My Dominion Day (Canada Day) message to my fellow Canadians

 I drove past parliament today. As I came up Sussex and turned right onto Wellington to the Hill police were everywhere in preparation for the Freedom Protest which will take place on Canada Day. You know, even using the phrase “Canada Day” sticks in my craw. The official name of our country is the Dominion of Canada and therefore the day to me will always be Dominion Day. This is the name which celebrates our autonomy from Great Britain as an emergent nation. After all, no child should forget their parent, nor ignore their relationship to them even when they become an autonomous adult exercising their own judgement and freely making their own choices. The scriptures warn us about the hubris of the child who dishonours their parents and the fate that dishonour will bring upon the offspring.

So, when I drove past parliament and its magnificent buildings I was struck with an overwhelming realization, that the inhabitants of those august and beautiful buildings have become like hermit crabs. The outside appearance of the Hill remains little changed but those who inhabit those buildings have completely rejected the system of governance that served to create the government of the Dominion of Canada. 

"Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin" might as well be written above the doors of its main entrance.

Here is what these words mean:

Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.

Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.

Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.

From Brian Lilley in the Toronto Sun: “Tamara Lich nabbed for breach of bail while repeat violent offenders use revolving door of court system”

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-tamara-lich-nabbed-for-breach-of-bail-while-repeat-violent-offenders-use-revolving-door-of-court-system?fbclid=IwAR3I_72Wj7JPnOHL1it4p1efi8Np8d-dDN6qZIEW3NEf9h991C_ZQwr8yAk

“Without downplaying the impact of the freedom convoy on residents of Ottawa’s downtown core, those are hardly charges that would normally see this kind of action by police and prosecutors. Lich has no prior criminal record and has not been convicted of the charges she now faces.”, stated Brian Lilley. Of course not, because Ms. Lich is a political prisoner in jail purely due to her having the unmitigated gall to believe that the Dominion of Canada is a free country governed by the Rule of Law.

Our neo-totalitarian cadre of hermit crabs fear what will take place this Dominion Day here in Ottawa, hence the police presence I mentioned earlier. James Topp will arrive in Ottawa this Friday after marching on foot from Vancouver. Here is why he is marching and who he is if you have not heard of him and his incredible journey from our left coast, and I do mean left.

“James Topp is a current serving soldier who has served in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) for 28 years. James is in the process of being released and as such is a unique case of a current serving member engaging in peaceful protest openly. The Canada Marches team, and Canadians have come to know James as a man with great humility, integrity, drive, leadership, and a desire to serve. Canada is getting to know him as well along the road.

James is keen to protect his mindful integrity by questioning the orders he is being given. He believes in, and talks about, rising above the classification of thought. He is keen to avoid identity politics, talking in circles about how we got here, and wants to explore solutions as well as open dialogue. He is often heard saying some version of:

"Can't we all just have respect and compassion for each other, and call it a day?".

WHY IS JAMES TOPP MARCHING

This march exists for 3 reasons:

1. James is protesting federal government mandates that require, as a condition for employment or continued employment, vaccination, testing, quarantine, and/or isolation;

2. James has stepped forward to speak on behalf of those personnel employed by the federal government or otherwise who have been denied access to employment and services, who have lost income and have suffered from damaged relationships due to the imposition of a medical procedure;

3. James has also stepped forward to speak on behalf of those who have, through the introduction of false constructs surrounding choices and consequences, been pressured into taking part in medical procedures that they would not otherwise have accepted;

MISSION STATEMENT:

We rise to serve Canadians with honesty, respect, and compassion, for the purpose of reuniting our people. We do this, with the intention of ensuring our government upholds the laws that support Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

I both salute and honour Tamara and James, but what disgusts me is that a nation founded on the Rule of Law, and limited constitutional government with the separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judiciary has permitted the floor of parliament and our sacred institutions such as our courts to become inhabited by creatures who desecrate their offices. These elitists have no respect for this heritage and simply refuse to defend our sacred rights under proper and transparent parliamentary oversight. Our nation as an experiment in peace, order, and good government has failed under the mishandling by the filthy claws of a pack of hermit crabs who exist in mere pretence to what their high office has called them to be! And worse, we have placed them there! It is time to place them all in a crab bucket where they can be boiled, cracked, and consumed with garlic butter for at least then they will have served some purpose if only to satiate the nation’s appetite for shellfish. We must create legislation which will allow us to hold such treasonous oligarchs responsible to recall them for the malfeasance and corruption for which they have so often proven themselves to be guilty.

The ever morphing Marxist agenda

 

I do my best work when irritated. Dr. Gad Saad who is an evolutionary psychologist and the author of “The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense”, a USA TODAY NATIONAL BESTSELLER, advises us to awaken our inner honey badger in order to motivate us to attack the ever-morphing inane ideological possession of the current prevalent social orthodoxy. Well today my inner honey badger woke up due to a remark someone left on my wife’s Facebook page. She was lamenting the lack of customer focus in modern business and indeed in the manner in which government services are provided to those who depend on them being delivered in a manner that accurately and efficiently addresses the needs of the client. Perhaps she might have worded her concerns better so I added the following comments to her post which would also address the smart-ass who told my wife communism is dead and therefore is no longer a societal concern.

His tone was patronizing and was intended to cow my wife into adopting his need for social consensus. What angers me about this is that here I have yet another example of someone manifesting a stereotype I absolutely loathe, namely that of someone who is undoubtedly a part of the prevalent social orthodoxy mocking someone who recognizes why this orthodoxy is both dysfunctional and dangerous. Communism may be dead in the form originally devised by Marx and Engels but that certainly does not mean it didn’t spawn a thousand offspring before it kicked the bucket. Therefore, I posted the following to address this undeniable reality.

I believe you may have meant to say why is there a lack of focus on the customer today? Of course, it has to do with social collectivism. After Alexander Solzhenitsyn published the Gulag Archipelago it became next to impossible for any but the most blatantly murderous to believe that Marxism wasn't ideologically unworkable. However, that only caused the faithful to invent new ideologies which trace their ideological DNA back to Marx and Engels. The Frankfurt School with its Critical Theory created a new victim versus victimizer doctrine that is alive and well in today's WOKE ideology which is practically universally accepted. It's been combined with the literary relativism and criticism of Foucault and Derrida who were leading literary critics in developing French Postmodernism. These two schools of ideological thought have virtually taken over the Academy today. Since these ideologies have created D.I.E. (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) politics there can be no room for the individual since their ideology denies that we are an individual, but rather are mere extensions of the "intersectional identity group" to which we belong. Under these mind worms, for that is what they are, the end user, the customer, indeed the very idea of "I", must die under the knives of those whose aims are to create social consensus. This in a nutshell is the essence of thinking underpinning the modern welfare state with its Central Planning, whacky green ideology which isn’t actually renewable, the species of social engineering foisted by those who deny the binary nature of our sexuality, their cloying demand for censorship and uniformity, in other words, NORWAY AND CANADA. Yeah, Communism died but it's mutant children not only live on but have completely captured the Academy and our governments!

A better explanation of the left versus right political divide

The left versus right political spectrum is largely derived from the French Revolution. However, it fails to define in useful terms a political system which is based on individual liberty, personal autonomy, with a free market economy versus a system based upon central planning, social engineering, and the social collectivism of the welfare state as being the two extremes of political thought. Ultimately if the state comes to control all aspects of life itself the result will be totalitarian government.

The following excerpt is taken from an article entitled “What to Know About the Origins of 'Left' and 'Right' in Politics, From the French Revolution to the 2020 Presidential Race” by Madeleine Carlisle originally published on Sept 12, 2019 

 https://time.com/5673239/left-right-politics-origins/?fbclid=IwAR37C-Jc79kM8DAxDi1eNJTeDT1c-phLATfEoBXLhyK5XZe2krpj25wNOrg

What are the origins of the political terms ‘left’ and ‘right’?

“The story begins in France, in the summer of 1789, explains Patrice Higonnet, a professor emeritus of French history at Harvard University. As the French Revolution gained steam, an angry mob had just stormed the Bastille. The National Assembly assembled to act as the revolution’s government. 

And the assembly had a principal goal: writing a new constitution. One of the main issues the assembly debated was how much power the king should have, says David A. Bell, a professor of early modern France at Princeton University. Would he have the right to an absolute veto? As the debate continued, those who thought the king should have an absolute veto sat on the right of the president of the assembly, and those who thought he should not — the more radical view — sat on the left of the president of the assembly. In other words, those who wanted to hew closer to tradition were on the right, and those who wanted more change were on the left.

“So, these groupings became known as the left and the right, and that’s where we trace the origins,” Bell tells TIME.

The seating pattern repeated itself in subsequent legislatures and parliaments. “It entered popular vernacular quite quickly,” he says. “These terms were used in the newspapers reporting on the national assembly.”

How did ‘left-wing’ and ‘right-wing’ spread?

The whole world was watching the French Revolution, and its jargon eventually began to make its way around the world — but not overnight. According to French historian Marcel Gauchet’s essay “Right and Left,” the process of right and left becoming primary categories of political identity was “a long drawn-out process that lasted more than three quarters of a century, until the first decade of the 20th century.”

The prevalence of left and right in Bolshevik Russia and in the early years of the Soviet Union exemplifies the terms’ reach.

“The Bolsheviks were fascinated by the French Revolution. They were intensely conscious about carrying out its legacy — and raising it to a higher level,” Marci Shore, a professor of European cultural and intellectual history at Yale University, told TIME in an email. They viewed it as a necessary step in the historical process that would eventually lead to communism.

For them, left and right took on newly specific meanings. People who broke from the Communist party line were described by opponents as left-wing or right-wing deviationists, especially during the Stalinist era. Leaning toward the left generally meant embracing a radical international workers revolution, and leaning to the right generally meant adopting some sort of national sentiment. But the definitions were fluid, always shifting in relation to the ever-changing party line.” end quote.

The problem with the French model is that it places the desire to give the executive branch of government absolute power over legislation on the right of the spectrum and limited, constitutional government on the left. It should be noted that within the Anglosphere limited constitutional government translates into the opposite of this paradigm because it is the left which wishes to increase the centralized authoritarian power of the executive branch of government. 

But why is this uniquely so within the Anglosphere? 

"The Bloodless Revolution: What We Need to Learn from John Wesley and the Great Awakening" by David Beidel

https://tristatevoice.com/2020/08/04/the-bloodless-revolution-what-we-need-to-learn-from-john-wesley-and-the-great-awakening/

“In the 18th Century, most of Europe was on fire. Bloody civil wars and revolutions were decimating nation after nation. Unrestrained injustice, government and Church corruption, slave trade and the oppression of the poor created a powder keg for violence. Miraculously, Great Britain escaped the horrors of civil war and the brutal savagery that revolutionary anarchy engenders.

Few ancient monarchies are still in place today. The mystery of the UK’s capacity to honor the old guard, while raising up a more democratic system without a revolution, is a sociological wonder. Many credit the Great Awakening, in particular the Methodist movement, launched by John Wesley, for this extraordinary and peaceful transition.

Methodism unleashed an army of “little Christ’s” all over Europe. They cared for the poor, took in unwanted and abused children, fought unjust laws and labor conditions, visited prisoners, and battled against slavery; They joined hands with the Apostles and “turned the world upside down.” Eventually compassion became fashionable.

The very concept of having concern for suffering people outside the basic family structure, never mind other countries, was unheard of before Methodism brought to Europe this attitude of benevolence. Over two centuries later, there is still a powerful sense that to be compassionate is an American virtue. The virtue is not American, it is purely Christian, and we have the Great Evangelical Revival of the 18th Century to thank for it.

In these troubling days, there is much we can learn from John Wesley and the Methodists. He positively impacted England and most of the Western world mainly because of these three things:

He persistently and passionately preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Although his ministry may have brought about more positive social reform than any in his millennium, he never strayed from preaching the glorious story of salvation in Jesus’ name. He travelled over 250,000 miles, mostly on horseback throughout the United Kingdom, sharing the good news to the poorest of the poor in fields and outside coal mines. He did not plan to launch a social reform movement but years later realized that these transformed souls forged a transformed world. 

He gave his converts dignity by teaching them the truth; that they were a chosen people and a royal priesthood. The poor of England were spiralling out of control. Gin, prostitution, violence, slave trade and appalling corruption in the church and government, created one of the worst urban environments Europe had ever seen. Nevertheless, Wesley gave the lowest class in England dignity, honoring them as the children of God. He quickly conferred leadership over the rapidly forming small groups of new converts. They were unified in their desire to: “avoid evil, do good, and grow spiritually by the grace of God.” Soon this movement became known as ”Methodism” because as quickly as it grew, Wesley began organizing and inspiring his followers to be spiritually self-disciplined and to perform charitable good works.

He taught that faith without works – of compassion and justice – were dead. He never fell into the trap of separating preaching the Gospel and doing good for society. The cumulative effect of this grass roots movement accomplished peaceable reform by providing a vehicle for nonviolent change through the multiplication of humanitarian services to the old, the poor, children and the disabled.

The biblical teaching of Wesley flourished, launching a compassion revolution that pushed a nation—that should have erupted in flames—off the cliff of revolution and onto a robust course of meaningful reformation. Mercy and social justice became popular. “Kindness became the new cool.” Between the passionate work of the people of God and the good will of the populace, the government was forced to enact vital reforms that eventually set the standard for all civil and just nations.

His peers and protégés abolished slave trade, passed labor laws for children and adults, and radically served the desperately poor, helping them to transition into a healthy, noble middle class with political influence that accelerated proper reform.

Thus, the only horrific bloodshed of this revolution was the blood of Jesus, the Prince of Peace, who, with His blood, reconciled ALL.”, end quote.

In Alexis de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America” published in 1835 de Tocqueville cited that the chief reason for America’s democratic successes were due to the radical faith of its citizens. The French had murdered its protestants with impunity. The French Revolution ultimately replaced the authority of the Catholic Church and the King for an autocratic authoritarian centrally controlled government which culminated under the tyranny of that emperor and tyrant Napoleon. We can see a similar story being repeated in Quebec where the authoritarian control of the Catholic Church has been replaced by a secular authority which exercises enormous influence over the Quebecois with them being utterly dependant on handouts from the State. 

And so, we find this problem manifested federally under the government of Justin Trudeau who sees himself as a little Napoleon believing he has the authority to govern without parliamentary oversight while granting himself the power of vetoing legislation put forth by anyone but himself even suspending parliament when it suits him. He is the one who today metaphorically sits to the right of the “President of the Assembly” believing himself to have absolute authority. The man throws a tantrum if he doesn’t get his way and has demonstrated this often by storming off the floor of parliament while uttering obscenities. History may not repeat itself, but it does regurgitate the same themes over and over again. 

I hope this has provided a more realistic understanding of the left versus right political spectrum since the French model does little to explain it with clarity. What we need to recognize is the difference between those who seek to establish the moral, spiritual, and philosophical framework which can support limited, constitutional government under the rule of law where our Divine rights are recognized and protected versus those who favour absolutism and centralised, authoritarian government where the executive branch of government has become a law unto itself. 

The Postmodern left has an inherent loathing of mankind's desire to live freely. They despise the human capacity to strive against life's vicissitudes because these social collectivist types reject their own humanity by ignoring their spiritual life. Today we see radicals literally seeking to create a government which will insulate people from reality itself! Of course, their incessant promises of creating equity invariably result in ensuring an equal sharing of nihilism since they reduce every issue to a material problem. Yet the authors of the materialistic system they hope to create never themselves do without. Simply look at the ostentation and opulence of the Besserwissers attending Davos who demand that we forgo life’s small pleasures, like our automobiles, while they continue to live in obscene wealth driven about in chauffeured limousines. Whatever we are to call them and wherever we are to place them on the political divide, their goal is to use their secular power to control the distribution and production of material goods and services because they reject the need to undergo the moral, spiritual and philosophical transformation that would allow them to permit others to be free from their arbitrary overlordship. 

This is an invitation to all of us to become an army of little Christs preaching freedom to those who exist under such authoritarian bondage. I find it interesting that I am descended from radical dissenters and Methodists who had no use whatsoever for High Church mummery and religious superstition. My ancestors' churches were expressions of the people themselves where the people governed the church and not the church the people. Let us return to the inheritance they left us of limited, constitutional government under the Rule of Law where our Divinely given rights are not granted to us by our government but rather respected by it!

Putting politics into perspective in our Godless and Postmodern era

 

Many of us long for deliverance from a political class which has come to owe its allegiance not to the nation it governs but rather to unelected extranational interests. We see unelected global players such as NATO, the WHO, the WEF in Davos, the World Bank, the UN and EU, and other multinational conglomerates which are both indebted to and controlled by these extranational interests dictating to us how we ought to govern ourselves. We are also witnessing government constantly pandering to ideologies so bizarre and foreign to us that we must conclude that they are antithetical to our very way of life. Inevitably we may come to feel disassociated from a system of government which no longer resembles representative democracy under parliamentary oversite. Here in Canada the executive branch of government now deliberately hinders and impedes the work of parliament while undermining the Rule of Law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

So, we must ask, who or what can deliver us from such powerful international forces since our own elected leaders not only have not stopped this erosion of our national sovereignty and representative democracy but have actively cooperated with its demise? I often talk about the Grand Narrative and look to the history of how that narrative has played out in the past. The Jews thought that Christ had come to deliver them from Roman rule. Their own king was a mere puppet leader, a Quisling if you will, whose real loyalty was to Rome. The Jewish Sanhedrin, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees had failed to defend the actual Spirit of the Torah and the Talmud. The people of Israel were in desperate need of a deliverer. But they weren’t willing to change their carnal ways for God to deliver them and so they were given over to tyranny. All tyranny is the result of our own moral failures, mine, and yours.

From https://www.gotquestions.org/Jews-reject-Jesus.html

“Why do most Jews reject Jesus as the Messiah?

ANSWER:

The Jews rejected Jesus because He failed, in their eyes, to do what they expected their Messiah to do—destroy evil and all their enemies and establish an eternal kingdom with Israel as the preeminent nation in the world. The prophecies in Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 describe a suffering Messiah who would be persecuted and killed, but the Jews chose to focus instead on those prophecies that discuss His glorious victories, not His crucifixion.

The commentaries in the Talmud, written before the onset of Christianity, clearly discuss the Messianic prophecies of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and puzzle over how these would be fulfilled with the glorious setting up of the kingdom of the Messiah. After the church used these prophecies to prove the claims of Christ, the Jews took the position that the prophecies did not refer to the Messiah, but to Israel or some other person.

The Jews believed that the Messiah, the prophet which Moses spoke about, would come and deliver them from Roman bondage and set up a kingdom where they would be the rulers. Two of the disciples, James and John, even asked to sit at Jesus’ right and left in His kingdom when He came into His glory. The people of Jerusalem also thought He would deliver them. They shouted praises to God for the mighty works they had seen Jesus do and called out, “Hosanna, save us,” when He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matthew 21:9). They treated Him like a conquering king. Then, when He allowed Himself to be arrested, tried, and crucified on a cursed cross, the people stopped believing that He was the promised prophet. They rejected their Messiah (Matthew 27:22).

Note that Paul tells the church that the spiritual blindness of Israel is a “mystery” that had not previously been revealed (Romans chapters 9–11). For thousands of years, Israel had been the one nation that looked to God while the Gentile nations generally rejected the light and chose to live in spiritual darkness. Israel and her inspired prophets revealed monotheism—one God who was personally interested in mankind’s destiny of heaven or hell, the path to salvation, the written Word with the Ten Commandments. Yet Israel rejected her prophesied Messiah, and the promises of the kingdom of heaven were postponed. A veil of spiritual blindness fell upon the eyes of the Jews, who previously were the most spiritually discerning people. As Paul explained, this hardening on the part of Israel led to the blessing of the Gentiles who would believe in Jesus and accept Him as Lord and Savior.”

So, if we long for deliverance in our hour of need we must first look to ourselves. We need to understand that hoping that elections will solve our moral, spiritual, and philosophical crisis without confronting our own failings is to do as the Jews did in the time of Christ. They rejected their Messiah because they thought He would put an end to Roman rule without them dealing first with their own failures to live as they were commanded by God. If we are to put an end to this globalist takedown of the West, we must first repent and turn away from our own sin before we will ever see the Kingdom of God here on earth. And that is a word of warning I know few will receive and many will laugh at. So be it, I write these things knowing that my words are not winning friends or influencing people, rather I write them because they are true.

And, to add clarity, I have stated these things not because I am a paragon of virtue but because I am equally guilty and therefore must look to myself to ensure that I am living rightly in an age driven mad by Postmodern relativism where nothing is deemed to be true.

On the soft bigotry of lowered expectations:

Brilliant writers have dedicated volumes to this theme, but few have more eloquently defined this phenomenon than Douglas Murray in his latest book, “The War on the West” in which he writes about the pathological nature of Western Anti-Westernism. Its prologue on Amazon’s website reads:

“China has concentration camps now. Why do Westerners claim our sins are unique?

It is now in vogue to celebrate non-Western cultures and disparage Western ones. Some of this is a much-needed reckoning, but much of it fatally undermines the very things that created the greatest, most humane civilization in the world.

In The War on the West, Douglas Murray shows how many well-meaning people have been fooled by hypocritical and inconsistent anti-West rhetoric. After all, if we must discard the ideas of Kant, Hume, and Mill for their opinions on race, shouldn’t we discard Marx, whose work is peppered with racial slurs and anti-Semitism? Embers of racism remain to be stamped out in America, but what about the raging racist inferno in the Middle East and Asia?

It’s not just dishonest scholars who benefit from this intellectual fraud but hostile nations and human rights abusers hoping to distract from their own ongoing villainy. Dictators who slaughter their own people are happy to jump on the “America is a racist country” bandwagon and mimic the language of antiracism and “pro-justice” movements as PR while making authoritarian conquests.

If the West is to survive, it must be defended. The War on the West is not only an incisive takedown of foolish anti-Western arguments but also a rigorous new apologetic for civilization itself.”, end of prologue.

We live in a time when everything originating from Western Culture is deemed to be bad while all other cultures, particularly those of visible minorities, are deemed to be superior to that of our own. Where these Postmodern ideas lose their consistency lies in Postmodernism’s loathing of patriarchal condescension yet what could be more patriarchal than to expect less of other cultures you claim to prefer? Herein lies the soft bigotry of lowered expectations.

The Norwegian Labour Party (Arbeiderpartiet) has a slogan, “Alle skal med!” which translates into something like “everyone together” or “no one shall be left behind” but the actual outcome of this policy is much different. It should read, “Alle må være enig!” or “everyone must agree”. It is an attempt to homogenize humanity, to create a state where all are deemed to be essentially the same. Where everyone is required to think the same. Yet when we examine the failure of the state’s attempt to assimilate cultures who hold vastly different world views, we see that “Alle skal med” has created a race to build a system which favours the lowest common denominator. I know, I attended Norskkurs (Norwegian Course) where this failure was on full display. 

I deliberately chose to attend the local Norskkurs in the small city where I was living so that I could observe firsthand how well my fellow students were adjusting to life in Norway. They weren’t and the authorities didn’t want me to adapt either out of some perverse dislike of someone whom they undoubtedly viewed as too fond of their culture. I came to understand that the socialists who dominated state run institutions were leery of anyone who admired them since the Nazis had attempted to appropriate their culture during WWII even though the Arbeiderpartiet made repeated attempts to join the Nazi puppet government led by Vidkun Quisling. A law was passed at war’s end which made it illegal for anyone to investigate who had cooperated with the Nazis.

The reason I state these things is that the self-same ideological nonsense of “Alle skal med” informs every single policy in Canada put forth by our governments federally, provincially, regionally, and locally. We are driven by a species of self loathing that has become nothing short of pathological while deliberately ignoring the work our ancestors did to help create a free, and just society under democratic parliamentary oversight and the Rule of Law.

From the Canadian Encyclopedia: “On 14 March 1793, United Empire Loyalist Sergeant Adam Vrooman violently bound Chloe Cooley, a Black woman he enslaved, with a rope. (See also Loyalists in Canada.) He was assisted by two other men — his brother Isaac Vrooman and one of the five sons of United Empire Loyalist McGregory Van Every. The men put Cooley in a boat and transported her across the Niagara River to sell her in New York State. Cooley resisted fiercely, but to no avail.

Cooley’s piercing scream alerted Peter Martin, a Black Loyalist formerly enslaved by John Butler, to what was transpiring.

Peter Martin, a veteran of Butler’s Rangers, along with witness William Grisley, reported the incident to Lieutenant-Governor John Graves Simcoe and the Executive Council of Upper Canada in Newark (now Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario). Grisley, a white resident of nearby Mississauga Point and employee of Sergeant Vrooman’s, was able to provide a detailed account of the events as he was on the boat that transported Cooley but did not assist in restraining her.

Lieutenant-Governor Simcoe used the Chloe Cooley incident to introduce legislation to abolish slavery in Upper Canada.

Enslavement in Upper Canada

British abolitionists such as William Wilberforce, James Ramsay, Granville Sharp and Thomas Clarkson had argued against the Atlantic slave trade since the 1770s. (See also Black Enslavement in Canada.) Lieutenant-Governor John Graves Simcoe had been influenced by the growing abolitionist movement prior to his arrival in Upper Canada in 1791. By then, abolitionists of African heritage were also playing a vital role in the struggle. Olaudah Equiano (also known as Gustavus Vassa), once enslaved in England, published his autobiography in 1789 and toured the United Kingdom to speak out against the inhumanity of enslavement. These abolitionist opinions spread to Upper Canada, where Simcoe and Attorney General John White led the call for abolition in the province.”, end quote.

The eventual outcome of Simcoe’s actions resulted in making my own hometown of St. Catharines one of the northern terminuses along the Underground Railroad. Harriet Tubman lived in my city. It was she who acted as Moses had to the Israelites by leading her people to the promised land. Yes, Upper Canada (now Ontario) was known as Beulah Land to the folks who had escaped from the slavery inherent in the slave states of the USA. Harriet Tubman was given land by the founder of the Welland Canal, Wm. Hamilton Merritt, to build the British Methodist Episcopal Church which still stands on Geneva Street. 

From the Church's website: “The British Methodist Episcopal Church, Salem Chapel was founded in 1820 by African-American freedom seekers in St. Catharines, Ontario. It is located at 92 Geneva St. in the heart of Old St. Catharines. The church is a valued historical site due to its design, and its important associations with abolitionist activity.

The church has a congregation of approximately 20 people, and a Sunday worship service takes place at 11:00 am. Guided tours of the church and museum, which displays original documents, artifacts, and a rare book collection, all associated with the anti-slavery movement, are available by appointment.”, end quote.

Folks from St. Catharines were known to accompany Tubman during her trips into the slave states, most often Maryland, so that she could avoid suspicion by pretending to be her slave owner. This is obviously not an example of white privilege or patriarchal tyranny since the people accompanying her could easily have been imprisoned if they had been caught, yet how often does one hear of such factual accounts of bravery and fortitude where whites and blacks together worked to abolish an institution which Simcoe had declared to be an offence to Christ? The Act passed by him was the first of its kind in the British Empire which eventually led to slavery within the rest of the Empire being abolished by 1833.

I state these things to make a very concerted and clear point, slavery has continued unabated in Africa, China, and the Middle East to this day where cultures vastly different to that of our own do not view slavery as an offence to Christ since they obviously aren’t Christian societies. Every society which has ever existed has practiced slavery including that of North America’s indigenous people. Therefore, the question that must be asked, which society both denounced and abolished it first? And, as Murray so eloquently pointed out, the Postmodern answer to our tradition of Western liberalism and its insistence on individual liberty and autonomy is to replace the most liberating philosophical ideas which any society has ever created with Marxist ideology which demonstrably has resulted in the greatest injustices mankind has ever witnessed. Death and repression under Marxism exceeds that of even the murderous tyranny of National Socialism. Furthermore, we must NEVER forget that Nazism was just one more version of the species of social collectivism being foisted on us by Postmodern ideologues whose claims of creating equity visibly and demonstrably deconstruct themselves.

Day 48: Call me a confident pessimist

Yes, I am confident humanity writ large is too flawed to permit a small body of persons to be given too much authority.

I often write about the need to develop a far more sophisticated idea of evil. Psychologists have discovered one of the leading causes of PTSD is naivety. PTSD often occurs when someone who is lacking a sufficiently evolved understanding of evil encounters the horrific which results in mental and emotional damage. This is particularly true when the shock has been brought on because of being appalled at our own actions. People who become aware of their true nature will treat themselves far more cautiously knowing what they are capable of doing.

It is interesting that the Biblical tale from the Garden of Eden focuses on that great metaphor, that mankind would know good and evil and become like gods as a result of their sinfulness. This knowledge lies at the very core of who and what we are. Even as we are capable of doing great good, so we are capable of wreaking havoc on our neighbour. And there is no greater harm that we can do than to demand of others what we believe to be good for them. The knowledge we were vulnerable which emerged at our loss of innocence also gave us the knowledge of how to harm others for what can hurt me I can use to hurt you. This knowledge led to the first murder where Cain slew Abel. And what motivated him to do this? His envy!

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.” ~ Perth, Scotland, 28 May 1948, in Churchill, Europe Unite: Speeches 1947 & 1948 (London: Cassell, 1950), 347.

As the entire narrative surrounding #COVID-1984 devolves into a farcical parody of itself and the stupid low-resolution salute to social collectivism of, “We are all in this together” is proven to be an utter lie, we see even Dr. Fauci being exposed for the liar he is. He must have taken the hypocritical oath instead of the Hippocratic Oath when he became a physician! Even though he forced the use of masks on America it has been discovered that he stated that they have little to no ability to mitigate transmission of the virus. Obviously, masks have been part and parcel of an enormous social experiment to investigate how easily the authorities can create blind conformity in a population. The there is the issue of Fauci himself cooperating and funding the research at the Level 4 Biopathogen Laboratory in Wuhan as Dr. Rand Paul has just presented evidence that Fauci lied to the American Congress about his involvement in creating what is effectively a bioweapon. Even Fauci himself is now admitting that the laboratory origin theory is no longer a conspiracy. Beware of any and all who play God by thinking they have a sufficient understanding of good and evil. The most reprehensible acts throughout history have invariably been perpetrated in the name of “the good of the many”.

I watch daily as the narrative changes and all the excuses for crushing our economy and damaging our health care system while preventing those with severe illnesses to receive treatment melt away in lies. Those who have created the falsehoods needed to sustain the level of fear required to excite public sympathy are doubling down on their BS even as it is becoming impossible for us to believe them. And as the naïve public are awakened to the shock of this betrayal PTSD and mental health issues are becoming rife. All because many lack a sufficiently sophisticated idea of evil.

Therefore, my belief in individual liberty has nothing to do with my confidence that individuals will behave responsibly. It has to do with understanding one wicked person acting alone can only do so much damage who then must be made to suffer punishment for their actions. But when many wicked men and women falsely professing to be good band together under the name of government, the damage they can do corporately will have exponentially more dire consequences on society. At the same time this seldom leads to them being held properly accountable so that they can be punished for their collective crimes.

In my assertion lies the difference between social collectivists who assign guilt or innocence purely by group identity and those few of us who are utterly convinced that freedom of voluntary association and individual accountability invariably leads to a more just society.

And these two ideas are diametrically opposed. Only one can emerge the victor. If social collectivism under arbitrary State control wins out there will be no freedom left in the West. Remember this, they stole our liberty with the very lies which are now daily being revealed as utter falsehoods as they cooperated with the CCP to destroy us. It is my concerted opinion that those who hold the highest offices and positions in the West are now guilty of treason.

Day 41: How weakness became a virtue

 

The war on meritocracy begins within you

Life is an existential crisis. Ever since man became aware of his own mortality, we have been faced with the dilemma of giving life eternal meaning. Even the most devout atheist does not wish to face the future without finding some purpose which would allow their memory to live on as a legacy. The nature of the legacy we leave behind us completely depends on whether we have come to grips with ourselves. This is where the hero myth was born, the hero archetype represents the person who is able to face adversity while overcoming the challenges they encounter nobly. These myths exist in mankind’s collective unconscious. Since they form the basis for our oldest collective psychic memories, they appear to be eternal. And it is in the eternal that we need to find the meaning which will permit us to mitigate the existential crisis our finite life inevitably creates.  

 "The Hero with A Thousand Faces, by Joseph Campbell, is ostensibly about myths and mythology. But the lessons in this book can help us identify and navigate the paths we take to better ourselves and the changes in our lives, in order to become better at change, and better people in general.

Campbell, a professor at Sara Lawrence College, studied lore from every conceivable culture; he looked at everything from the ancient religions of antiquity to the mythology of more modern religions like Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

Campbell’s research led him to focus on comparative mythology; specifically, he looked at what myths from different cultures had in common, rather than what they didn’t. Everywhere Campbell searched, he found it: a single story-telling arc, the ubiquitous story that every culture from Mesopotamia to our modern Western Society uses to pass along information, tradition, and worldly perception. Collectively, Campbell put this information into his seminal and most influential work, The Hero with a Thousand Faces.

The Hero’s Journey and Why It’s Important

The monomyth begins with the main character, or Hero, in one place, and ends with him in another — both physically and emotionally. Campbell asserts that this Hero is the same regardless of the story, and that he appears in different forms. This is important because the hero can be the star quarterback or he can be the accountant in cubicle nine. The paths are different but the journey is the same.

 Within each journey, the Hero will encounter other characters that play an essential role in growth. Campbell labeled these archetypes (the Herald, the Mentor, the Goddess, the Trickster, etc.), and they appear in the vast majority of stories. It’s easy to spot an archetype once you know what you’re looking for. So whether the hero is Harry Potter or King Arthur or Frodo, his path is always very similar. Whether the mentor is Dumbledore or Merlin or Gandalf, his role is always to guide the hero.

 This structure appears everywhere, but is most easily recognized in movies and books. Luke Skywalker starts his journey by leaving his home on Tatooine, having grand adventures, and fulfilling his potential as a Jedi. The events might be different, but the journey is the same one King Arthur takes. And this is the same exact course that prominent figures in religious stories all follow. Campbell shows us just how accurate this concept is, and how it replays over and over again. And it’s happening right now in your life, too.

 

 

Now, looking at that picture, as well as chart below, you’ll probably get a good idea of what each stage signifies based on the name; the examples will drive home that all of this is applicable to every story you have ever heard.

 

Stage of the Journey	Description	Example
The Ordinary World	The Hero’s starting point	Dorothy Gale living on her farm (The Wizard of Oz)
The Call to Adventure	The Hero realizes that there is a larger world that he can be a part of	Harry Potter gets a letter from Hogwarts (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone)
Refusal of the Call	In a moment of doubt, the Hero decides not to undertake the quest	Luke Skywalker tells Obi-Wan Kenobi that he can’t go to Alderaan (Star Wars)
Meeting with the Mentor	Either the first encounter with the Mentor figure, or the moment when the Mentor encourages the Hero to take on the Quest	Daniel LaRusso meets Mr. Miyagi (The Karate Kid)
Crossing the First Threshold	The Hero moves from the Ordinary World to the Special World, and sees the difference between the two	The Narrator walks into Tyler Durden’s house for the first time (Fight Club)
Tests, Allies, and Enemies	The Hero begins to undertake tasks that will help him prepare for the road ahead; he also meets friends who will aid him, and foes who will try to stop him	Frodo leaves Rivendell with the Fellowship of the Ring, and has to learn how to be on the road as he goes (The Lord of the Rings)
Approach	Internal and external preparation; usually includes an imposing destination	Neo and Trinity gather an arsenal before heading off to rescue Morpheus (The Matrix)
The Ordeal	The central conflict in the story, the big boss fight, where the possibility of death is imminent	Dorothy and her friends battle the Wicked Witch in her castle (The Wizard of Oz)
Seizing the Sword/Reward	Having slain the enemy, the Hero is free to take the treasure; sometimes this is an item of great value, like the Holy Grail, or a person, but very often it’s something more abstract, like the end to a war	After the death of the dragon Smaug, Bilbo and the dwarves are free to help themselves to his treasure (The Hobbit)
Apotheosis and Resurrection	Often, the Hero needs for all of his growth to come to a head and manifest itself all at once in a moment of enlightenment called apotheosis; this realization is the death blow to the old self and beliefs, and the embracing of the new; this is punctuated by a symbolic (sometimes literal) death and resurrection	The Narrator realizes that in order for him to stop Tyler Durden, he must kill himself — by making peace with his own death he accepts mortality, and is, for a moment, truly at peace; he shoots himself and lives, though Tyler is dead (Fight Club)
The Road Back	The Special World, with all of its lessons and adventures, may have become more comfortable than the Ordinary World, and for some Heroes, returning can be harder than the initial departure.	After the One Ring is destroyed, Frodo has a hard time adapting to life as a normal Hobbit in the Shire (Return of the King)
Return with the Elixir and the Master of Two Worlds	The Hero returns home changed, and uses the gifts he received and lessons he learned on the journey to better others; at the same time, the Hero must come to terms with all of the personal changes he’s undergone; he must reconcile who he was with who he has become	Luke, now a Jedi, restores balance to the Force, helping bring peace to the galaxy; concurrently, he is able to resolve his relationship with his father and move on (Return of the Jedi)

But Campbell’s thesis is not simply that nearly every culture in history has found an identical and effective way to tell stories; it’s that the commonalities in storytelling exist because they are a fundamental part of the human experience. The monomyth isn’t only the structure of how we tell the undertakings of heroes and characters in stories, it’s also how we relate those stories to ourselves, and, in a very real way, how we understand the things that are happening to us.

 I would take it a step further.

I believe that while the monomyth is exceptional for storytelling, and therefore exceptional for exploring cultural ideas, it can have just as great an impact when applied to an individual — when applied to you. Put somewhat more directly, the Hero’s Journey is the perfect lens through which to view any change in your life — whatever new journey you’re taking, you will go through all of the phases of the monomyth as you grow, adapt, and ultimately fulfill your goal.

 Of course, I’m not the only one who suggests this. For years, the Campbellian model has been used by people in various fields to help people advance; for example, some therapists use it with their patients to help structure psychoanalysis. Similarly, it’s used to help people deal with the grieving process — after all, the 5 stages are grief each have their mirror in the monomyth. Still others use it for mindset or success coaching — helping people understand where they are in the journey not only provides a sense of comfort and control, but also a clear path, making it easier, conceptually, to get to the next phase.

 Because all changes in your life can fit into this structure, whether you realize it or not, at any given time you’re going through at least one such journey — and mastering the ideology of the monomyth will make you more successful. Because not only is the Hero’s Journey a lens for viewing change, but it’s also an excellent operating thesis for propelling change forward."

~ https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/heros-journey/

 

As I have oft stated any fool can tell you what is wrong, but it takes an expert to tell you why and what to do about it. What is wrong is not so difficult to address for we live in an age where the state in all if its manifestations has assumed far too great a role in our lives. It serves the state’s purposes to keep us weak and dependent. As the dividend, you will be able to receive benefits in the form of money and special rights. Those who administer these schemes (politicians and bureaucrats) profit from this continuing "class struggle". In our current system it is important to be adamant about defining yourself as weak or part of an exploited group to maintain this status. The welfare state lives by this thinking and there is no end to the injustices it can claim to be suitable for the state to resolve. And the fewer injustices that are solved the better because then you will need more money and assistance from the state run collective.

Therefore, socialism is where the hero myth goes to die as its acolytes in training sit around playing video games or engaging in other trivial pursuits which are shallow imitations of the hero myth while living lives which have little lasting merit or meaning. Now there is irony for you!