"We are Devo!" call and response chant is a reference
to the 1932 movie Island of Lost Souls. The song had been in Devo's setlists
for several years prior to being recorded, and an early version was featured in
the band's 1976 short film The Truth About De-Evolution.
Our Prime Minister is the literal manifestation of the
devolution of the experiment known as Canadian Confederation. He has, more than
anyone, devolved the nation into an ape like mockery of reasoned cognitive
discourse and civil order. We are DEVO, are we not Canucks?
If there is one thing above all else that those who have
surrendered their individual autonomy to the faceless social collective detest
is reality. Have you noted that they spend all of their resources (and ours)
trying to create a society that lives on permanent life support? By that I mean
that they demand to recreate the world around them based upon “ought” rather
than “what is”. All their efforts are exerted to distort reality into their dystopian
image. This is why they insist that human sexuality is not biological but
rather a subjective experience. They both loathe and fear reality so much that
they are willing to deny its very existence. Dr. Gad Saad released an episode
of the Saad Truth that describes the reason for their attempt to legislate falsity
entitled, “What Do Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and Joe Rogan Have in Common? (THE
SAAD TRUTH_1777)” https://youtu.be/RjdQ0__eUXo?si=P8NTCj6MjRzAE_20
His conclusion was glaringly simple, none of them are phoneys. Like them or
loathe them they are genuine and do not project an affected image to the public.
No matter who their audience is, you are still seeing the same guy while the narcissist
on the other hand is completely dependent on creating an image that hides their
severe narcissistic vulnerability.
The narcissist will create a fake persona to control how
they're perceived to seek admiration and validation. It's all about feeding
their ego while masking their insecurities. Narcissistic insecurities stem from
deep-seated fears and vulnerabilities. Despite projecting confidence, they
often have fragile self-esteem and depend heavily on external validation. This
need for admiration is a way to shield their inner doubts. The façade helps
them feel more in control and less exposed. It's quite the paradox, isn't it?
People who seem so self-assured can actually be struggling underneath. Here is
a list of the characteristics of a pathological narcissist and why they appear
false despite their ostensible charm:
Characteristics of a Pathological Narcissist
Exaggerated Sense of Self-Importance: They often
believe they are superior to others and expect to be recognized as such.
Lack of Empathy: They have difficulty understanding
or valuing the feelings and needs of others.
Need for Excessive Admiration: They constantly seek
validation and praise to boost their fragile self-esteem.
Sense of Entitlement: They expect special treatment
and compliance with their expectations.
Manipulative and Exploitative Behavior: They use
others to achieve their own goals.
Envy of Others: They may feel envious of others'
successes or believe others are envious of them.
Arrogant or Haughty Behaviors or Attitudes: They
display a patronizing or dismissive demeanor.
Why Narcissists Appear So False:
Insecurity and Low Self-Esteem: Despite their
grandiose exterior, narcissists often have deep-seated insecurities. Their
self-worth is heavily reliant on the approval and admiration of others.
Defense Mechanism: The false front serves as a
defense mechanism to protect against feelings of inadequacy and vulnerability.
Image Control: They carefully construct and maintain
a persona that they believe will earn them the validation and admiration they
crave.
Fear of Rejection: Fear of being exposed or rejected
for their true selves drives them to maintain the façade at all costs.
Why do
narcissists often wear masks during protests?
Narcissists wearing masks while protesting can be seen as
a metaphor for their behavior in everyday life. Masks serve multiple purposes
for them:
Protection of Identity: Just as they hide their true
selves behind a façade in social situations, masks help them maintain anonymity
and control their image in public protests.
Avoiding Accountability: Wearing a mask can shield
them from repercussions of their actions, similar to how they deflect blame and
avoid responsibility in personal relationships.
Fear of Exposure: By covering their faces, they
protect themselves from being exposed, criticized, or judged—a constant fear in
their lives. It's an interesting reflection of their deeper psychological
tendencies. Need we wonder then why masking became so important to them during
COVID up to and including the present despite the ineffectiveness of the masking
protocols in preventing infection and notwithstanding the damage it had on impeding
early childhood development, socializing, and learning?
So, what precisely has caused these collectivist attitudes to
develop to the point where they pose an existential risk to the most threatened
minority of all, the individual and his or her personal agency and freedom?
After all, compelled speech and censorship only exist in authoritarian
societies. Here I will quote from our friend Mikkel Clair Nissen and his
seminal work on the narcissistic nature of social collectivist ideologies.
“Democracy in itself cannot radicalize collectivism.
Therefore, socialism within the context of a democratic system is very
different from traditional socialism. In an attempt to protect, maintain, and
secure the continuance of what has now ended up in absolute collectivist greed,
the Marxists have put into use awful methods of suppressive psychological undermining.
Now we find they use orchestrated, designed, and calculated psychological
coercion—subliminal conditioning that utilizes the weapon of guilt and
enticement. Coercion is accomplished by means that are identical to the methods
commonly known as Machiavellian egocentricity, which is described in psychology
as the illusive ability to manipulate, subdue, and control others in order to
achieve personal ends and desires. This results in weakening the general
society, and even worse, further weakening society’s emotionally weakest
citizens—the codependent collectivists. Conversely, this emotional weakness
empowers the radical collectivist part of society even further. The more
deprived the collectivist is—and thereby the more manipulative and
malignant—the stronger the collectivist.
Note: The political spectrum, known as right and left, is in
actuality being purposely manipulated. The fact is that the essence of freedom
lies in the proper limitation of government. Indisputably, throughout history
no source has proven itself more deadly and destructive than the authority
invested in government. While this is general knowledge to those who
enthusiastically advocate freedoms, most, unfortunately, are uninformed.
Accordingly, this creates the perfect environment for deception. Indeed, an
accurate political spectrum from right to left would undeniably begin with
“freedom” (e.g., non-intrusive government, self-sovereignty, and
self-determination), defined by “little or no government control.” Thus, the
political spectrum would end up on the left with “totalitarianism” (e.g.,
authoritarian dictatorial government, subjugation, and tyranny), defined by
“unlimited government control.” In accordance, a correct paradigm would begin
with ideals of “anarchy,” endorsing “no government.”
Next would come the ideals of “libertarianism,” also known
as “classical-liberalism,” endorsing “limited government.” Thereafter, would
come “modern liberalism,” also known as “social-liberalism,” endorsing “greater
government.” Ultimately, the spectrum would end with the ideals of “fascism,”
“socialism,” and “communism,” endorsing “totalitarian government.”
Conversely, perfect deception is achieved through
manipulating this spectrum by placing those who are in favor of egalitarianism
(the notion of social equality), also known as Marxism (e.g., communists and
socialists), on the left wing. This would place those who are not in favor of
social equality on the right wing, which is more than half of the political
spectrum, including fascists who are in favor of complete government control.
Although the fact is that communism, socialism, and fascism promote the same
set of radical collectivist ideals of “totalitarianism”—dictatorial intrusive
government. However, by affiliating genuine right-wingers—individuals in favor
of minimum government control— with totalitarian fascist regimes (e.g.,
Hitler’s “Nazism”), the perfect diversion is created. Hence, relying on
ignorance, the left and right paradigm is in fact a well-known method of
deception, known as “divide and conquer,” with one sole purpose: to create
confusion and so achieve emotional and intellectual control.’ ~ from “Manipulism
and the Weapon of Guilt: Collectivism Exposed” by Mikkel Clair Nissen
The coercive nature of narcissistic social collectivism
demands conformity to support the narrative which was created to protect the
system of compliance. It is as phony and false as the fake personas they cover themselves
in replete with died hair, tats, and piercings that disguise how ingenuine they
are. Aposematic coloring is a fascinating phenomenon in the animal kingdom
where bright, conspicuous colors signal danger to potential predators. Think of
the vivid hues of poison dart frogs or monarch butterflies. This coloring
serves as a warning, saying, "Stay away; I'm toxic!" Drawing a
parallel to narcissism, you might say that narcissists exhibit a kind of
"social aposematism." They often display traits—like grandiosity and
excessive confidence—to ward off criticism and attract admiration. Just as
aposematic coloring is a survival strategy in nature, narcissists' behaviors
are strategies to protect their self-esteem and maintain control over how they
are perceived by others. In both cases, it's about creating an image that
serves a protective function, and I can see right through them!
Today we aren't being governed, rather we are being lorded
over by a cadre of liars whose aim is to hide their extortion of the Canadian
taxpayer's money. This is a species of corruption so vile that it has now
become endemic to our utterly unscrupulous political class who no longer answer
to their constituents but rather to an international cartel of carpet baggers!
But why, precisely why have people been so taken in by the
transparent falsehoods of pathological narcissists? This will be the topic of
today discussion. So let us begin with this, make no mistake, Canada has been
captured by radical political Islam with all that implies. Murder, tyranny, and
illiberalism is being funded by Trudeau’s excessive taxation. For this reason,
it is my concerted opinion that Trudeau has committed treason. Since most
people are not deep thinkers nor do they care to develop an even rudimentary
understanding of the faith, philosophy, and cultural traditions that underpin
the Western way of life, many have surrendered themselves to cultural genocide
by the parasitical empathy being promoted in our universities' humanities
departments, the political class who have been indoctrinated by those
ideologues whose wicked creed is in turn being advanced by the government
funded 4th Estate. Almost everyone is sensing that something has gone deeply
awry with social cohesion, law and order, good government, and societal norms
but have become too preoccupied with everyday concerns to even ponder why we
are facing an existential crisis.
The answer to the emergence of the collectivist mindset in
Canada which has traditionally been a nation built on rugged individualism must
therefore be examined. To do that I will quote from Chapter Two on Mikkel Clair
Nissen’s seminal treatise on the pathological nature of socialist thinking. I
want to remind my audience that I would never have come to understand the “Malignant
Narcissistic Coercion” of democratic socialism had I note lived in Norway for a
few years. So let us examine what our friend Mikkel has to state about Scandinavian
mentality.
“Collectivists will read this book, but in an attempt to
deny the evidence, they will not really read it thoroughly. Instead, they
subconsciously will look for ways to distract themselves from the facts. Any
excuse is valid. If it is not looking for spelling mistakes, then it will be
looking for research errors. Then they would want to see proof of a PhD, yet
even a PhD would not be enough. Unless of course one uses the PhD to establish
how happy Danes are. A collectivist will always deny, belittle, and intimidate,
but never truly research. Severe pathological narcissism (more precisely a
mindset referred to in psychology as “magical thinking”) is the key to
collectivism’s progression, survival, and continuance.
I once sat admiring my daughter, aged six, doing crazy
things interactively with a children’s program on TV. At one point she glanced at
me, smiled, and said, “Am I not skilled daddy?” “Yes, you are very, very
clever,” I replied. The situation made me think about the mental freedom that
my daughter still possesses. A mental freedom still liberated from my country’s
oppressive collectivist mentality: the right to be her unique self and
confidently express herself freely. She will be deprived of this mental freedom
by Marxism’s powerful emotional iron grip here in Denmark if I do not teach her
how to protect herself from it. This mental prison is an oppressive
collectivist mentality that has been misunderstood and misinterpreted through
almost a century. It is perceived simply to be Scandinavian culture, described
as the Jante Law.
The Jante Law/Subliminal Conditioning (Malignant
Narcissistic Coercion)
Don’t think you are anything special!
Don’t think you are as good as us!
Don’t think you are wiser than us!
Don’t convince yourself that you are better than us!
Don’t think you know more than us!
Don’t think you are more important than us!
Don’t think you are good at anything!
Don’t laugh at us!
Don’t think anyone cares about you!
Don’t think you can teach us anything!
The Jante Law was first described in the novel “A
Fugitive Crosses His Track” in 1933 by the Danish author Axel Sandemose. His
observations and thoughts describe the consequence of more or less
three-quarters of a century of continuous advancement of oppressive
collectivist mentality in the Danish society. The fictional Danish town of
Jante lives by its own ten commandments, named the Jante Law. This slow
intellectual process of radicalization started roughly a few decades before The
Communist Manifesto was published in 1848 by the Germans Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels, when the utopian idea of socialism was originally presented
in the United States in 1825 by Robert Owen, a Welshman.
The Jante Law is unquestionably not a unique Scandinavian
phenomenon. The mentality is commonly known worldwide. In commonwealth
countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Great Britain, it is
referred to as tall poppy syndrome, a pejorative term that is more frequently
used in the most socialistic-influenced of these nations. The term is also
referred to as schadenfreude (referring to someone envious and scornful who
takes pleasure in demeaning others), a loanword used in English from the German
word schadenfroh that is commonly used in the democratic socialism countries of
Scandinavia (i.e., Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland) as well as in Russia.
Behind the former communist Iron Curtain, the mentality is also known as hell
(e.g., in Poland as Polish hell). In all cases, these syndromes are uniquely
linked to Marxism, the notion of social equality—all forms of fascism. Whether called
crab mentality in the Philippines (“If I can’t have it neither can you”) or the
Jante Law in Scandinavia (“Don’t think that you are more than others”), the
tall poppy syndrome in Marxist-influenced commonwealth countries (“Cutting down
the tall poppy”), or schadenfreude in former Nazi-occupied Germany, these
syndromes all describe the same condition of pathological narcissism that
thrives commonly in collectivism on undermining and is driven by severe
inferiority complex. Depending on how severely deprived the person’s
self-esteem is, the consequent result can be narcissistic personality disorder
(NPD).
Narcissistic behaviors occur as defense mechanisms,
described as the lack of ability to take criticism as a result of low
self-worth or feeling inferior in certain situations. We are all born as
narcissists and gradually mature our immature narcissistic ego into a healthy
subconscious adult identity. Unhealthy narcissism appears in this stage of
development if the process of the emerging individual self is by some means
disrupted. Should narcissistic behaviors or feelings reoccur frequently, be
strong or tough to control, this is then referred to in psychology as
pathological narcissism. Frequently, this is caused by poor standards set by
others, such as intervention by parents, friends, and society.
Hotchkiss’
seven deadly sins of narcissism
Hotchkiss identified what she called the seven deadly
sins of narcissism:
Shamelessness: Shame is the feeling that
lurks beneath all unhealthy narcissism and the inability to process shame in
healthy ways.
Magical thinking: Narcissists see
themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking.
They also use projection to dump shame onto others.
Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling
deflated may re-inflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
Envy: A narcissist may secure a sense of
superiority in the face of another person’s ability by using contempt to
minimize the other person.
Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable
expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because
they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on
their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an “awkward” or
“difficult” person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can
trigger narcissistic rage.
Exploitation: Can take many forms but
always involves the exploitation of others without regard for their feelings or
interests. Often the other is in a subservient position where resistance would
be difficult or even impossible. Sometimes the subservience is not so much real
as assumed.
Bad boundaries: Narcissists do not
recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not
extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as
well not exist at all. Those who provide narcissistic supply to the narcissist
are treated as if they are part of the narcissist and are expected to live up
to those expectations. In the mind of a narcissist, there is no boundary
between self and other. The narcissist feels emotionally threatened when other
individuals appear confident or challenging, creating an urge to belittle,
intimidate, or humiliate. This is referred to in psychology as malignant
narcissism. These emotions are caused by arrogance and envy, and are triggered
by criticism, undesired reality, facts, and insights, or anything that appears
superior to the narcissist’s “sense of worth,” characterized in psychology by
“the sense of entitlement.” What better place to be for the narcissist: to be
worshipped, to be in a superior mind-controlling position (such as psychiatry,
tutoring, media, or politics), or to be part of a complete collective society
adapted to these coercive, narcissistic societal manners, and the resultant
universal pathological narcissism, where everyone expresses themselves as
equals.
Though nearly an exact description of oppressive
collectivist mentality, Sandemose’s novel still has a few inconsistencies. One
example is that one is allowed to think greatly of oneself but is intimidated
into never expressing it in obvious ways. I have, therefore, carefully
clarified the mentality for which basis I elaborate in the following
description of the mentality’s behavior, that is, though minutely different,
the mentality known around the world as tall poppy syndrome.
The tall poppy syndrome, with its origin in Australia,
dates back to the 1860s, just after The Communist Manifesto was published. It
refers to a powerful yet common mentality that people of all countries are
subject to in some degree. Symptoms include bullying as a completely normal
part of any child’s process of building identity and self-esteem. Among adults,
contemptuous behavior and malignant narcissism is routinely performed by envious
immature people who are driven by severe pathological narcissism and lack
initiative, and as a result exploit the easy way by trying to bring down
surrounding individuals to their low level of accomplishment. Consequently,
depending on a country’s level of radical collectivist influence, the
mentality—when adopted by collectivists and continued into adulthood—is
unequivocally transformed into manipulism.” – excerpt taken from Chapter
Two of “Manipulism and the Weapon of Guilt: Collectivism Exposed” by Mikkel
Clair Nissen @ https://a.co/d/brNvrcq
As I have stated many times in my blogs and on my vodcasts,
without my experiences while living in an intensely social collectivist society
like Norway I would not have been prepared to expose the dangers of this vicious
manipulating mindset which now embodies the WOKE policies of our insidious
political class and bureaucracy that is endemic to the government of Justin Trudeau.
If anything shocks me it is how quickly we have been forced down an Alice in
Wonderland rabbit hole. I would never have believed that it was possible for
Canadians to exchange their traditional rugged individualism for a parasitical mindset
which is destroying social cohesion, economic prosperity, and the rule of law.
Yet here we are. As Trump shouted after rising to his feet when he was nearly
shot dead, “FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT”! I will never surrender my country to this vicious
mind virus without expending my all to end it!