June 30, 2018
This guy can’t even keep his fake eyebrows on straight but we’re accepting him as capable of running a massive experiment to completely transform an entire society?
There’s really only so much of this sort of thing you can expect people to take.
At least at such a rapid pace.
Trudeau is doing the same thing Obama did – shock and awe cultural transformation. And it might end up having the same backlash as what Obama did. Assuming Canada has the demographics to make that happen when Trudeau is done with his little project.
Looks like an already highly liberal Canada has taken the very notion of tolerance to a whole new level. But could the “progressive” policies of the self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister Justin Trudeau eventually backfire?
Ottawa has recently shaken things up as both chambers of the Canadian parliament passed a bill legalizing the recreational use of marijuana as well as its cultivation, including home growth. The legislation that made Canada the first Western country to fully decriminalize pot was actively promoted by Trudeau’s ruling Liberal Party for quite some time.
But that’s not the first move Canada’s recently made that might seem a little extravagant. It appears to be on a spree of overly liberal political decisions, many of which ended up in controversy. Just about a week ago, a Canadian court recognized two men in a polyamorous relationship with a woman as legal parents of a child in the first such case ever.
lol it’s two soyboys and a fat bitch. Here’s a big CBC article about that event.
They didn’t show their faces in any of the pics.
This radical change in attitude when it comes to the idea of family has probably yet to sink in, while some other initiatives of the Canadian officials have already garnered discontent.
Staunch proponents of gender equality and inclusiveness of all sorts, the Canadian government issued a directive to a state agency this March, telling its staff to effectively abolish the terms “father” and “mother” while addressing their clients with “gender-neutral” terms. The idea was immediately ridiculed by opposition politicians. Eventually, the Social Development and Family Minister Jean-Yves Duclos had to admit that he directive was confusing and needed to be corrected.
Gender neutrality seems to be a hot-button topic for Trudeau-led Canada. It introduced third gender options for passports and immigration documents, made the national anthem gender-neutral and even issued an “unknown” gender health card to an infant at a request of its particularly insistent non-binary transgender parent – all in one year.
The mother has a beard in the “unknown” baby case.
If she is breastfeeding while taking testosterone injections wouldn’t that… man, I don’t even fucking know.
Some of these excessively progressive initiatives ended up in blunders, though. Last November, students at an Alberta high-school suddenly found out that most of their toilets had become “gender-neutral”. The move turned out to have been the school’s overzealous response to newly-adopted laws on transgender accommodation. The students protested, demanding that the school authorities revert to the gender-specific concept they had been quite comfortable with.
Trudeau himself is no stranger to controversy surrounding his “progressive” policies. In February, he interrupted a woman to tell her to use the term ‘peoplekind’ instead of ‘mankind’ at a Q&A session at MacEwan University in Edmonton. Later, the Prime Minister had to apologize, saying he “made a dumb joke.”
I don’t think he was joking.
He sure didn’t sound like he was joking. But that is the one step he’s taken back, because it was so close to “how is this really happening?” that some advisor must have insisted he say it was a joke.
Though they may have only said that because he was accused of “mansplaining” for interrupting a female to correct her, not because the statement itself is insane. They don’t appear to be concerned about engaging in insanity or people noticing that they are doing it.
The Liberal politician came to power riding on the wave of promises of change. But Trudeau’s “brave new world” of seemingly unrivaled freedom, equality and inclusivity is apparently a bit baffling to many Canadians, who are wading through a bog of previously untested social practices. As a result, a lot of them seem to turn to literally more “conservative” values.
Yeah, that seems to be the thing.
This bit here didn’t get a mention in the RT article:
I mean – it is just going on and on and on with this guy.
This whole idea of society as an experimental playground for fringe Jewish sociologists to implement never before tried social policies for the alleged purpose of improving society while never explaining how the changes are improvements is looking increasingly strange to the average person.
This has been going on since the 60s. But it was slower. There was the initial shock and awe program in the 1960s, but that was exclusively targeted at teenagers. Their parents rebelled against it, angered by it, but there was ultimately not much they could do to steer things back on course.
But this new shock and awe program is not only that much weirder than the stuff in the 1960s, that much further from the order of nature, but it is targeted at the entire society, rather than a naturally malleable youth segment.
Furthermore, in the 1960s there was at least a veneer of a revolutionary direction – that the changes being implemented to the social order were leading toward something good.
This new stuff with the trannies and the mass immigration, and the complete abolishment of any kind of natural sexual identity has no clear agenda, even in theory. It is basically presented as being done simply because it is possible to do it, without any even theoretical defense of why it would be necessary or desirable.
And lastly, the 60s revolution was selling sex, which was in turn justified by the ideology.
We are not being given anything material by this new revolution that has no comprehensible ideology or stated goal. Mostly, it is being implemented as a form of punishment, and driven by shame.
The underlying premise is that any form of normalcy – whether racial, sexual or otherwise – is wrong, and so should be punihsed and ultimately abolished. Just because normalcy is bad in itself. Again, the 60s revolution did attack normalcy, but with at least some conception of replacing it with a better new normal, where people would freer and happier.
But this new program, even when they call it “freedom,” is predicated on the silencing of any and all opposition, both through social shaming, financial and legal attacks and in places outside of the US, criminal prosecution.
Canada is presently prosecuting a bus driver for making negative comments about homosexuality, for instance. He is potentially facing 2 years in prison. It is very difficult to claim that “freedom,” even in the most vague and abstract sense, is increasing when you are using such brutal authoritarian measures to force social changes.
Point being: you floored the gas pedal when you should have been tapping the brakes, Shlomo. And this train is about to run off the rails.
Have you learned nothing at all from history Jews?
Do you not remember Russia?
Do you not remember Germany?
Do you not remember all the times before that?
(Can’t find a pic of Ed I smiling to keep with the “smiling as they deal with the Jews merrily” theme, regrettably.)
Apparently, they either don’t remember these things (they actually do) or they are simply biologically incapable of not repeating the same behavior patterns over and over and over again, and getting the same results (that is actually the case).