Why ‘crazy making’ is de rigueur in big business and big politics

I haven’t written a blog post in some time so I apologize to those who care to read my rants. I promise you that today’s post will resonate with at least some of you. Have you ever been forced to call a service provider to end up in an endless loop of electronic phone entries so that you may speak with a real human being in the hopes of resolving an issue? It has been my experience that often the problem fails to be resolved even after repeatedly suffering through the same process. Yesterday I had an agent from Bell call me and ask if I would be interested in purchasing more of their services. Here is the thing, I just cancelled my Bell TV and internet services on November 30^th. When I asked the agent why I would renew Bell services since they had overcharged me and failed to supply me with the services for which I had paid, her reply was, “I am sorry you feel that way.” I answered, “This had nothing to do with my feelings, your firm failed to provide me with the services for which I have paid!” She then retorted smarmily, “There is no need to be angry!” ‘Crazy Making 101’, when caught with your hand in the cookie jar, blame the person you are ripping off for being annoyed. The inability to take responsibility and project blame onto the injured party has become a universal phenomenon and I believe I know why. I also know that these mega corporations can ONLY function in the manner in which they do because our government has created the regulatory nightmare that permits them to rip us off while choking out their smaller competitors.

But first, since nothing is new under the sun, let us examine our own history. Certainly the inability to assume responsibility is reflected profoundly by the manner in which both big government and big business operates. In the Anglo-sphere we were wise enough to put a system of checks and balances in place so that such tyranny could be kept in check. That system is founded on Magna Carta and Common Law which protect our inherent rights. All current excesses are a direct result of ignoring that legacy. There have been many times throughout history within the Anglo-sphere when people have been forced to take up arms in this ongoing struggle to reign in tyranny. Government has often be forced to be accountable to its citizenry, as opposed to special interests and wealthy political insiders.

Allow me to cite the example of the MacKenzie-Papineau Rebellion of 1837-1838. William Lyon MacKenzie was the first mayor of Toronto. He was also a Classical Liberal a la John Locke and Adam Smith who published a newspaper known as the ‘Colonial Advocate’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Advocate . This newspaper advocated for democratic reform in the Canadas. A wealthy class of political insiders known as the ‘Family Compact’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Compact  exercised most of the political, economic and judicial power in Upper Canada. MacKenzie was faced with a significant challenge to mobilize enough dissent to end their tyranny. His newspaper was the means by which he did so. He was the ‘fake media’ of his day. The Family Compact were enraged by MacKenzie’s rants and stopped at nothing in an attempt to shut his newspaper down. They simply wouldn’t bear him daring to state the truth about them and their undue influence over the legislature and the economy.

Permit me to quote from Wikipedia; “In 1824, Mackenzie established his most famous newspaper, the Colonial Advocate. It was initially established to influence voters in the elections for the 9th Parliament of Upper Canada. Mackenzie supported some characteristically British institutions, notably the British Empire, primogeniture and the clergy reserves, but he also praised American institutions in the paper.

The Colonial Advocate had financial difficulties, and in November 1824, Mackenzie relocated the paper to York. There, he advocated in favour of the Reform cause and became an outspoken critic of the Family Compact, an upper-class clique which dominated the government of Upper Canada. However, the newspaper continued to face financial pressures: it had only 825 subscribers by the beginning of 1825, and faced stiff competition from another Reform newspaper, the Canadian Freeman. As a result, Mackenzie had to suspend publishing the Colonial Advocate from July to December 1825. He purchased a new printing press in fall 1825 and resumed publication in 1826, now engaging in even more scurrilous attacks on leading Tory politicians such as William Allan, G. D'Arcy Boulton, Henry John Boulton, and George Gurnett. However, Mackenzie continued to amass debts, and in May 1826, he fled across the American border to Lewiston, New York to evade his creditors.

A mob of 11 young Tories, led by Samuel Jarvis, took advantage of Mackenzie's absence to exact revenge for the attacks on the Tories printed in the Colonial Advocate. Thinly disguising themselves as "Indigenous peoples of the Americas", they broke into the Colonial Advocate's office in broad daylight, smashed the printing press, and threw the type into Lake Ontario. The Tory magistrates did nothing to stop them and did not prosecute them afterwards.

Mackenzie took full advantage of the incident, returning to York and suing the perpetrators in a sensational trial, which propelled Mackenzie into the ranks of martyrs of Upper Canadian liberty, alongside Robert Thorpe and Robert Fleming Gourlay. Mackenzie refused a settlement of £200 (approximately the value of the damage) and insisted on trial. His legal team, which included Marshall Spring Bidwell, argued effectively and the jury returned a verdict of £625, far more than the amount of damage done to the press.

There are three implications of the Types riot according to historian Paul Romney. First, he argues the riot illustrates how the elite's self-justifications regularly skirted the rule of law they held out as their Loyalist mission. Second, he demonstrated that the significant damages Mackenzie received in his civil lawsuit against the vandals did not reflect the soundness of the criminal administration of justice in Upper Canada. And lastly, he sees in the Types riot “the seed of the Rebellion” in a deeper sense than those earlier writers who viewed it simply as the start of a highly personal feud between Mackenzie and the Family Compact. Romney emphasizes that Mackenzie’s personal harassment, the “outrage,” served as a lightning rod of discontent because so many Upper Canadians had faced similar endemic abuses and hence identified their political fortunes with his.^[5]

Mackenzie took advantage of the money and fame which the trial had brought him to re-establish his business on sound financial footing.”

I encourage my readers to read the entire article on MacKenzie I have posted from Wikipedia. You will learn of the challenges he faced as well as what the wealthy political insiders of his day did to silence him. Although the MacKenzie-Papineau Rebellion failed to overthrow the government, sufficient public awareness and the accompanying sympathy for the cause of liberty under law broke the stronghold of the Family Compact. By 1849 the Baldwin Act was passed, the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada were united as the ‘Province of Canada’, and we finally had achieved responsible government with limited suffrage, since only those who owned land and were male could vote. I quote from http://www.lsuc.on.ca/Great-Library/Blog/More-Ephemera_-The-Baldwin-Act/ “The Baldwin Act, also referred to as the Municipal Corporations Act, 1849, was Ontario’s first municipal statute. It was named after Robert Baldwin (1804-1858), who was co-premier and Attorney General at the time and at various other times lawyer and Law Society of Upper Canada Treasurer. The Act was passed in 1849, came into force on January 1, 1850, and was described in The Municipal Manual, 11th ed., as “it may be regarded as the Magna Charta of municipal government in Canada”’

The Magna Carta of municipal government indeed. A most fitting epithet for this vital step toward elected, responsible, limited government under the rule of law in Canada. Without MacKenzie and Papineau and their dedication to the cause of liberty under law this act would not have been passed in 1849. They had broken the Family Compact's grip which was referred to by Lord Durham as, "a petty, corrupt, insolent Tory clique". If you cannot see the similarities between this and our current political-economic situation then you are truly blind, stupid or both. Today we see wealthy political insiders who are deep in bed with big banks and big multinational conglomerates on a global scale! They are choking the life out of democracy and truly free economies within the nation states they influence. Just as political insiders did in the past, these oligarchs pillar and vilify all who dare report the truth about them. They call what has amounted to nothing short of prophecies as ‘fake news’! Brexit and Trump are only the beginning of proving them to be wrong.

I wish to remind you that MacKenzie won his case against the Family Compact’s attack on his presses and was awarded punitive damages because of Magna Carta and Common Law. The judge, who himself was a member of the Family Compact, could not disregard Common Law regardless of his personal sympathies. Our greatest hope resides in our noble heritage of liberty under law. One the current political class will do everything it can to make us forget. They will project and use crazy making as a thinly veiled excuse to rob us of our inherent rights. They will call us xenophobes and bigots. They will tell us that we don’t care for the common man when they are in fact his oppressors. Stick to your guns and remember that this moment of history is even more defining than the one MacKenzie and Papineau faced. We are up against a global cabal so insidious, so heinous, so evil that their only goal is to make us slaves to a system which propagates global unrest and instability while ignoring the rule of law. The current immigration crisis is proof of such. The current attempt to undermine the electoral college in America is another. The fact that Soros is cooperating with Justin Trudeau on immigration issues that only this sovereign country should decide as well as is funding a campaign to silence alt-media is further proof of this wicked globalist cabal. They are admittedly seeking to turn Canada into a 'post-national state'. That, good readers, is treasonous. God bless you all. I pray for this nation to awaken from its slumber!

When NAZIs party like it's 1939 - Europe in chaos

http://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/konzert-von-rechtsextremen_5-000-neonazis-schockieren-die-schweiz/42524780

With five thousand neo-NAZIs partying like it's 1939 in Switzerland, which has until now has been relatively immune to the trouble of the E.U. since it is not a member, there is proof that the oligarchs in power within the Schengen area have created the most volatile situation seen since NAZI's (Fascists) and Communists were vying to destroy Western Civilization. And it is worthy of note that it is still the same type of wealthy ideologues behind it. The same enemies of freedom who would rather argue over which flavour of totalitarian, big government, freedom-robbing, oligarchy they prefer. The majority of Europeans appear not to want limited government. The necessary separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government needed to create a system of checks and balances simply doesn't exist.  And, as in North America, an independent and diligent 4th Estate ready, willing, and able to criticize government is lacking. Europe has favoured oligarchs and tyrants in its past and continues to do so. Moreover, what Europe desperately needs today is a return to a recognition of the sovereignty of each nation state within it, a renewal of respect for each nation's distinct cultures, and the freedom to allow each nation to manage its own economy and relationships with their neighbours. National sovereignty within Europe has been torn apart by cultural Marxists who insist wrongly that all people are the same and all economies alike. Cultural relativism and historical revisionism are key elements of the Frankfurt School's socialist ideology https://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/. It is the basis for their plan to create a socialist cultural revolution. And, as Europe descends into chaos, there's proof it ain't workin'!

As badly, here at home folks have forgotten that we are founded on a tradition of government limited by law with the necessary system of checks and balances to prevent oligarchs from assuming too much power. The traditional understanding of left-right politics is utter nonsense. There are only those who want their government to answer to them versus those who are willing to surrender their personal and economic freedoms to the state. Just think of the illegal search and seizure powers we have given to agencies of the state since 911. The very foundations of government limited by Magna Carta and Common Law are under assault.

Here is an excerpt from Andre van Heerden's wonderful article, 'Are You Part Of The Leadership Crisis?' http://bizcatalyst360.com/are-you-part-of-the-leadership-crisis/  which explains why such ideologies have taken hold in the west. "Ideological thinking, as exemplified in the prejudice and bigotry that repress rational thought today, grows out of the rejection of the reality of objective truth, and the consequent belief that we are all free to make our own truth. An ideology is a fictitious reality that excludes all knowledge that doesn’t support its claims. It is an attempt to justify might over right. So the cultural silos we know as ideologies, the pseudo-rational manifestos of power and self-justification, like laissez faire liberalism, socialism, neo-fascism, neo-Marxism, libertarianism, technocracy, consumerism, racism, scientism, and the currently dominant model of globalisation, all arise from a widely held worldview, a metaphysical stance with no scientific grounding, that says that there is no such thing as truth, other than the reality we create for ourselves." 

This past weekend I even had a so called friend tell me that I was a Fascist since I believe in liberty. Obviously the poor fellow does not know that Fascism is a variant of Socialism with big business and big government deep in bed with one another. Fascist means 'to bundle' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_symbolism. Fascism personifies everything those of us who believe in law, order and good governance loath! It blew my mind that anyone who knows me could equate me with someone who would wish enormous state control over our lives! The government that governs least, governs best. Such is the ignorance and arrogance of our age where the common man no longer understands liberty. Sadly there is now a majority who haven't even noticed that our freedoms have been surrendered to the state.

When there is no 'debate' in the debate or America's fondness for snake oil salesmen

There just has to be some explanation for the farce that was broadcast the other night in the name of a 'debate'. Try as I might I just cannot get over the pain of watching it. It was agonizing listening to two fraudulent crooks lie about disclosing key information that would damn either. This has brought American politics to a new low. Two people who are under investigation for criminal activity are running for the highest office in the U.S.! Both are equally corrupt and perverse. Both were accusing one another of the same thing, namely fraud. Amazing. Both admitted sufficient culpability to make either completely unfit to hold public office, let alone be President of the United States. Yet many Americans and, yes, many Canadians, are deluded into believing this was about the left versus right political divide! There must be something that could account for the public's incredible inability to distinguish between jive and reality and I think I have found the probable cause.

Here is an excerpt from a forward written by Sam Blumenfeld in 'The New American' for 'The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America' by Charlotte Iserbyt; 'Charlotte Iserbyt has put her great exposé of the dumbing-down agenda of American education on the Internet, so that anyone can now read it and download it free of charge. The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America is a big book and so very important that anyone interested in the future of this country must read it. I wrote a Foreword for the book that basically explains what Charlotte achieved by her incredible research based on documents she took out of the files of the Department of Education in Washington, where she worked as a Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) during the first Reagan administration. She is the consummate whistleblower, with an overwhelming sense of responsibility as a public servant and a parent. Here’s the essence of what I wrote:Charlotte Iserbyt is to be greatly commended for having put together the most formidable and practical compilation of documentation describing the “deliberate dumbing down” of American children by their education system. Anyone interested in the truth will be shocked by the way American social engineers have systematically gone about destroying the intellect of millions of American children for the purpose of leading the American people into a socialist world government controlled by behavioral and social scientists.Mrs. Iserbyt has also documented the gradual transformation of our once academically successful education system into one devoted to training children to become compliant human resources to be used by government and industry for their own purposes. This is how fascist-socialist societies train their children to become servants of their government masters.

The successful implementation of this new philosophy of education will spell the end of the American dream of individual freedom and opportunity. The government will plan your life for you, and unless you comply with government restrictions and regulations your ability to pursue a career of your own choice will be severely limited.'

Reading posts over these past few days from supporters of each candidate has cemented my disgust as well as convince me that Charlotte Iserbyt is right. Firstly, because what was broadcast followed none of the rules of debating. Secondly, because neither candidate defended the Constitution. In fact both have made themselves a law unto themselves, have broken the law, and more damningly, admitted to doing so! Thirdly, neither had a plan as to how to encourage private investment and retire debt. Fourthly, both made promises without stating how their plans could be funded given America's crushing debt and failing economy. What they did mention was passing more business killing and restrictive legislation when the market is already too tightly regulated. Fifthly, both personify America's love of a sideshow. Both are snake oil salesmen selling a bogus product promised to cure all of your ills with one swallow. I am appalled at the level of gullibility required to buy into either candidate's hype and hyperbole. And finally, the separation of powers required to maintain democratic balance have failed. If it had not the judiciary would have had them both charged, even if they were not yet convicted in a court of the fraud both admitted to committing on air. One candidate even had the unmitigated gall to admit boldly that getting away with it made him 'smart'!

The three Branches of Government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial are kept separate to limit the power of each from assuming too much authority. In 1787, leaders from each of the states gathered to write the United States' Constitution. The Constitution sets forth how the United States will govern itself by creating a system that separates powers between the three differing branches of government. Why? Because absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hence the name 'limited government'. In order to maintain an effective democracy this is critical. To make these three bodies accountable to the public there must be a free and diligent Fourth Estate that is ready, willing and able to criticize all three branches of government. 

What we see today, however, is an utter failure of this entire process. The press is owned by the establishment. The three branches of government are not exercising their powers to limit one another. The result is 'STATISM' with a capital 'S'. Under such the voice of the people is silenced for that most politically correct of all reasons, namely, 'We are doing this for the good of the collective.' While the American Constitution guarantees the rights of the individual to be protected from big government, the current cadre of oligarchs have pulled a bait and switch. Every single collectivist and oppressive regime that has brought anguish, war and ruin to humanity has used the same reasoning, that the welfare of the collective outweighs that of the individual. When oligarchs determine what is good for us by ignoring the democratic will of the people the result is tyranny. The political class only desires more power.

Today we are witnessing the emergence of alternative media sources due to the failure of the Fourth Estate to fulfill its obligation to the public. In one regard I am pleased. It is an indication that not everyone is willing to ignore governments' excesses. What I do lament, however, is that alternative media often appeals to the lowest common denominator. While 'The Rebel' and 'Alex Jones' have their uses, I am not a fan of the hype and hyperbole they frequently employ in an attempt to make a point. It shows a lack of intelligence. By doing so they are stooping to the level of their opponents. If we are going to win the struggle for liberty under law we must make sensible and reasonable arguments. They will always trump the hucksterism of snake oil salesmen. People may be attracted to the circus for a performance or two but afterward they wish to kick the elephant shit off their boots, leave the foul odors of animal feces behind and go home to reality. Above all we need calm and sincere voices who can make an intelligent defence of limited government and liberty under law. Let us leave running a three ring circus to the political class, power mongers and oligarchs. They have certainly proven that is where they belong if the so called Presidential debate from September 26th is any indication.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/books/item/6443-the-deliberate-dumbing-down-of-america

'Postnational' Canada and the fallacy of the global village

Such a buzz word globalism. It sounds so modern, so now, so progressive ... but oh, so what? The global financier and 'philanthropist' George Soros is omnipresent in the mad rush to create a post-national world. But to what end?  Now he has teamed up with Justin Trudeau and the UN in order to export the Canadian Liberal Party's model for unvetted immigration to the world; http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/private-refugee-sponsorship-soros-un-1.3769639. They hope to encourage and help fund the progressive faithful to leap into a bright new 'global village' post-national reality where all mankind lives in harmony and Soros and his globalist cronies control the economy. Except people are not living in harmony, and economies are not that easily predicted or controlled. Soros and his fellow globalists actually increase tensions through their interventionism. Why, you may ask? Because their model for a global village is based upon the erroneous belief that culture does not matter. That secular humanism will replace faith based religions. That big government can solve the world's ills. Except it hasn't.

Angela Merkel has finally admitted that her government has lost control of Germany's migrant crisis; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3800544/Outrage-Angela-Merkel-s-migration-policy-blamed-rising-violence-Germany-government.html. Once again we see right pitted against left in Europe. Brexit was a cry of desperation from the British people who wish to take back control of their borders and their economy. The single market has failed to produce the economic prosperity that it had promised for the very reason that it was created. It is too controlling, too intrusive, too restrictive, too bureaucratic, and wealth is not distributed effectively using the EU's model. It is administered by powerful unelected oligarchs whose decisions cannot be vetoed by the European Union's own parliament. It has become, in effect, the 4th Reich with Germany as the strongest controlling voice in Brussels. But how did this happen? What are the ideological foundations for this nightmare? We must dare to ask the difficult questions. Especially now in an age where even asking such questions is deemed to be a radical act.

The answer is both frightening and damning. It was created by NAZI officers under the influence of socialist think tanks such as the Frankfurt School; http://www.eu-facts.org/en/background/dark_roots_europe_lecture.html, http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/470967/The-EU-was-HITLER-S-idea-and-it-proves-Germany-WON-the-Second-World-War-claims-new-book, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1179902/Revealed-The-secret-report-shows-Nazis-planned-Fourth-Reich--EU.html Yes, the NAZI's, who were fascists, planned it all.

You cannot make stuff like this up. The entire 20th Century in Europe has been a struggle, not for freedom, but rather for which version of big government statist control would emerge the victor. The idea of government limited by law, of fair play as opposed to raison d’état, and of the individual before the collective is almost unknown in Europe. Fascism (the bundling of big government and business, just as we have in the EU) permits private ownership of industry but the government controls how, what, where and when goods and services will be provided, which also includes influencing cost through levies and taxes. Under communism the state runs everything. Either way, neither favours personal or economic freedom. But how did Marxism get reworked into an ideology that people would buy into since modern statism is a combination of radical socialism and fascism?

The Frankfurt School provided the framework. After the initial failures of Marxism, pseudo intelligentsia from the Frankfurt School asserted the following in an attempt to repackage communism; 'What differentiated the West from Russia, Lukacs identified, was a Judeo-Christian cultural matrix which emphasized exactly the uniqueness and sacredness of the individual which Lukacs abjured. At its core, the dominant Western ideology maintained that the individual, through the exercise of his or her reason, could discern the Divine Will in an unmediated relationship. What was worse, from Lukacs' standpoint: this reasonable relationship necessarily implied that the individual could and should change the physical universe in pursuit of the Good; that Man should have dominion over Nature, as stated in the Biblical injunction in Genesis. The problem was, that as long as the individual had the belief—or even the hope of the belief—that his or her divine spark of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation which Lukacs recognized as the necessary prerequisite for socialist revolution.' In order for their ideology to take hold they had to attack individualism and replace that with collective idealism. The tool they identified as most effective in advancing this ideology was political correctness. In a politically correct society it would become impossible for anyone to assert the rights of the individual over that of the perceived welfare of the collective.

 

As incredible as this sounds here in Canada, one of the freest countries in the world, we have a Prime Minister who asserts these very things. Who states openly and unashamedly that the nation he has been elected to lead has no 'core identity' and that we now live in the first post-national country on earth! If his belief that we lack 'core identity'  as a nation doesn't result in Canadians feeling hopeless and alienated, then I don't know what could. Can you recall any former Prime Minister who had the sinister gall to make such an assertion? With these words Justin Trudeau has declared himself in opposition to the Dominion and the very laws by which we were founded under God. Trouble ahead? No, it is already upon us.

Liberal blinders and cognitive dissonance

The modern 'retrogressive progressive' replete with his blinders

Let me set up my blog post with this, 'Cognitive Dissonance (Leon Festinger) According to cognitive dissonance theory, there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among their cognitions (i.e., beliefs, opinions). When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance.' from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/cognitive-dissonance.html . Ah, it appears as though we have probable cause for the 'retrogressive progressives'' incredible ability to talk out of both sides of their mouth at the same time. 

In my previous blog posted last Friday  https://populistadvocate.blogspot.ca/2016/09/why-queen-of-green-kathleen-wynne-hit.html I discussed how sufficiently evolved incompetence is functionally indistinguishable from malice. National Post has since published two articles which support my arguments regarding the Ontario Provincial Liberal's failed 'green energy' policies; the first is entitle 'Former McGuinty staffer charged in Ont. gas plants scandal to run B.C. Liberals’ re election campaign' by  Ashley Csanady September 13, 2016. 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/former-ontario-bureaucrat-charged-in-gas-plants-scandal-to-run-b-c-liberals-re-election-campaign . I quote from that article, 'A former provincial staffer facing criminal charges related to Ontario’s gas plants scandal has been tapped to run the B.C. Liberals’ re-election campaign. Laura Miller, former deputy chief of staff to then-premier Dalton McGuinty, is set to go to trial in September 2017 for her alleged role in the scandal, but first she’ll try to help B.C. Premier Christy Clark win re-election in a vote expected in early May of next year. Miller identified herself as “2017 Campaign Director” in an eblast sent to B.C. Liberal supporters on Tuesday.

David Livingston, McGuinty’s chief of staff at the time, is also set to go to trial alongside Miller for their alleged role in the deletion of emails related to the cancellation of two gas plants in the Greater Toronto Area.

They each face one count of breach of trust, one of mischief in relation to data, and one count of misuse of a computer system to commit the offence of mischief. Both have declared their innocence and have said they will fight the charges in court.' 

Malice or incompetence? It is so difficult to say for sure, however, even the most loyal Liberal must admit something is desperately wrong with this picture! I also have to wonder why McGuinty has not been implicated given his staffers would not have unilaterally tampered with data without being given direction to do so by their boss.

But that ain't all folks, then there is this; 'Ontario Liberals try to fix the problems they created with more decidedly liberal solutions' by Matt Gurney September 12, 2016; http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-ontario-liberals-try-to-fix-the-problems-they-themselves-created-with-more-decidedly-liberal-solutions I ask you, when has the government not created a problem only to emerge as the only ones who can solve the very problems they have created? This is a classic examples of the law of unintended consequences driven by the 'progressive' need for control. ‘The law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is that actions of people—and especially of government—always have effects that are unanticipated or unintended. Economists and other social scientists have heeded its power for centuries; for just as long, politicians and popular opinion have largely ignored it.’, from ‘Unintended Consequences’ by Rob Norton; http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.html

Finally, we have this from the man-feminist Justin Trudeau himself; ‘‘Feminist’ Trudeau under attack for attending gender-segregated event at Ottawa mosque’ by David Akin, on September 13^th from the National Post, and I quote from that article, ‘“Right now we have these political leaders — ironically, politically liberal leaders — who are just putting blinders on their eyes about their values,” Asra Nomani said in a telephone interview from Washington, D.C. Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who describes herself as a liberal, is the author of Standing Alone: An American Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam.

“That’s the big differential for liberals, they fancy themselves as honouring the women’s body and yet the segregation by its very definition hyper-sexualizes women’s bodies. That’s the great irony.”

For the Premier of Ontario and the Prime Minister to believe that we will not find fundamental inconsistencies between their governments' actions versus what they claim is indicative of how utterly out of touch with reality and the public they are. They have become poster children for ‘Cognitive Dissonance’. No wonder good citizens are getting hip to the witless insincerity of their politically correct rhetoric. Rhetoric which contradicts their own stated value system. Once again facts, evidence, and reality are dismissed. Worse, those who are growing wise to their high handed pseudo-morality are being dismissed by them as well. The emperor’s new suit of clothes is not looking too good in spite of all Trudeau's ‘sunny ways’. Good hair alone won't cut it. Both the province and the nation will not brook the Liberals' nonsense for much longer.

Why 'Queen of Green' Kathleen hit the reset button

In my previous blog, 'On fundamental laws of politics and hypocrisy in a "progressive age"' https://populistadvocate.blogspot.ca/2016/09/on-fundamental-laws-of-politics-and.html I promised to discuss the environmental impact of Lithium-Ion batteries. I can think of no better time than now when Ontario’s ‘Queen of Green’, Premier Kathleen, has just prorogued Ontario’s parliament. The fiscal mismanagement of her government, largely a result of the Liberal Party’s failed environmental initiatives, has given Ontario the highest sub-sovereign debt in the world. Policies which are so radical they have caused a staggering loss of private investment in Ontario, along with the highest hydro rates in North America. The zeal with which Wynne’s government has pursued their environmental policies is based upon pseudo-science and fearmongering over climate change. It is evidence that the Liberals have a ‘cult-like’ adherence to ideology. Facts and evidence which contradict their belief system are dismissed out of hand. People who espouse views contrary to the Liberal Party are marginalized and silenced, hence Wynne's need to prorogue parliament.

In an article from the Globe and Mail written by Duff Conacher published on Aug. 13th, 2013 entitled ‘Proroguing Parliament without cause? Canadians want it banned’, Conacher wrote, ‘While it is normal for a prime minister or provincial premier to prorogue the legislature to set out a new government agenda, many prorogations in the past decade have been for what many see as unjustifiable lengths of time, and for unjustifiable reasons. The rules are not clear and enforcement is ineffective – and a large majority of Canadians want these problems fixed.’ Indeed, we do. All of the major parties in Canada are guilty of hitting the ‘reset button’ and we Canadians are fed up with our democratic right to be heard on the floors of our Houses of Commons being tampered with by oligarchs who hope to cling to power no matter what.

Imagine what would happen in a private business if the senior manager had caused similar havoc to their firm such that it could no longer pay dividends to its shareholders. How long would he or she remain CEO? In the case of the Liberals, they not only cannot provide the investors (taxpayers') dividends, they have indebted us to the point where our children’s children will be paying for our government’s blatant incompetence. My wife remarked regarding the old saw about ‘spending like a drunken sailor’, 'that at least a drunken sailor will go back to the ship when he runs out of money'. Yet these mismanagers of the public purse, and betrayers of the public trust, just keep spending more borrowed money. Nor are they even smart enough to help create sufficient economic freedom where there might be some hope of retiring the debt. Have you ever heard about, or read about, just one of them talking about how to encourage growth and investment in the private sector? No, but they sure know how to grow the public one!

Ah, but of what of Lithium-Ion batteries you ask? Let us examine the Four Laws of Ecology formulated by physicist and ecologist, Barry Commoner. Since he is a darling of the environmentalists, 'progressives' should listen to him:

‘1) Everything is connected to everything else - humans and other species are connected/dependent on a number of other species.

2) Everything must go somewhere - no matter what you do, and no matter what you use, it has to go somewhere.

3) Nature knows best - Like it says, nature knows best.

4) There is no such thing as a free lunch - Everything you do, must have a reason behind it.’

No free lunch, eh? No, everything must come from somewhere and go to somewhere else. You cannot make an omelet without breaking eggs. You cannot power a vehicle without energy. All energy is extracted and stored at some cost to the environment by turning matter into energy. So states the laws of conservation of matter and energy. Seriously, did these ‘progressives’ fail high school chemistry? Here is a list of articles on the actual cost to the environment from the use of Lithium-ion batteries used in powering ‘green cars’;

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/hold-smugness-tesla-might-just-worse-environment-know/

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/02/14/think-your-tesla-is-saving-the-environment-think-a.aspx

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green-think/

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/others/opinion/no-you-are-not-saving-the-environment-by-driving-a-tesla-821950

http://www.lithiummine.com/lithium-mining-and-environmental-impact

It is appalling to think that Wynne, who is a teacher, is so utterly ignorant of science. No wonder generation ‘Snow Flake’, who have been educated by her ilk, are so self-entitled and unaware of the real world and the laws that govern nature. The Liberal government’s closure of coal and gas fired power stations did not take into consideration that such technology may be used with much lower risk to the environment if scrubbers and other means were used to allow them to operate more cleanly. For those of you interested, here are a few articles on clean coal technology;

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/education/energylessons/coal/coal_cct2.html

http://insideenergy.org/2016/01/06/coal-fired-power-plants-clean-up-their-act/  

The provincial Liberals are still suffering from the power plant scandal yet went full steam ahead with their plans anyway. Their hubris would seem to know no bounds. Finally, here are stats and facts about wind power, ‘Ontario Wind Turbines Ontario has the most expensive electricity in North America. The result of subsidized, over-priced wind power that Ontario doesn’t need. November 1, 2015: rates increase by 8.7%. January 1, 2016: rates increase by another 10%. May 1, 2016: rates increase by another 2.5 cents per kWh because “Ontario didn’t sell enough power over the winter”’, from http://www.windontario.ca/.
  

This is not the best your government can do. These stats are either the result of a wicked plan to undermine the province that would make Mike Myers’ ‘Dr. Evil’ blush or the result of incompetence so monumental that it is shocking anyone so inept could have their hand on the province’s helm. Remember Clark’s Law?: “Sufficiently advanced incompetence is functionally indistinguishable from malice.” Ontario can and must do better!

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-ontario-liberals-try-to-fix-the-problems-they-themselves-created-with-more-decidedly-liberal-solutions

On fundamental laws of politics and hypocrisy in a "progressive age"

Once again Dr. John Robson http://www.thejohnrobson.com/ has inspired this blog. I am an unabashed disciple of Robson for the following reason. In an age of pundits who often wax with vitriol and venom against whatever flavour of governmental tomfoolery is the most current, Robson resists such temptation. He expresses himself reasonably and logically while founding his discourse upon our legacy of government limited by law. Historical revision and cultural relativity have no place in his arguments. Being a professor of history he understands history too well to engage in such. I quote Antonov's Observation on Santayana's Law: ‘There is a mistaken proverb which tells us that those who are ignorant of the past are condemned to repeat it. In fact, they're lucky if they're allowed to repeat it. More probably, they're condemned to something even worse than the past. This is doubly true of those who believe that their ignorance somehow makes them morally superior to those who don't share it.' (Spoken by the fictional Admiral Ivan Antonov in David Weber and Steve White, "In death ground".) Robson seeks to empower his readers so that we as a society will not repeat our past errors. There is no wringing of hands in desperation nor talking down to the ignorant plebes, rather he identifies areas of concern and suggests solutions. He believes that we can and should do better.

In Full Comment from Sept. 6th's National Post Robson wrote an article entitled, ‘John Robson: Apple tax decision shows that Britain was right to leave the EU'. Pournelle's Iron Law explains the point Robson made in his article: ‘In any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representative[s] who work to protect any teacher, including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.' The E.U. is run by unelected oligarchs in Brussels while its parliament cannot even veto their decisions. Robson wrote: ‘Remember Robert Conquest's Third Law of Politics? "The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies."' Case in point: the European Union recently ordered Ireland to collect €13 billion ($18.72 billion) in taxes that Apple doesn't even owe." Remember Muggeridge's Law?: ‘Satire can never compete with real life for its sheer absurdity.'

On the falseness of progressive oligarchies such as the E.U., Sumner's Law explains why progressivism is undemocratic: ‘The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. [A and B] ignore entirely the source from which they must draw all the energy which they employ in their remedies, and they ignore all the effects on other members of society than the ones they have in view. The State cannot get a cent for any man without taking it from some other man, and this latter must be a man [C] who has produced and saved it. This latter is the "Forgotten Man". [The title of Amity Shlaes' book about the Great Depression and the New Deal pays homage to Sumner.]'

In my previous blog entitled, ‘The truth is stranger than fiction in a "progressive age"' I made the point that there is no need to exaggerate or prevaricate in order to cite concrete examples of the utter madness of ‘progressive' politics. The current flood of rhetoric from Trudeau's government regarding, ‘Canada is back' is a case in point. The Liberal government's constant attempt to paint our Canadian identity in the "progressive" image of the Liberal Party is not only false, it is dangerous. Canada and its people cannot, nor should not, be defined by the politics of any particular political party. We should be defined by the values of liberty under law expressed by a functional constitution which recognizes that our rights are inherent to our person. As importantly, no matter what party is currently in power, our elected representatives represent all Canadians, not merely those who voted them into power. They were elected to represent all their constituents irrespective of who they voted for. The assumption that the citizen must adhere to the values of whatever party is in power in order to 'be Canadian' is patently false. Moreover, that party has no right to define who we are as a people. Their job is to represent their constituents in parliament, period, and uphold the constitution. It is we the people who define what values we shall embrace and what values we shall eschew. Ottawa and many provincial legislatures throughout Canada are completely out of touch with the real needs of their citizens and therefore are failing to serve the public good. They need to be reminded that they are not our masters but our servants.

Finally, regarding public good, I wish to cite a speech given by Rex Murphy at a conference held in Alberta back in November of 2013. Rex spoke on how vital western oil is to the nation. I can state without fear of contradiction that if a traditional liberal like Rex can deliver such a scathing indictment of progressive stupidity one would assume the party faithful would have listened. Sadly, they have not. Canada needs a pipeline. We need ethical oil, not Saudi oil. Everything we use is made from it. Even the keys on the laptop I am currently punching like a madman were made from petroleum. With Wynne pricing electricity ever higher due to her so called ‘green initiatives', oil is even more important to the economy. Wynne's initiatives don't even look at the real environmental hazards behind the use of electric vehicles. Few mention the hazards posed by the lithium batteries required to power them. I will save that topic for next time, though. Please watch the video of Rex's impassioned plea. Listen to him tell how vital Alberta was to the nation's economy and in particular in helping lessen the blow on Newfoundlanders after the collapse of their cod fisheries. Listen to Rex tell about the greening of the oil sands projects. Listen to him speak on the environmental miracles he witnessed when he visited the oil sands.  And read how the 'oppressive progressives' tried to silence one of their own for doing so.

As Professor Robson has so often demonstrated, there is no need for us to wring our hands in desperation. We require solutions. Namely, demand that your elected representative support building a pipeline from Alberta to the east to renew use of Canadian ethical oil. Canada can and should do better!

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/rex-murphys-pro-oil-sands-speech-prompts-cbc-review-journalistic-rules

https://youtu.be/erh8Ew8ImP8

The truth is stranger than fiction in a "progressive age"

“Give me lust, baby.
Flash.
Give me malice.
Flash.
Give me detached existentialist ennui.
Flash.
Give me rampant intellectualism as a coping mechanism.
Flash.” 
― Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” 
― Edward R. Murrow

“Whoever controls the media, controls the mind” 
― Jim Morrison

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance” 
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

and finally a word from someone who understood propaganda;
“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” 
― Joseph Goebbels

We can see that controlling the dialogue is vital. It is often said that the left deliberately falsifies information in order to start a conversation that they wish to control. Take for example this excerpt from an article written by Jonah Goldberg from June 16th's New York Post, entitled, "The left only wants conversation it controls"

"Conversations! Glorious conversations! What more can you ask for? 

The other day, former CBS News darling Katie Couric was asked about the scandal swirling around her anti-gun-documentary — specifically, the fact that she deceptively edited a gun-rights group’s response to a question to make the members seem like dangerous idiots.

Couric and her producer are guilty of outright deception. But her response at the New York event was amusingly revealing.

“I can understand the objection of people who did have an issue about it,” Couric said. (The “it” here is the deliberate falsifying of the truth). “Having said that, I think we have to focus on the big issue of gun violence. It was my hope that, when I approached this topic, that this would be a conversation starter.”

Well, OK then. After all, who denies that starting conversations — or, as they often call them in academia, “dialogues” — is the highest aspiration there is?

For instance, a Central Michigan University professor claimed last year that she was punched in the face at a Toby Keith concert for being a lesbian. She later admitted she actually punched herself, but said it was worth it because she wanted to start a dialogue."

Interesting, isn't it? There are clear parallels in that article with the methods "social progressives" have used with every totalitarian regime one could possibly mention. They sacrifice truth in order to make a point that supports their false dialectic. But what if I were to tell you that I am interested in having a conversation that is only factual? I will, for the moment, forgo writing on matters of faith and deal rather with substantive facts that are provable and tangible.

Firstly, social progressives are not the only ones who are guilty of this sin. I have read many memes from conservatives, or those who purportedly believe themselves to be, that use pseudo information in an attempt to make a point. If one needs to resort to lying to defend a moral philosophy then that philosophy is woefully wanting. What I suggest may also be wanting are the wits to develop a reasoned argument.

Secondly, the traditional understanding of the left/right political divide is practically useless. It is used by banksters, multinationals, big governments and mass media (that they control) to keep us bickering amongst ourselves so that we never get wise to their real plan, namely control. There are really only those who believe that big governments, multinationals and big banks must shape our lives versus those who believe in freedom. That freedom can only be achieved under limited government. The only proven successful limits on government are ones based upon a separation of powers and laws as defined by a constitution which was designed to defend our inherent rights. In order for those constitutions to be effective they must recognize that our rights are indeed inherent to our very being and NOT awarded to us by the state. A limited system of governance must have the necessary checks and balances in place to prevent too much power from being given to any one entity since absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Thirdly, allow me to cite an example of what will happen if such limits are bypassed and/or ignored. Max Hermansen, maxblogg.blogg.no is a friend of mine. A very decent chap who is a retired Norwegian Naval Commander. He used to teach foreign students in Oslo. In his class there were many students from Muslim countries. His students discovered that Max has a homosexual son. They began to say many hateful things about Max's son, even mentioning an "honour killing". Needles to say Max told them he would not tolerate such remarks in his classroom. The students then filed a complaint. What do you think the school did? That's right, as a result Max was let go. Punishing the students for making such remarks is viewed as racist because of the students' heritage. If the law, the very rules, that govern civil society are not blind to race, creed and colour, then there can be no justice. Groups of people have no special rights, but each and every individual has every right. If the law is based upon equality and it is illegal to call for the harm of another person based upon their sexual orientation and the authorities choose to ignore the threats because of the affiliations of the people who made them, then that law is not worth the paper upon which it is written! Fortunately Max won a huge settlement. One over which the leftist media in Norway raged. The issue did not need to go before a judge either, it was settled out of court. I can only surmise that the school wished to avoid the issue going to trial for fear of negative publicity. 

I should also mention that Max had a used book store as well. It was a wonderful dusty old shop which expressed Max's bohemian nature. But what do you think happened to his shop? Can you guess? Someone, or some persons, trashed his book store and covered it with Swastikas. What the "perps" don't realize is in accusing Max of being a NAZI they were doing exactly what NAZI's did, namely preventing people from accessing books. Max was forced to close it as a result. Now this leaves a very obvious question. Who are the real fascists in this disgusting tale of politically correctness on lysergic diethylamide? This level of insanity is straight out of Alice in Wonderland. If I had not known Max personally and followed his quest for justice I would not have believed this possible. 

For those who care, Max is doing very well indeed today. He is reno'ing condos in Oslo and recouping his losses. He is now also head of Pegida in Norway, and for good reason given what he has gone through. I wish my dear friend the very best. I have posted his blog link here and invite you all to follow him. He stands for liberty in a country where government often exceeds its mandate to govern.

Lastly, there is no need to exaggerate the facts when you have the facts straight. You just can't make up stuff like Max's story. I have shared it with his permission. Thank you Max for permitting me to do so. It is an example of what happens when a nation becomes too complacent, too trusting of their elected leaders who are in fact betraying the trust the public has placed in them. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Stay posted for more folks. I value my readers and need your input. It is time to put on our marching boots and get active in renewing liberty under law! 

Max's shop after the attack: