Who Left the Overton Window Open

For those not in the know, the Overton Window is the range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time. An example of this in Canada is where Blasphemous libel was a crime under section 296 of the Criminal Code R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46. Subsection (1), though there was Subsection (3) that provided a legal ‘out’ which stated "No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section for expressing in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to establish by argument used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, an opinion on a religious subject". This law along, with the ‘out’, was repealed on December 13^th 2018.

 

Staying in Canada for now, Bill C-16 received Royal Assent on June 19^th, 2017. The premise of Bill C-16 was to add ‘gender expression’ and ‘gender identity’ to both the Canadian Human Rights Act as protective grounds and to the Criminal Code with regard to hate propaganda, incitement to genocide, and aggravating factors in sentencing.

 

The two examples above show how the Overton Window has shifted away from ‘disagree politely’ towards ‘thou shalt not’ or even ‘thou must’ when it comes to freedom of speech. Speech is probably the most significant aspect of being human. Humans use their own speech to convey their own ideas and the speech of others is used to try to understand the thoughts and ideas of others.

 

Anti-speech or the curtailing of speech are both synonyms for the same action, which falls under the title of censorship, are bad because those actions stifle any exchange of ideas and without the exchange of ideas there can be no possibility of a mutually agreeable compromise. Without mutually agreeable compromise there can be only two eventual outcomes and those are WAR or SUBMISSION and seeing as submission has historically eventually led to war via revolution, it seems there is actually only one inevitable outcome. This leaves the author to wonder why anyone would encourage censorship unless they don’t want compromise.

Section 2

Moving on to another pain in the Overton Window; here we are talking about the UN v. Nationalism. A concerted effort over the last seventy-five plus years there has been in the works an effort to take down the idea of nation states. Post World War Two (WW2) the United Nations (UN) was formed in October of 1945 with the purpose of maintaining international peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations, achieve international cooperation, and be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations. While these goals were at the time laudable, it is the opinion of this author that the UN has failed in the original mandate with the exception of that last talking point.

 

The Nationalism v. UN argument was replicated with the formation of the European Union (EU). These two entities have a commonality in that these institutions’ leaders are not elected and when leadership is not elected, leadership falls outside the realm of consequence. Eight hundred plus years ago, 1215 AD, the one and only King John of England signed the Magna Carta bringing into law the principle that no one, not even the King of England, is above the law. The word ‘democracy’ means, ‘power from the people’ and it now seems that most of the people today have less power over their own lives than those of their fathers and grandfathers had.

 

 

The emergent path, in the Western world, if left on its current course will rip the Magna Carta asunder along with all derived documents. The Roman Manorial system was the basis for the European Feudal system; both systems were based on a pact between the land owner and those who did don’t own land also know as the commoners; the pact was that if the commoner stayed on the land and worked the land then the owner, who lorded over the commoners, would provide protection. Through the passage of time and wars nation states started to form and so Kings and Queens became a thing throughout Europe and in the early years the only one a King or Queen answered to would be God; and this is what the Magna Carta sought to change.

 

These hierarchical governments are easily described as an obtuse triangle with a very broad base. England, via the Magna Carta and other legal moves, became the look-to nation for many governments around the world. England could not shake its feudal history, hence why there are a House of Commons and a House of Lords. The USA borrowing the British system had to change the names for reasons, hence why there are The Congress and the Senate; if it turns out that Congress is based on the word congregation and the title Senate was borrowed from Roman politics, then perhaps the US didn’t do so well at separating Church and State after all.

Section 3

Moving on to the next Overton pain, we will be the addressing of how overtly sexualized key Western societies have become. Societies that last long enough will cycle through times of prudence and times of excess. As the known world, from the Western perspective grew, the impact of these cycles also grew. An obvious example came from the end of WWI (1914-1920) is the ‘Roaring Twenties’ in the US and around the same time in Germany there was a surge in ‘partying’ that included a rise in drinking, cross-dressing, and homosexuality for both sexes. It is the opinion of this author that similar activities were being performed in the US though much of that information was scrubbed from the historical record in order to maintain the illusion of Protestant prudence.

 

World War II (1939-1945) brought an end to the earlier period of excess and post WWII saw a return to prudence across much of the Western world and beyond. The return to prudence, most likely due to the shortages incurred during war time coupled with the technological advancements such as rocketry and with many countries attempting to present a strong face to a world entrenched in a cold war; this lasted 25 years and a little bit.

 

The 1960s brought forth another milestone moment for the world was the introduction of the birth control pill. The feminists of the day leveraged ‘the pill’ by telling women that they could have the same ‘freedom’ as men in the realm of promiscuity. The slight of the feminists hand, intentional or not, was that women while free socially became fiscally taxable because there was social pressure that women could only be considered successful by doing what men do over doing what men can’t. Item of note - since the 1970s, studies have shown that the happiness of women has in general been in decline.

 

Perhaps it was simply frustration or the masculinization of women or a combination of both, Western societies started to socially embrace the acceptance of homosexuality after the mostly peaceful protests which started in 1969 and carried on into the 1970s with the Gay Liberation March on June 28^th 1970 in New York city. That first march, of about 250 men, was morphed into the Pride Parades of today.

NOTE: This author makes no assertion towards a full understanding of the homosexual community or the politics that surround that community. This author sees the up and coming demise for the publicity side of the Pride movement; though unlike the Climate Disaster people, this author will not provide a date on an ever sliding scale as to when this change will come.

 

The Gay Liberation March simply sought public acceptance and an end to prosecution in both the legal and public domains. On the other side of the US the Personal Rights in Defense and Education (PRIDE), a political organization was already well established since their start in 1966 Los Angeles. Though PRIDE as an organization dissolved in 1968 due to backlash against their radical approach and occasionally violent actions; it would not be a surprise if the current ‘Pride Parade’ events are a shout out to that earlier movement.

 

When Pierre Elliot Trudeau said ‘There is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation’ he was correct; though for some within the homosexual portion of society were still not satisfied and wanted to bring their bedroom out to the street. Many understand the concept of ‘strength in numbers’ and while historically that phrase has only been accurate in peaceful protest and the violence that may follow. The homosexual community made the mistake of going beyond any mandate of acceptance or normalization, for some within their ranks now seeks reverence; there is no reason why a homosexual lifestyle should be celebrated any more or less than a heterosexual one. Returning to the numbers game, it seems that each year or two a new group or sub-group is added to the roster of participants and eventually one of these groups will be outside of the Overton Window, thus collapsing the whole effort.

 

In recent years there was a push by some to add the letter P to the already over flowing cup of alphabet soup. The P was rightly rejected as it stood for Pedophilia. Not to be deterred from losing out on public support the pedophilic-lobby did a rebranding exercise by converting their label to MAPs (Minor Attracted Persons). Another term that has recently come into play is TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist); this though time the title was not self imposed, it was awarded to some feminists by the Trans-lobbyists.

Conclusion

Andrew Breitbart posited that ‘politics is down stream from culture’, a statement which is mostly true. This claim is made because politicians have a dual role; the first role is to protect the society while the second role being to promote the wishes of that same society. One of the ugliest heads in any society is lobbying; as a well funded enthusiastic group can steer the perceptions of the political class, thus skewing impressions.

 

Recent events and the reporting of from many News outlets, has lifted the preverbal rug, thus exposing what some people wanted swept under the public’s perception. There has been for a few years now a concerted effort to introduce sex to young minors and racism to young adults. It must be realized that there is a difference between a ‘government with prying eyes’ a ‘government that states- show me the man and I’ll show you the crime’ and those who knowingly hide their actions as they stepped outside the Overton Window.