Entirely possible and I would say a reasonable contention. Giving ground lets them take ground.
I would note that the greater weakness of the LPC contra the CPC in this particular decade will be ruinous in light of Communist-occupied China's hundred year marathon, now in its final stretch. Were the international implications of a NDP-LPC coalition or another LPC government not so consequential (i.e. for the West), I'd say let the left continue to activate conservative sentiments. We can't run the risk.
Henceforth, take a paywalled link, put it into archive.is, and voila. Archived.
Also: National Post articles can be read behind paywall via Google Incognito mode.
C.S. Lewis is great (I loved the Pilgrim's Regress and Screwtape), but it's important to recall that he is the ripple off of GKC that reached the shore.
Man Who Was Thursday was a lot of fun. Chesterton led the same detective fiction club that Agathie Christie and other greats were part of.
Manalive is another phenomenal work of fiction that Chuck Palahniuk stole from for Fight Club.
The two essential works of his non-fiction are Orthodoxy and The Everlasting Man, and the latter is immensely powerful (and responsible for converting C.S. Lewis). Once done with those, Eugenics and Other Evils is a compelling read, though just a compilation of short essays.
Refuse to concede to the statists' / leftists' linguistic territory and refuse to limit yourself to the boundaries of their irrational framework.
E.g. Rather than call a man claiming to be a woman a "biological male" (itself a grievous crime in the eyes of the left) just call him a man. [Don't try to win the match. Reject the game.]
The parallel: rather than debating the particulars of the experimental vaccines (e.g. adverse effects; efficacy; etc.), emphasize the universal and lasting implications of a state denying law-abiding citizens their natural rights, allegedly sacrificing that liberty for illusory safety all amidst conflicts of interest too profitable to discount. [Government wielding and using unprecedented emergency powers. Big pharma (making the US Congress richer, to say nothing of Canadian politicians) getting huge paydays with total indemnity. Media pivoting from bleeding edge new to wheezing edge, trying to maintain clicks and ad value post-Trump and addicted to grief porn tune-ins.
Are you vaccine hesitant?
(To your point) "None of anyone's fucking business."
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia deserve to collapse as well. Few recall that 12 out of the 15 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi nationals and that Saudi Arabia is the biggest exporter of Wahhabist terrorism in the world. That Afghanistan with its 90% Sunni population and its Taliban armed by the CCP throughout the Soviet and Western occupations fails again only to become some backwater caliphate is not our concern. The genocidal terror state in Beijing is, however; and we need to shift our priorities big time.
JCCF will have your back. If I'm not mistaken, they support such cases pro-bono. Conscientious objection on religious grounds. https://www.jccf.ca/
Harper's gotta swing into action and O'Toole's gotta kiss the ring.
The reality is Bernier will max out at 8%, siphoning votes away from Liberal Lite, and guaranteeing either an NDP-LPC coalition or an LPC minority.
I think from mid-2015 forward he's been stellar. Called out the depredations of the Clinton camp. Called out the Obama regime for spying on the Trump campaign. Called out the false flag in Syria. Championed the cause of Nick Sandmann. Called out the Russian Collusion Hoax. Pointed out the innocence of the Ukraine phone call. Called out the treacherousness and insanity of the impeachment charade. Pointed out the benefits of President Trump's conservative populism (and expounded on his short pundit's analysis in Ship of Fools). Pointed out the benefits of a secure border and ending foreign entanglements in the Near East. Pointed out the wins on the abortion front that pro-lifers have been having. Pointed out the left's various hate hoaxes and the media's zealousness about accepting them as true. Pointed out elements of the steal both during and after the illegitimate 2020 election. Has been calling out the Dems for cementing their one-party state (with RINO carry-alongs) and for their hypocrisy.
Can't agree more about the response to weakness. The real and symbolic strength of Trump (recall the use of the MOAB; "fire & fury"; etc) shut up a lot of Klingon-types who only respect boldness. This comes up in Conrad Black's book on President Trump, which is worth the read, though not as good as his other presidential biographies. The Al Qaeda one is particularly interesting though, and I wonder if someone can help me make heads or tails of it...
Mike Pillsbury discusses the extent of China's involvement in Afghanistan, first when the Soviets were there (p. 80-83; PDF linked below), and then when the Allies went in post 9/11. Ancient Chinese stratagems are apparently maintained wisdom (p. 42): avoid encirclement at all costs, important to keep in mind as China shares a border with Afghanistan. This is, Pillsbury argues, part of the reason why the Communist Chinese helped America undermine the Soviets (even though the CCP was a fair-weather ally and oftentimes a CCCP beneficiary); why the Chinese helped provide American-bought armaments to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan. It's also why the CCP directly and indirectly aided both the Taliban and Al Qaeda after September 11th.
I wonder if much of the recent noise about Afghanistan is--if not just deep state rumblings and last-ditch efforts to keep America enmeshed in the region with the deadline 24 days away--is more than just jihadist threats manageable by a few drone or cruise missile strikes; if it's an Al Qaeda emboldened by renewed CCP support. (Now, I can't imagine the CCP's extermination of Uyghurs is palatable to other Muslims, though it's important to recognize that regionalism, tribalism, sectarianism, and ethnicity often trump religious affinities, even for extremists.) Though the CCP has a track record with them, here it's conjecture, but strategically, why wouldn't you want to continue to sap American resources and divert antipathy away from the homeland?
Thoughts? Is it just a matter of death cultists raising their voices, or do you imagine there's a bigger play in the mountains?
Hundred Year Marathon: https://elkitab.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/by-Michael-Pillsbury-The-Hundred-Year-Marathon-3572536-z-lib.org_.pdf
I would contend that AIPAC, American (and European) arms manufacturers, and the State Department want a war with Iran. My guess is they can get, extra to RINOs, some populist reps on board if they implicate Iran as a Communist Chinese ally and regime change as a way to kick dirt onto the OBOR, as well as one way of choking oil supply to Beijing, though its reserves are sizeable and its favorable relationship with Russia will keep them liquid.
I'd say Iran's boldness is resultant of Bibi no longer being at the helm in Israel and trying to use international tension to solidify domestic unity granted the pandemic has gutted them, and American sanctions have greatly exacerbated the impact.
Rodney Stark isn't a Catholic, but his history "The Triumph of Christianity" is phenomenal. Even better sourced: Paul Johnson's "The History of Christianity". (Johnson is a Catholic, but he leaves no rock unturned and has no inhibitions about criticizing the Church). I'd say if neither of those two books convinces you, you'll remain convinced of your current position.
To the extent that this massive question and even greater answer can be summarized, I'd say that the Peterine and Pauline "Jesus Movement" (i.e. the Judaic and largely Hellenic groups) converged in large part as a result not just of the persecutions under Nero and Diocletian, but also because of the brutal Persian persecution of the church. I'd ignore Gibbon's spurious revisionist histories (he was a trenchantly anti-Catholic free mason) as well as Voltaire who wrote history to shape the political future, and reconsider Constantine in lieu of recent findings, at least regarding the sincerity of his conversion, and the importance of the Council of Nicaea in terms of eliminating gnostic elements as well as other heretical elements (e.g. those claiming Christ was not consubstantial with God; those claiming Christ was not fully human and fully God; those maintaining that the God of the Old Testament was a demi-urge and the God of the New Testament the ostensibly 'irrational' but loving supra-God). That Christianity was ever unified with a common orthodoxy (one tree with many limbs and branches), it was in the Roman Church, which cites Peter then James as first pontiffs. If you look at other denominations, they were largely driven by ego and passing corruption of the clergy by aristocrats (Lutheranism) and by political gambits (Anglicanism). There are a number of offshoots that were extremists of one sort or another (e.g. Marcionites who wanted to eliminate all Judaic elements in Christianity; Arians who believed in a unitary God and denied the divinity of Christ; and Anabaptists who were a motley of ascetics and lunatics).
What I would contend is that to the extent that there is legitimacy beyond Rome, to a lesser degree but still a considerable extent, it is to be found in Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Notwithstanding the theological confusion and corruption of the Nestorians, those Christian holdouts in northern Africa, which are almost all in communion now with Rome, are also legitimate, especially in terms of apostolic succession.
The Stark book: https://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Christianity-Movement-Largest-Religion/dp/0062007696
Trust me, buddy, I get you and think you've raised some fair points and concerns.
I'd like to highlight one example. The Toronto dioceses never ran a residential school; it has nothing whatsoever to do with them (there is no national Canadian Catholic Church despite ridiculous suggestions to the contrary, discounting ~2000 of the Roman diocesan system). Some activist put hundreds of orange ribbons around the Cathedral downtown--I don't know if it occurs to them that orange is a color long associated with anti-Catholicism and anti-Irish bigotry.
Now, to take down these ribbons, themselves constituting a libel, would give the activist a photo-op and an opportunity for the CBC to seek another unwarranted and innocent pound of flesh. I'm surprised a lay Catholic hasn't taken them down, but understand that it would only serve to engage the professionally offended.
Also note: many of the wealthy dioceses in the West had nothing to do with the residential schools and didn't operate them (e.g. Calgary). It was actually in the 90s when the protestant churches made a deal to pay up then, despite themselves also not bearing much if any 'guilt' in many circumstances. The Catholic churches refused and for good reason. That's part of the reason why post-TRC, there are many in the grievance industry keen to extort money they believe is owing. (Sadly, much of the diocesan funds taken in those regions where residential schools had existed had been earmarked for charitable causes, and instead ended up being claimed by individuals who presented no evidence and were permitted to offer testimony without cross-examination.)
You might think that. I don't want to dox myself by divulging too much, but I know that there are no-bullshit heavy hitters amongst the clergy and lay (i.e. in the Catholic Church in Canada) that are throwing down in ways the media won't cover but are seismic. Just not in Quebec.
Justin Trudeau murdered 28,000 Canadians by slow-rolling the experimental vaccines. My name is Erin The Hammer but don't let it distract you from the fact that in 1998, The Undertaker threw Mankind off Hell In A Cell, and plummeted 16 ft through an announcer’s table.
That's weird. Here's an archived version of the article: https://archive.is/hREkk
"Truthful statements can be presented in a manner that would meet the definition of hate speech, and not all truthful statements must be free from restriction...The benefits of suppression of hate speech and its harmful effects outweigh the detrimental effect of restricting expression, which, by its nature, does little to promote the values underlying freedom of expression."
-Supreme Court of Canada, 2013 Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott Case number 33676
Acton Institute commentary: https://blog.acton.org/archives/50857-when-free-speech-died-in-canada.html
"Incorrect" opinions may include truthful statements. For example: pointing out that Mohammed was an illiterate warlord who married a child and who transmogrified Christian Scripture on the basis of the Arian heretic understanding conferred him by his uncle, though historically correct and factually true would no doubt constitute a hate crime. Pointing out that an individual is a biological man, verboten! Pointing out that the super-majority of those among the ~4,000 who perished in residential schools were dying on arrival from or soon contracted the tuberculosis ubiquitous at the time, a hateful fact worth censoring.
If I am not mistaken, Alberta is a voluntary vaccination province, so head there first; and even if they ultimately threaten you with a tax or a mandatory vaccine, you can get an exemption.
It's a charter rights issue, for starters. Not only would a fine as penalty for refusing an experimental vaccine constitute a violation of the security of the person [following abortion law logic] (7), but if the mandated vaccine in question had been tested on or incorporated elements of aborted fetuses / fetal tissue, and that is the reason cited for refusal, coercion / punitive taxing will run afoul of 2A regarding freedom of conscience and religion (i.e. a problem compounded if someone cannot or will not pay this fine, given they'll no doubt be incarcerated). Conscientious objectors could also cite the drug company’s own admissions that studies on medium-to-long-term effects—a where ovarian cancer links are concerned for instance—wont’ be concluded for another 2 years. Exemptions would likely become the rule, not the exception, making such a tax wholly ineffective.
Consider the exemptions provided in 'Immunization of School Pupils Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.1', for example (evidence that past efforts in this vein have encountered similar constitutional caltrops); "Same, statement of conscience or religious belief (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a parent who has completed an immunization education session with a medical officer of health or with a medical officer of health’s delegate that complies with the prescribed requirements, if any, and who has filed a statement of conscience or religious belief with the proper medical officer of health. 2017, c. 11, Sched. 2, s. 2; 2021, c. 4, Sched. 11, s. 17 (1)." https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90i01
Additionally, like other diseases, those who can produce evidence of having had the virus through natural transmission will no doubt be able to similarly obtain an exemption, unless the rules of antibodies don't apply to the Wuhan flu.
I imagine that it may stress certain provincial health privacy acts as well.
It's worth revisiting Stephen R.C. Hicks' "Explaining Postmodernism". The left has intentionally abandoned reason. It's phenomenology (navigating pseudo-reality via feeling contra reason) all the way, rather than empiricism and rationalism. Even the old Marxists feigned to be scientific materialists, which relies upon a form of rationalism. Not the new left.
They can hold that all religions are evil, but that Islam is a religion of peace; that there is a gender wage gap, but there is no such thing as biologically-linked gender; that there is no truth, but that leftist claims are true; etc. There is no good will in their political debating anymore. They will say and do anything to seize more control over life and death, more power.
The only thing the left is consistent about is its inconsistency.