Preserving Freedom

Big Brother Image: Panmacmillan.com



Preserving Freedom
​
... by taking away our freedoms.

I feel dizzy.  I can't vote Conservative; I just can't. But I can't vote Liberal either, not any more. Governments have gone nuts, period. For one thing, they are in thrall to the UN (or vice versa in the case of the US), citing Peace as an excuse for War, carefully avoiding using the actual words: "War is Peace". And the Trudeau bunch are competing hard to get back onto the Security Council so that Canada can participate in these endeavours.

In the early '80's I was called a "secular humanist" by an evangelical. It was a newly-minted pejorative I had not before heard, so I had to assess the tone of voice to realize I had been condemned to hellfire. My cheeky reply was "When I, myself, decide that I am one, I'll let you know."

Not being a joiner, and glad of it since the movement itself is fraught with political/religious differences, I found I did agree, however, with the basic tenets of humanism, although I do think "morality" is a subjective term. So, still on the burning pit trajectory and feeling pretty good about it.

I hadn't yet clued in, back then, to the love/hate relationships that capitalism maintains for the sake of profits. For instance, our government can cause a media uproar about playfights (just a Tweet in the bucket) with Saudi Arabia over women's rights, while still working on the QT to sell them military equipment. Same with big, bad Iran. Tweet them evil but whisper "Have I got a deal for you" when it comes to selling them planes.

We're kept focussed on our obsessive political correctness, constantly raising the bar so that we don't even know what to call what used to be our First Nations People and especially can't pronounce the growing acronym of sexual identities, not to mention that we're stymied as to why "antisemitic" does not refer equally to prejudice against both Jews and Arabs. (Why did we need a whole nother word: "Islamophobia"?)

Why can't we just be people who try to treat one another decently?  Does it have to do with the failure of mothers to teach their kids to play nice and share their toys? Yes, of course, it's always the mothers. And, no, that's not sexism, it's sarcasm!

Take a look at the 1999 movie "Must Be Santa" (script written by Douglas Bowie of Kingston Ontario) and see a little girl sitting happily on the knee of a "black" Santa who had trouble fitting into the job let alone the oversized suit, and who for all they know could also have been "gay", Jewish, Muslim or gawd knows what.

Kids have to be taught to hate and fear differences, and it takes a whole village to accomplish that.

A negative IMDB reviewer of the film says:  "The worst offense is the main character using his Santa-mind-control to force a little girl to love him. That's a wonderful example of Christmas Spirit, isn't it?"

Little does the disgruntled commenter realize, attempts have been made to cause all of us to love Santa and God and Jesus and the Easter Bunny, all of whose stories contain the directive "you'd better love us" or else no presents under the tree, no chocolate eggs, and no Heaven when you die. The reviewer himself was brainwashed to have binding standards for a "Christmas Spirit" that doesn't really exist, at least not without a lot of TV/school cheerleading aimed at the kids, and non-stop grocery store music aimed at shoppers, and then maybe a little spiked egg nog or punch.

Peace and Goodwill can be a very selective sentiment. We sing about it while wars are raging, and people are fighting over the last Barbie doll.

By the way, the Must Be Santa movie mentions the word "snowflake" but with the original meaning, not the more recent pejorative one.  It's a shame I even had to point that out.

Now check what our government is so eager to be an integral part of (again):

UN Security Council: Peace and Security

• The Security Council takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, the Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Security: now there's a magic word. People will vote for any fool who peppers his rhetoric with that. A more honest description would be "peace OR security", and we all know what "security" entails.  Locks, alarms, weapons ...

It has occurred to me that every night prison inmates are locked into their cells, and also that, if we forget or lose our keys, we can't get into ours.  Locked in or locked out: Security = Prison.  How's that for a 1984-ism?

Especially when things go all topsy-turvy and we have to hear it from a Conservative that our Liberal freedoms are evaporating:

Stephen Ledrew - YouTube - Comment Nation: Putin's right — we've killed liberalism.

• Governments that once fought for freedom are now regulating it away — and we need to stop them.

I can't believe this is a video produced by the pro-Con National Post, but anyone who watches it can see that more and more laws are being struck to regulate the speech and behaviour of the entire population. Soon there will be a law that men can't wear bow-ties, big red eyeglasses and pink/blue-pin-striped shirts. Never mind that Ledrew is strikingly slim and fit-looking for an old guy (am I allowed to say "old guy"? No, that's "ageism" - sorry).  Good for him!

He's also got a definition for "populism" - YouTube -  Turns out it's just an insult elites hurl when votes go against them

​YYC: Populism: Who Needs It?

Having fun?  This will further entertain and amaze you:

Vladimir Putin: the full interview (YouTube)

• The Financial Times is the first major international newspaper to be granted an interview with the Russian leader for 16 years. Here is the exclusive interview with editor Lionel Barber and Moscow bureau chief Henry Foy in full

• Viewer comment: "Is this legal in the west? Unedited interview, without interrupting , accusing or demonizing Putin?"

The video even comes with a handy list of subjects covered and where to locate them in the video. I'm including it here for future reference because this Putin video is definitely a download keeper and I might lose the URL or the video might disappear from YouTube:

0:01:49 Has the world become more fragmented? 0:02:27 What do you want to achieve in Osaka? 0:04:31 OPEC oil production agreements 0:07:27 How does Trump compare to other US presidents? 0:10:54 Trump’s criticisms of European alliances 0:15:10 Globalisation vs ‘America First’ 0:16:25 Russia and China’s relationship 0:21:02 Danger of tensions between Russia America and China 0:24:05 Arms control 0:26:45 Potential for nuclear agreements 0:28:08 China’s maritime strength 0:30:45 North Korea 0:33:06 North Asia security situation 0:34:42 Has your appetite for risk increased? 0:36:51 Intervening in Syria 0:42:13 Venezuela 0:50:15 Anglo-Russian relations post Skripal 0:55:32 Did what happened in Salisbury send an unambiguous message to anyone who is thinking of betraying the Russian state that it is fair game? 0:57:04 Russia’s economy and foreign exchange reserves 1:04:18 Russia’s macro economic stability - oligarchs 1:06:05 Breakup of the Soviet Union vs China’s anticorruption campaign 1:09:30 Can Russian remain immune to backlashes against the establishment? 1:14:30 Did Angela Merkel make a mistake? 1:18:32 The end of the liberal idea 1:21:15 Religion is not the opium of the masses? 1:21:49 Is now the time for illiberals? 1:24:33 Who do you most admire? 1:26:10 How will your successor be chosen?

Below Image: Goalcast.com