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.”

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.

Where’s the Money?

One cannot pick up any newspaper without seeing a reminder that advances in technology are rapidly changing the way people now live and work. Canadians are as active in developing new ideas as any national group but are not as good when it comes to reaping the benefits of their future commercial developments.

Whoever wins the current election might be well advised to make changing this a priority because it is from ideas that jobs in manufacturing, distribution, and sales spring. Furthermore, one idea often leads to another, and the economic development process starts anew.

For all the encouraging information coming out about ground-breaking new developments, there seems to be an equal amount emerging about technology that is on the verge of production being sold to a large, often offshore, industrial or investment concern. In too many cases it means that the technology itself is exported and the highly skilled manufacturing jobs it generates are developed for other people. In other cases, the income derived from it benefits the offshore buyer, and not Canada.

If this is a matter of real concern, Canada’s tax system could stand reforming to allow for large scale capital assembly so that money created from peoples’ good ideas stays in the country to be used for the development of new businesses.  If any of the local candidates could use some suggestions for where the money could be used, they might consider the opportunities available in the forest products sector and their potential for new materials used in the construction of new housing.

Quebec Nation

It appears that due to conditioning, with help from the government education curriculum, many citizens of Canada have lost sight of, or have never known the political history of the country they call home.   For example, many Canadians do not know what the 1763 “Treaty of Paris” is, and why Canada effectively has a French colony inside its borders.

From early contact with First Nations, to the basic-survival of the Pioneers, and their respective ensuing diplomatic struggles,  leaders of different nations and cultures, some capable and some inept, forged forward with plans that did not always end well.  From the French and Indian War/Seven Year War (1)  of 1754-1763 that culminated in the ratification of “The Treaty of Paris”, to the failure of “The Albany Plan of Union” in 1774, there are volumes of history that answer many questions as to how Canada evolved divided, and how some historical decisions are still negatively reverberating today.  (2)

For example, after the “Treaty of Paris”, addressing Quebec separately was accommodated by “The Quebec Act” of 1774 which reinstituted French Civil Law in Quebec, pointedly for matters of private law (i.e.: law between individuals) but left English Common Law intact for public matters (i.e.: between individuals, governments, and institutions).  (3)

The “Official Languages Act” which formally added French as one of the official languages of Canada, did not exist until it was championed in 1969 by PM Pierre Trudeau.  (4)  Along with other increments, one of the most recent concessions Quebec has sought is to be recognized as a “Nation” – which will likely lead to future Constitutional repercussions.   As the current Premier of Quebec, Mr. Legault signifies in his own words; …his government has “the right and duty to use the clause, especially when the foundation of our existence as a people in America is at stake.”, he emphasizes a rarely spoken opinion that Quebec has distinction and status above all other provinces. (5)

Parents of any family know that showering special treatment on one child, especially if it is at the expense of siblings, is a recipe for disharmony, if not complete disaster.   If Canada can be seen as a big family of provinces, all the historical and recent concessions, along with exorbitant transfer payments to Quebec, extracted from provinces that are struggling, indeed come across as questionable.  If the federal government truly wants equality, it should start here.  It is long past time for Canada to become one country, undivided.

(1) Milestones: 1750–1775 – Office of the Historian (state.gov)

(2) Albany Plan – Wikipedia

(3) Quebec Act, 1774 | The Canadian Encyclopedia

(4) Official Languages Act (Canada) – Wikipedia

(5) Quebec seeks to amend Canadian Constitution with new language law – The Globe and Mail


Canada’s Election 44

Election 44 seems to be more about the personal political needs of one individual Canadian than the needs of the (approximately) thirty-eight million other people who call Canada home.  It is about spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars frivolously, on an unwanted and unnecessary election, at a time of financial and medical crises.  The current circulating opinion is that full unadulterated majority, i.e., control, is what is sought, as this is what is needed to unfold and implement a specific agenda upon the nation.

Canadians have not been privy to the game plan, but a handful of recent Bills, ‘lying in wait’ in the House of Commons, spell out some of what is to come if the current administration is not held at bay.

It appears to many Canadians that the current Liberal government is not working hard for the struggling taxpayer, but instead is playing political charades, aggressively vote-pandering to the uninformed and special interest groups, (possibly with the intentional help of select media) in order to stay in office for its own self-fulfilling purpose.  In its truest sense of the term, this is not democracy at work.  It is the duty of Canadians to educate themselves of the facts and address this on September 20, 2021.

What is the Tipping Point?

Human beings are not livestock, to be forcibly herded, corralled, inoculated, and used.  They are free autonomous beings.

A population is in danger when its leaders “bait-and-switch”, installing themselves with grandiose powers, instituting their own personal agendas and abusing the funds of the hard-working taxpayer.  Taxpayers generally have no opposition to paying taxes and expect to pay their share for their country’s infrastructure.  But when tax dollars are syphoned off by the billions and used for a leader’s external ambitions, or extraneous pet projects, citizens are justifiably outraged.  This citizenry-affront arises because of a leader’s failure to remember that taxes are not government money; taxes are monies entrusted by taxpayers to the government to work on their behalf.

A population is also in danger when its leaders try to stifle or psychologically muzzle them.  When people are coerced into a new governmentally subscribed vocabulary, to the point of some words and phrases being prohibited by law, a population is in peril of losing one of its most basic and treasured liberties – free speech.  When mandated indoctrination replaces free expression, all forms of discourse; humour, debate, opinion, and even simple conversations are jeopardized.  This is authoritarianism at work.

The question arises, as to what level does a society sink before it completely succumbs to full-fledged authoritarianism?  How far does neo-despotism have to go before it is widely noticed and challenged by a majority?  What has history demonstrated?  What is the tipping point between a population’s begrudging-acquiescence and open societal conflict? These are just a few of the issues and questions people in the free western world are now having serious conversations about.



It is not only charming to live in a small town where everyone knows everyone else, but it is also generally safer.  When humans have close-knit reciprocal relationships; when they, at an innate level depend on each other, having something to lose or gain, whether economically, socially, or psychologically, they are likely to be mutually cooperative in their daily lives.  Natural reciprocity breeds peaceful co-habitation.  Forced reciprocity does not.

Extrapolating this premise to the current political landscape in Canada, one can see that the innate human contract has broken down.  Reciprocity has, in effect, turned to force and extortion.  Where once resided reasonable middle ground now sits Left and far-Left assemblies, making stifling demands on an already stressed middle-class population, and in the process crippling the framework that underpins economics.  A group of multi-millionaires and billionaires, not wanting to miss an opportunity, or possibly creating it in the first place, deftly wield the proverbial marionette in their own misguided delusions of grandeur.  They are like “want-to-be-kings in waiting”.  For what?  For the complete breakdown of society?

Ultimately the result is a struggling middle-class that is being crushed and looted from all sides.  The majority of whom have been psychologically divided from each other, muzzled, and beaten down by political correctness and cancel culture, to a point where they are in danger of losing the very fortitude required to rise up against this phenomenon.   A debilitating phenomenon that can only be described as liberal fascism.

Canada Day

The City of Victoria has decided not to celebrate Canada Day. Considering the recent Kamloops Residential School discovery of possible burial sites, they have cancelled their planned one-hour virtual broadcast, opting for an event on Sept. 6th honouring the wishes of the Lekwungen Nations.

Mayor Lisa Helps encouraged other communities to do the same. The effect has been electric. #Cancel Canada Day trended on Twitter. Other communities are considering cancelling celebrations, and media outlets are discussing the legitimacy of Canada Day. This induces some important questions for Canadians.

Why is this happening? A political agenda is being pursued by those who seek to revise Canadian history, cancel our customs, and alter our institutions. This is another perfect opportunity for progressive activists to deconstruct Canadian history. The expression “Never let a good crisis go to waste” applies here as various politically motivated groups try to reconstruct Canada. All Canadians mourn the lost children and condemn the excesses of the residential schools.  This is not new information.   An acknowledgement or prayer may be in order, yes, but it is not reasonable to cancel Canada Day.

Canada is a great Nation. Canadians have the right to celebrate their history in the light of balanced consideration and proper historical context.  They should not be shamed into renaming institutions, taking down statues, or chastened into thinking of themselves as components of a pariah nation. It is not historically accurate or fair. Every community in Canada should celebrate Canada Day with pride because, in the end, Canada is a country worth celebrating.

Rudyard Griffiths: Instead of reconciliation, we are busy with pointless acts of retribution | The Hub