When the BS Leaves the Farm

 George Carlin stated: 'Bullshit is the glue that binds us as a nation.' this was just a single line out of one of Mr. Carlin’s typical rants, and as usual he was spot on. Seeing as the American culture tends to rub off on Canada culture, mostly due to proximity. In days gone past the sources of the cultural rubbing were movies and television, this all changed when the public internet became ubiquitous. Full disclosure, I’m not on any of the social-media platforms, though I do watch YouTube videos and engage in the occasional conversations there.

 One difficulty in this exercise is deciding the order of presentation. So, I’m going to try to contain each explanation section complete with a heading in bold. Most of these talking points have been brushed up against or deeply dived into in the last year or two while others will be new to even frequent readers.

 Migration- Legal, Mass, or Criminal:

The idea of a person moving from one place to another is as old as mankind itself with the main reason being opportunity. Of course the details of the reason matter and so preface the items in the following list with ‘opportunity to’: fight a war, flee a war, flee famine, improve education, gain employment, get free stuff (welfare), and visit new lands (tourism); now also it seems climate change. I’ll get to the last item eventually.  

 Companies and corporations like immigration mostly due to the suppression of wages, this is especially true when unskilled labour and illegal migration collide. Governments or more specifically, certain political parties like migration for a variety of reasons, though this varies based on location. Here are two examples: in California residents are counted in the census regardless of citizenship status, this will impact the number of seat in congress. In England, studies show that 80% of migrants tend to vote for the Labour party, thus gaining a larger portion of their House.

 Governments typically provide three reasons for migration and these are, GDP, an aging population, and compassion for refugees claiming asylum. On GDP, in both Canada and the US, government spending is included in GDP. Unfortunately, outside of infrastructure projects and life services (military/police/fire/medical) government spending provides no value to the citizenry. On pensions, everyone gets older until they don’t and because of inflation contributions to government based pension plans is a loosing proposition. On refugees, it would take a cold heart to not want to help though only so much help can be given else the host country becomes bankrupt.

 The more money the governments prints or borrows the worse inflation gets, and except for the rich high inflation hurts everyone because it reduces spending power, which particularly impacts fixed income citizens; that would be old people. Margaret Thatcher use to say ‘socialism works until you run out of other people’s money’ and this is the problem many Western countries face right now.

 

A Return to Feudalism:

Klaus Shwab of the World Economic Forum (WEF) has told the public at large that ‘you will own nothing and be happy’. Karl Marx put pen to paper in a letter and provided the line ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs’. In consideration of the human condition, the more likely result will be the former while the majority of the people would prefer the latter; please remember that the majority of people no matter where one goes are the poor.

 Currently the US Democratic Party’s most common talking point is about the protection of US democracy and yet that party’s leader, Joe Biden, has resumed funding the World Health Organization and the WHO is currently overhauling their charter in an attempt to make them the de facto source for all items regarding health globally. This includes but not limited to: pandemic status, medicine selection, actions and behaviours, information validity and messaging.

 The problem with the efforts currently underway by the WHO, an agency of the UN, is that it is not an elected body and yet it is looking to claim power over the citizenry of countries currently labeled as democratic states; in the past the WHO was limited to issuing suggestions and recommendation. An equivalency would be if the unelected leaders of the UN gave themselves the power to conscript the citizenry of member states into the Blue Helmet peace-keeping force.

 

CBDCs:

A Central Bank Digital Currency is a method of exchange based on interconnected databases where all transactions worldwide are housed and tracked by different National Banks. Banking across the globe was made already made suspect ever since the gold-standard was abandoned for the petro-dollar, which has by the way been dislodged by the consumption-dollar. We are now entrenched in a situation where the combination of bureaucracy, citizen bribery, and the use of a fiat currency has run its course. A fiat currency is in effect a ‘credit card’ when coupled with a low level of cash on-hand-reserve rule for banks and so the politicians who relied on citizenry bribery allowed the money printing machines go BRRRR. Then when both higher interest rates and inflation takes hold, the sound of citizenry happiness is now being displaced by the now all too common sound of money printing machines making an ever increasing BRRRRRRR sound while the poor people make an ever increasing WAAAAA sound.

CBCDs, if they work as described do have one problem for government though, they are traceable. Why this is a problem for government is because both the apparatus and the people within the apparatus occasionally like to do things outside of the light of public scrutiny; unless of course the block-chain that backs the CBDC is kept out of the public domain, which I suspect will be the case.

Power v. Responsibility

There is an old missive that states, ‘with great power comes great responsibility’ and while at one time this may have been a truism, this statement seemingly no longer holds water and has in fact been turned into a tool for gas lighting, at least in regards to government. In theory we the people in a representative government system hand power to society members via the election process and those people get to make choices for the citizenry on their behalf. So what happens when a politician screws up, intentional or accidently, we all know that the answer is effectively sweet-F-all; at least until the next election; except under rare circumstances. Of course they will get shuffled out of their current position or post due to their actions, yet they don’t loose their pension, or so I’ve been led to believe.

 

Calling People Alt/Far-Right

Politics is a dirty, dirty game and the public Internet hasn’t helped the process as the confusion around politics became exasperated by different linguistic traditions. Consider the following two definitions found on Google as defined by Oxford Languages:

 Right Wing (noun)

The section of a political party or system that advocates for free enterprise and private ownership, and typically favors socially traditional ideas; the conservative group or section.

Left Wing (noun)

The section of a political party or system that advocates for greater social and economic equality, and typically favors socially liberal ideas; the liberal or progressive group or section.

 The go-to labels typically applied to a person who is to be demonized as being of far-right temperament are Fascist and Nazi. Returning to Google the two previously mention terms were entered and Oxford Languages was ditched in favour of Wikipedia. In an attempt towards consistency, Oxford Languages was directly approached; unfortunately only Google gets free access.  

 Fascism, n.

gen. An authoritarian and nationalistic system of government and social organization which emerged after the end of the First World War in 1918, and…

Nazi, n. & adj.

A member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (now historical); a member of any similar organization. Also more generally, usually in…

 

 Communism, n.

A theory that advocates the abolition of private ownership, all property being vested in the community, and the organization of labour for the common…

 ‘Working men of all countries unite!’ was the rally cry made famous by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848 laid the groundwork for the socialist and communist ethos. Mussolini came to power in 1922 and Hitler eleven year later. In both cases they were in battles against the communist parties in their respective countries, even at the street level. Additional social-political context needs to be mentioned here: the Great War had recently ended, the Russian revolution had just happened and a lot of people were very unhappy.

Moving on, countries like DRC and DPRK have shown that the practice of pointing to the name of a country to describe the political position of said country doesn’t have to align. This doesn’t mean that one can’t see another country and trust how it was named, such as the United States of America. Each person must sort out on their own if National Socialist was an obvious self labeling or a deception at a Congolese level.

 The first item to be addressed is to take a look at the communist leaders and to determine if they were authoritarian or not, and history tells us that yes they were/are. Also, if one returns to the Google provided Oxford Languages definitions, the Right seeks free enterprise and private ownership; the recognition of a voluntary exchange of value needs also be added. The Left conversely seeks greater social and economic equality, and typically favors socially liberal ideas. It is beyond the understanding of this author how a government can create economic equality based on voluntary acts as that has historically been the purview of the religious. 

 Another facet of this discussion is the idea towards the takeover of the means of production; there was a kinetic war getting started, at the time and every country did this by different means and at varying degrees. The recent moves by many governments around the globe in their answers to COVID-19 showed just how far some representative democracies will go in a ‘time of war’ to ensure ‘the safety’ of their populations. Please note that historically men were willing to die in war to protect the Rights of others, while the war on Covid-19 had people’s Rights taken away to save lives.

 A perspective, to be kept front of mind for is the saying, ‘when one is a hammer every problem looks like a nail’. In other words, the Left can’t seem to help themselves, for when someone is not part of their group then that person must be part of the other. And the more famous a current character is, then that person must be framed as previous famous people who were in the out-group. What it comes down to is how will you the reader answer these two simple questions: when someone labels a dog’s tail a leg how many legs does that dog have? The second question is; does your answer to the first question reflect more upon you or on the dog?

 This missive might come across as ‘much adieu about nothing’, then riddle me this, why then are those left-leaning Politicians so enthusiastic in their acts of labeling those outside their group and forgiveness for those in their in-group? For those not in the know, the original ANTIFA (Antifaschisitsche Aktion) was founded by the Stalinist Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in 1932 Weimar Republic.

 

The Not So Might Power Strangers

Mr. Danielli, my father would tell me today if he felt I needed to hear it, ‘Richard, people can look good by doing good work or by putting down the works of other.’ I’ve striven to be the former and avoid being the later unless there is proof. Meanwhile, for others my father’s words seem to have provided the alternate conclusion and so they put down others towards providing a personal tactical advantage; this can work in a society where the majority of people don’t wish to cause offence. Those who wish to capitalize on the kindness of others have seemingly run in to a bit of a problem, for now they are tending to over step the line of reasonableness for those they wish to oppress. In short, these oppressors seem to have forgotten that patience is a virtue, especially when one seeks to subjugate others.

 Borrowing a line from the show Peaky Blinders character Thomas Shelby, ‘You don't parley when you're on the back foot.’ The back foot position is the defensive pose into which many people are currently being thrust into via the defamatory labels being tossed about. This tactic is quite simple, by publically labeling someone as a white nationalist, a xenophobe, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, or as being a sexist the labeler expects two outcomes. The first anticipated outcome is that the singled out individual will feel some sort shame or guilt and back down, the second outcome being that the public at large will believe the labeling and the side against the labeled person.

 Never having seen the show Peaky Blinders, it is not clear if the quote above from Thomas Shelby is to be treated as an instruction or a warning; of course it can be both, when given the right the situation. A similar argument has been going on since the 1500s when Niccolò Machiavelli wrote The Prince where Machiavelli posited that the good prince must be able to mimic both the fox, which is sly enough to avoid traps, and the wolf, which is strong enough to scare off their enemies.

 A village built upon a monoculture typically has a set of cultural norms that the majority accepts; these norms will of course shift over time. When change happens too quickly or suddenly becomes exposed the majority of any society will feel that those seeking change have gone beyond the pale; the caveat being that the majority will not complain if there is a strong enough amount of force exhibited.

 A multi-cultural village is harder to socially navigate and therefore harder to manipulate due to the kaleidoscopic nature of that society. Due to varied ideological belief systems the same messaging can not be applied across all facets of such a society.

 

Climate Change:

At 0.04% of the atmosphere, C0₂ is a food for plants. A giant redwood tree typically lives 800 to1,500 years, and if one was to die it could be felled and the tree rings examined to see what the effects have been. This would be the most obvious of proofs no-one has tried to give and until they do at least try I will continue to call bull-shit.

  

“There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs.”

Thomas Sowell