Fear and Dependency

Misguided politics and the ever changing bureaucratic bungles of CV-19 policymakers have brought financial ruin and emotional hardship to many Canadians.  The  apparent desire to hinder free enterprise, and digitally track citizens, appears to override the common sense of having sequestered and protected vulnerable citizens from the outset.

It is questionable whether the government’s action of tracking the activities of free human beings in a democratic society is even an acceptable exercise in the first place.    And once the passport system is fully implemented, the odds of authorities ever removing such a control measure would likely be zero.    Surely, they could justify a multitude of reasons to keep it in place.  Then what?

As many governmental decisions lately appear to “reign-down” (spelling intended) from agendas external to the needs of the Canadian people, it is no wonder many citizens are concerned as to just exactly what the end game is.   The rumour-mill is buzzing because nobody can get a straight answer from those who are supposed to have the answers.  Building on a comment made by the PM himself, is CV-19 the catalyst for  Canada to become a post-nationalist state of a yet to be defined global entity, and if so, who gave him and his entourage the permission to proceed with such a project?    The Canadian people?  Not likely – they were not even consulted.  Decisions of that magnitude surely should hinge on the democratic agreement of all citizens, not the dictates of an elitist few.  It does beg the question; “Does the virus drive the desire for the control mechanisms, or the other way around?”  It is a fair question.

The medieval fear tactics implemented over a virus, that in many cases is so mild it is completely unnoticeable, seems more than a little irrational.   Intentionally or not, there is no proper context given when numbers are regurgitated daily on the news.  Why is that?  For two years, the hysteria over case counts has outranked the more informative statistics of deaths-per-100,000 and the co-morbidity evidence available.  The survival rate is officially documented at just under 100% in total cases reported.  The facts are clear, yet the scare-tactics persist, as a 2005 quote may explain:

“By keeping the population in a state of artificially heightened apprehension, the government-cum-media prepares the ground for planting specific measures of taxation, regulation, surveillance, reporting, and other invasions of the people’s wealth, privacy, and freedoms. Left alone for a while, relieved of this ceaseless bombardment of warnings, people would soon come to understand that hardly any of the announced threats has any substance and that they can manage their own affairs quite well without the security-related regimentation and tax-extortion the government seeks to justify.”  (1)

Ultimately, a population in fear tends to develop a disproportionate psychological dependency upon an ever increasing paternalistic government. If that is the endgame, Saul Alinsky would be proud.


(1)  Higgs, Robert, Senior Fellow in Political Economy. “Fear: The Foundation of Every Government’s Power”, 2005,  Research Article, Independent Institute,  Fear: The Foundation of Every Government’s Power: Independent Institute

Power Gained by Increment

Before a problem can be solved, its existence must first be noticed and properly acknowledged.  Only when exposed to the light of day can its causes, and the players involved, be discovered.  However, when a problem evolves slowly it often goes undetected, or its progression is merely tolerated as bothersome.  People have a way of accepting and accommodating each stage of minor social inconvenience, often unaware of the cumulative long-term effects.  As such, they are vulnerable to abuse by those looking to take advantage.

Unfortunately, the human propensity to ignore or adapt to small disturbances over time allows organized nefarious players to implement undesirable changes on society through “incrementalization”.   Incrementalization is Gradualism, (also called the “Hegelian Dialectical Process” of consensus-getting), the almost imperceptible cascading effects of an initial action; the resulting reaction (opposition); a general acquiescence; and then total acceptance by a population.  Repeating over time, each step compounds on the one preceding it.  The intended outcome (that otherwise would be deemed unacceptable by the populace if delivered as a full package at the outset) is achieved.

Significant change can be instituted, almost undetected in this way.  Each isolated increment of change made can be justified as something needed, and as such appears logical. Of significant note is the fact that positive change does not need to employ these types of deceptions.  It is a tool:  “incrementalization of the undesirable”.

In the aftermath of historical atrocities, onlookers are shocked at what tyrants were able to pull off by using this technique.  A tool surreptitiously deployed until full power is gained, then switching to military control.

An alert and well informed population that is politically engaged and able to think critically, combined with a properly functioning media, are paramount to ensure democracies prevail and undesirable situations are kept in check.  The importance lies in noticing the problem, acknowledging it, exposing the players, and fixing issues as soon as possible.


Coughlin, Stephen and Higgins, Richard, “Remembering the Mis-Remembered Left – The Left’s Strategy and Tactics to Transform America”, 2019, Unconstrained Analytics.

COVID – Being Used as a Cover?

Covid – A Cover for “Progressive” Ambitions?

At the moment, Canadians seem powerless to sustain themselves against those who have taken root in the halls of power and seem to be either utterly ignorant of the potential consequences of their actions – or deliberately intent on breaking Canada’s present society.  In many parts of the western world, and Canada in particular, progressives now appear to control government, the education system, media, cultural institutions, and large portions of the financial sector.

Whatever the intent of frenzied assertions about eliminating Covid (while at the same time purging emissions, battling systemic racism, regulating speech, and redefining two biological sexes into a profusion of alternative genders), the outcome has been, as Rex Murphy phrased it in the National Post, “one long confusing frustrating and gravely imperfect improvisation.”

Breaking the existing system without specifying a replacement is a well-worn path taken by radicals like the managers of the Royal British Columbia Museum, who demolished a popular and effective display and admitted to having no plan for its replacement. As in a common movie plot, it warns us that the destruction of something we assumed was part of our reality is not just a political act. It is calling into question the entirety of our existence.

Over the centuries, citizens have emerged from the thrall of autocracy not to give power to governments but to lend it conditionally. This is probably the time in our history to remember the advice of Ronald Reagan that “Politicians, like babies should be changed often – and for the same reasons.”

A Christmas Message for 2021

One does not need to be of the Christian faith to appreciate the beauty of the Christmas story.  As every parent will attest, the birth of a child is the birth of hope itself.  It is a time of joy, a time to celebrate and look forward.  And so, it is at Christmas as we rejoice the miracle of the baby born in a manger during a historical time of violent oppression and chaos.   The birth signifies the beginning of renewed hope for the future.

Centuries before, early Europeans also celebrated in the darkest days of December.  Their celebration was of ‘Light and Birth’ as they supported each other, and congregated together through winter solstice, until the light started to rise again on the horizon.  It was a time when greenery was brought indoors, people stayed close, and the hearth-fires were kept burning.

This time of year is not too dissimilar today.  As Nativities are assembled and trees are brought into the house, stockings expectantly hang, by real or virtual fireplaces, and candles flicker warmly.  Hard thought-out gifts are exchanged, and traditional food is prepared and shared.  While Christmas cards send good-tidings to far away friends, carolers sing, and stories are told and relived around the table between generations.  It is a time to congregate; a time of togetherness, when both young and old are reminded of their roots and deep connections.

As years turn into centuries, and different cultural traditions converge and meld, it is the value of these connections that resonate and sustain families and communities.  These are timeless values of love, family and friends, faith, charity toward others, and gratitude for the bounty one has, however meagre.

From our heart and hearth to yours;  “Merry Christmas Everyone”

Separation of Political Powers

There is a reason for the separation of powers in politics.

Local municipalities have decided that the need to act on issues, that are the responsibility of senior levels of government, is preferable to doing their own jobs. The temptation to reduce global warming overrides the need to issue building permits. The point is that any possible action they may take lies well beyond a city’s ability to make any measurable adjustment to national temperatures. This overreach inevitably results in a decrease in local economic productivity with a corresponding drop in income.

Many councillors do not make the connection between their actions and a lack of local housing; a key factor in making people homeless. Potential solutions now mean using local government funds, originally earmarked for other projects, to provide temporary accommodation. Local proponents follow the San Francisco example, “… that homelessness is caused largely by poverty and discrimination; the solution, (they say) is not to judge the poor souls that sleep rough but to spend more money on them.” (1)   This is something that the current local tax base is unable to support. The social problems that accompany the new residents eclipse the capacity of any municipal authority to resolve; principally because the treatment resources are complex and belong to other levels of government.

Support programs for the homeless, like many relationships, are easy to start but offer no clear way to get out. The longer they last, the greater the loss to local resources and the longer the period of sustained damage to community fabric. Local councils would be well advised to stick to parks and potholes and keep the pressure on senior governments to meet their obligations.

(1)  ‘San Fransicko’: How progressives ruin cities” Michael Shellenberger, Harper Collins 2021. Quote from review in The Telegraph, 5th December 2021


Who Owns Your Children?

In an innate desire to avoid confrontation, humans often acquiesce to the illogical reasoning of others, one seemingly small increment at a time.  They push uncomfortable, or potentially dangerous, issues down the road in the hope that the altercations, they are trying to avoid, never transpire.   The result:  undesirable actions are allowed to compound and multiply.

Consider the following quote by Hitler: “He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.”    Like all collectivist social engineering tyrants, Adolf Hitler succeeded in gaining control of other peoples’ children for his personal political gain.  Through the “Hitler Youth” movement his men, B. Shirach and A. Axmann, were tasked with grooming children for the Nazi regime.

By usurping control of a variety of innocuous community groups that already existed in the Weimer Republic, the organization was founded in July 1926, and by 1933 it had grown to encompass an estimated one-hundred thousand children.  In 1936 its membership was over five million – all minors, between the ages of ten and eighteen.  Originally, enrollment was obtained through social encouragement and peer pressure, but in 1939, membership, and active participation in the group, was made mandatory by government legislation. *    In effect, the children had been made “tools” of a sinister apparatus, and even their own parents were denied the agency to object, on threats of reprisal.

“The Hitler Youth were used to break up church youth groups, spy on religious classes and Bible studies, and interfere with church attendance.  Education and training programs for the Hitler Youth were designed to undermine the values of the traditional elitist structures of German society along with their privileges.”  (1)

Onlookers of history are forgiven for wondering how such things could happen, but yet these types of things have happened many times.  In the end, it may be fair to say; that through accepted abeyances, naïve politeness, peer pressure, a fear of social confrontation, or worse, people essentially line up to accept their own loss of rights and freedoms, one small, seemingly innocent, increment at a time.

Having foresight and understanding as to what can happen under centralized control, based on history, is the easy part; but the real work is to recognize oppression as it is happening and having the fortitude to stand up and do something about it – in real time.

* Hans and Sophie Scholl, of “The White Rose” were two of the many reluctant members forced to join the organization.


Hildebrand, Klaus. The Third Reich, London and NY Routledge, 1984.
Bonney, Richard. Confronting the Nazi War on Christianity, Bern: Peter Lang, 2009.
Koch, H.W.. The Hitler Youth: Origins and Development 1922-1945, NY Barnes and Noble, 1996.
Rempel, Gerhard. Hitler’s Children: The Hitler Youth and the SS, Chapel Hill, NC, UNC Press, 1989.
(1)  Wikipedia. Hitler Youth – accessed Nov 10, 2021

Where Do We Go from Here?

There is too much for the concerned taxpayer to worry about right now. But even though focus and prioritizing have become complex issues within themselves, without them, no solution will ever appear.

The world has been conditioned by a pandemic, the treatment of which raises many questions, and finds few answers from those charged with its management.  The prospect of a looming catastrophe, posed by climate change alarmists, dictates that the only alternative is to shatter large parts of the present economy and restart it in some way nobody has identified.

Confusion appears to be consistently offered up over remedy.  Consider the present education system, from kindergarten to graduate school, which has been fractured by fear and division, sowed by cynical political opportunists.  How is this situation justifiable?

Additionally, technology has progressed to levels beyond the understanding of most of us, but where do we put our trust? It is not just a matter of deciding which developments will affect us in the future – it is also a matter of how some of them affect us now.

If all of this was not enough, BC is facing the most recent of a series of natural disasters. Not unnaturally, representatives at every political level are showering each other with blame for outcomes.  However, there is no doubt where the liability for the costs of all these issues will land – the taxpayer.

At a time when there is a real need for focus and prioritizing, concentrating on issues closest to home would show the best return. Local councilors and school board trustees are the ones most responsible for giving tangible value in the taxpayer’s service and, especially now, need to be held accountable.

Taxpayers Left Wanting

History provides many examples of political deception and dishonesty, carried out by nefarious players seeking personal gain and control, by attaining public office.  Ultimately, it is the responsibility of citizens to demand governmental restraint, but for the most part they are hobbled from navigating that bureaucracy – the very system they are forced to pay for.  Frustrated and left wanting, it is no wonder many taxpayers become politically apathetic.

Enter in the “charade of political spectacle”, that all-encompassing string of political photo-ops, contrived set-ups, ribbon-cutting, parades, motorcades, grand entrances, and general drama, designed to reassure the populace that all is well.  But all is not well in this top-down system.

Then there is the other end of the spectrum, where organized infiltration and intent to take control comes from the pedestrian level, taking advantage of peoples’ trusting nature and inherent goodness.  Unfortunately, the taxpayer is caught midway between the two forces.   For an example of this bottom-up approach consider the following quotes by Rob Hopkins of the Transition Network, along with Peter MacFadyen, and Andrew Gage, that each exemplify a furtive strategy to gain control over populations and governance:

“As I have already mentioned, it helps if you have a sympathetic entry point into local government to increase your influence.  One of the most direct ways is to put yourself forward as a councilor – either at parish, town, city, or the county council.  Better still, you may consider following Frome’s example of taking over the council altogether!  The Mayor of Frome, Peter MacFadyen, has written a highly inspiring book “Flatpack Democracy – A DIY Guide”   (1) 

“So what we need is Transition Towns to be running parallel systems which effectively come up and swamp the so-called democracy and make it irrelevant.” (2) 

 “It’s important that lawyers play a role that is appropriate to the movement.  I worry that if lawyers are not involved the Transition Town movement may result in infrastructure and systems that will not survive both the passage of time and clashes with mainstream culture.”  (3)  

So, as it appears; one group can be kept in public office by the processes in place, while the other can surreptitiously gain entry through a back door.  It is needless to say, but many would agree that both scenarios mock democracy.

(1)  Rob Hopkins, 2014, The “Transition Network” in transitioning neighbourhood plans
(2)  Peter MacFadyen, 2014, “Flatpack Democracy – A DIY Guide” on how to gain control
(3)  Andrew Gage, 2010, WCEL.

The Golden Egg

Only 62% of Canadians eligible to vote in election 44 exercised their right to do so.  Out of this number, the Liberals won 32%.  Ultimately, Justin Trudeau was elected to the highest office in Canada’s government, with only 19.8% of eligible voters choosing him.  (32% of 62% = 19.8%)  By extrapolation, that means that over 80% of eligible voters in Canada did not choose their current government, yet the PM has no shame, and in fact is acting as if he has just laid the golden egg.

To rephrase this, 80% of eligible voters in Canada are, in effect, subsequently experiencing “taxation without representation”, made worse by the fact that the PM is still refusing to allow Parliament to sit, once again using the pandemic “opportunity” as the excuse. In the truest sense of the word, none of this is democratic.

It is troubling that over one third of Canadians eligible to vote did not exercise their agency.  Additionally, the lackluster participation at the ballot box by the younger constituent is unfortunate.  According to Election Canada polls, the main reason for apathy across this (18 to 24 age group) demographic is that “they are not interested in politics”.

It is safe to state the obvious; “politics have become a train wreck in Canada”.   With special interest group “shadow campaigns”, possible foreign interference, divisionism, biased media, and apathy, the political scene is likely going to continue to deteriorate if Canadians do not speak up.   The time to do so is now.

Elections Canada – accessed Oct 18/21
Explaining the Turnout Decline in Canadian Federal Elections: A New Survey of Non-voters – Elections Canada

Covid is Not a Disaster

The Covid-19 pandemic is not a disaster. It is a major inconvenience made worse by the missteps of the political, administrative, and professional decision makers involved. Its major characteristic as a problem is that it has defied a solution for almost two years.

Canadians should consider what they would do if a real disaster struck, be it fire, flood, earthquake, war, or just a genuine pestilence. Given societal reaction to the current event, all should be very concerned.

Unlike the United Kingdom Canada does not have Army Field Hospital units where the Commanding Officer can have a discussion over tea with the National Health Service, lay his hands on enough staff and equipment, and ten days later open a hospital to hold five hundred patients, expandable to four thousand.

Unlike Germany, Canada does not have a national auxiliary fire fighting and rescue service whose crews and equipment were deployed earlier this year to help respond to the sudden damage from the worst floods in five hundred years.

Unlike the United States, Canada does not have large, national, multifunctional military forces which can deploy hospital ships or integral medical support when needed. Nor does it have the National Guard which can be called out by state governors without asking anyone’s permission.

In Canada, it appears, there is a mismanagement of government that has chipped away at its country’s national disaster response capacity, and in every one of their terms since the middle of the last century, has contrived, intentionally or not, to make the problem worse.