VIDEO: Warning! Is the Roman Catholic Church about to follow the United Church of Canada into irrelevance and perdition?

Two million members lost in 40 years! That's what happened to the United Church of Canada. In 1965, the United Church was Canada's largest Protestant denomination, with 1,064,000 members and 3700 churches. It was regarded as reflecting the national identity of the non-French part of Canada.

Today the United Church has just 375,000 members -- an 80% collapse in two generations. A large number of its church are either closed or empty, save for a few elderly folk who recognize that the church they attend no longer believes what they believe, but go anyway because that's what they do.

What happend? The United Church, founded barely a century ago as a merger of four Protestant denominations with a total combined membership of about 600,000 members, got caught up in the cultural revolution of the hippy-dippy `60s. It went willingly down the rabbit hole of progressivism, liberalism and, latterly, "wokeism".

The policies of the church are totally inclusive and liberal. There are no restrictions of gender, sexual orientation or marital status for a person considering entering the ministry. LGBTQ++ "worship leaders" are welcome. The heresy of relativism is embraced. Interfaith marriages are recognized. Communion (the symbol only -- not the real Body and Blood of Jesus) is offered to everyone, regardless of age, religion or anything else.

In trying hardest to be relevant, the United Church of Canada became the most irrelevant. And that reveals something profound about the failure of progressive theology -- the same theology now being adopted by the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church, contrary to its own teachings and commandments. 

For the Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ while He was with us on Earth, the handwriting is on the wall. Will Catholics follow their supposed leaders into the new "church of accompaniment", Francis' New Church of the New World Order, or will they listen to the voices of Catholic tradition and hold onto the Faith of our fathers, that we may yet be saved.

Games that people play: "Liberal"

Thesis: This is a game played by men who desire to prove they are Tolerant and Good Persons. In it the Jerk takes over and gains great satisfaction.

Man goes up to the Pretty Coloured Girl in the office.

CHEESE: Hi there. How's the job going?

PCG: Umm.

C: I sure am glad they hired you here. I like to see you people get ahead. I'm a big supporter of the NAACP.

PCG: Wat dat?

C: How about having lunch with me?

PCG: I'm busy, man.

C (adapting): Well, listen, man. I mean like we'll splitsville and maybe swing a little, cool-wise. I'm a hipster. Man.

PCG: That's the strangest patois I ever heard. Have you a speech impediment?

C: Crazy!

PCG: Get your cotton-pickin' hand off my shoulder.

Aim: Cheese retires a Winner for the next two years he is able to tell the Other Fellows (Auditors) about the fantastic lunch-hour romances he has had with the PCG.

Social Advantages: The PCG, after a couple of experiences with various Cheeses, comes out against Integration. "Who needs those clowns, man!" 

Psychological Advantages: None.

Adapted (very slightly) from People Games, by Dr Otto Kitzenger & Dr Albert Schwine, Pocket Books, 1966. How far we've come since the Civil Rights Act changed everything!

Call it whatever you like...

The words "fascism" and "fascist" were coined when Benito Mussolini rose to power in Italy, almost a century ago. Some people think fascism died when Il Duce was overthrown just before the end of WWII. "Progressives", however, want you to believe that fascism lives on in today's America.

Google's totally unbiased (LMAO) AI overview tells us: Fascism is a far-right political ideology characterized by authoritarianism, ultranationalism, and often militarism. It emphasizes the importance of the nation above individual rights and prioritizes a strong, centralized state controlled by a dictatorial leader or a small group. Key features include the suppression of dissent, [my emphasis] a focus on national unity and renewal, and the use of propaganda and symbols to cultivate a sense of national identity and purpose.

Here's another view.

Try speaking out against the liberal, woke, orthodoxy pushed by the intellectual elites and their lickspittle media and you'll soon find out who the real fascists are.

You don't believe me? Click here.

Book Review: "Listen. Liberal!" by Thomas Franks

"Modern liberalism in action: an unregulated virtue-exchange in which representative of one class of humanity [the elites] ritually forgive the sins of another class [the rest of us], all of it conened and facilitated by a vast army of well-graduated American professionals, their reassuring expertised propped up by bogus social science, while the unfortunately object of their high and noble compassion sink slowloy back into a preindustrial state." 

Except for Walt's interpolations, that was written in "Listen, Liberal!" by Thomas Franks, a certified liberal who used to write for The Wall Street Journal and Harper's. After almost eight year's of the Obama presidensity, Mr Franks gave up on the Prez's "politics of hope".

He discovered that the US of A was being run, not by classical liberals fighting for the betterment of the common man, but by a class of progessional elites and technocratic experts, who have what Mr Franks calls "social authority". 

"Although we [the 'common' people] are the subjects are the subjects of ptheir[ diagnoses and prescriptions," he writes, "the group to which professionals ultimately answer is not the public but their peers.... They listen mainly to one another. The professions are autonomous; they are not required to heed voices from below their circle of expertise."

Mr Franks points out that the Democrats have done little to advance traditional liberal goals. They occupied the White house for 16 of the 24 years (to 2015, the date of his writing), and yet the decline of the middle class has only accelerated. Corpoorate and cultural elitism eclipsed the Democrats' supposed middle-class commitment. 

That's why, in "Listen, Liberal!", he calls the Democrats back to their historic goals, and predicts that unless they returned to the politics of the man in the street, they would lose the 2016 election. Which they did. And because they learned no lessons from their defeat, they would have lost the 2020 election had it not been rigged in the greatest political theft in American history.

But the Dimocrats didn't learn anything from their stolen victory. If anything, their policies got worse under the Prez's hand-picked and ill-fated successor. Elitism morphed into wokeism, leaving ordinary Americans in last place behind not just the elites but all the special interest groups the Dims pandered to in the name of diversity, equity and inclusion, hoping that the DEI types would keep them in power. 

The party of Mr and Mrs Clintons, Mr and Mrs Obama, Mr and "Dr" Biden, and Ms Harris and some white man, is now agonizing over its dim (geddit?) prospects for the future. Those who take helm of the presently rudderless ship would do well to read "Listen, Liberal!"... twice! And repeat if necessary.

Note to Canadian Liberals: The same happened to the Liberal Party of Canada, in spades, under the leadership of Blackie McBlackface, the heroic advocate of wokeism who is due to resign this month to avoid having the imprint of a big real Canadian boot etched permanently on his derrière. 

Only a fool... or a Trudeau Liberal... could fail to see the parallels with the fate of Obama, who, by the way, publicly endorsed Trudeau in the greatest liberal bromance of recent years.

Walt's one-and-only copy of this excellent book, gently used, autographed on request, is available on eBid.

VIDEO: "Snowflakes" by Tom MacDonald

You won't be suprised, eh, to learn that Walt is no fan of "rap music" -- an oxymoron if ever there was one. However, every rule has its exception, and in view of what I said eaerlier about sleeping through the suicide of Western Civilization, now seems like a good time to post this "anti-woke rap" by Tom MacDonald. All you snowflakes, listen up!

 

Rapper Tom MacDonald is preaching to spineless Americans who won't stand up and fight to take back their country from the Forces of Wokeness. But he actually grew up in Alberta and British Columbia, and should also direct his message to the sheeple of Canuckistan. I'm sure some apathetic frostbacks may be among the 21 million people who've viewed this. 

Walt sez... wake up America... and Canada... and Britain... and France... and [add your own country here]. The New World Order hasn't yet been established. Walt predicts that the liberal elites who run the USA and Canada -- perhaps even the Vatican -- will be ousted from the halls of power by this day in 2024. (Lifetime pct .989.) Do your part to make it so.

Recession? What recession?

At school, I studied "Polisciandec" (Political Science and Economics). Political science was interesting. Economics, not so much. They don't call it "the dismal science" for nothing! Q. Why does God allow economists to live? A. To make astrologers look good by comparison! 

My point (and I do have one) is that political science and economics are inextricably intertwined. You can't do one without the other. Bad policies inevitably have bad economic consequences. This is a lesson which President Brandon and Prime Minister McBlackface seem not to have learned. Maybe they weren't in class that day. I commend to them, and to you, dear reader, The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, by Amity Shlaes, HarperCollins 2007.

Our so-called leaders (and you) don't need to read the whole book. The introduction will do. It includes a quote from an 1883 essay called "The Forgotten Man", by William Graham Sumner, an American social scientist and classical liberal. To wit: 

As soon as A observes something, which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine...what C shall do for X, or in the better case, what A, B, and C shall do for X.... 

I call [C] the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of.... He works, he votes, generally he prays -- but he always pays.... 

There is nothing wrong (Ms Shlaes speaking now) with A and B helping X. What was wrong was the law, and the indenturing of C to the cause. Whereas C had been Sumner's forgotten man, [Roosevelt's] New Deal made X the forgotten man -- the poor man, the old man, labor, or any other recipient of government help. 

Roosevelt's work on behalf of his version of the forgotten man generated a new tradition. To justify giving to one forgotten man, the administration found, it had to make a scapegoat of another. Businessmen and businesses were the targets.... 

[During the Great Depression] C [became] the American who was not thought of. He was the Depression-era man who was not part of any political constituency and therefore lived the negatives of the period. 

He was the man who paid for the big projects, who got make-work instead of real work. He was the man who waited for economic growth that did not come.

As an editorialist in Indiana wrote in 1936, "Who is the 'forgotten man' in Muncie? I know him as intimately as I know my own undershirt. He is the fellow that is trying to get along without public relief and has been attempting the same thing since the depression that cracked down on him."

Roosevelt systematized interest-group politics...to include many constituencies.... [He] ministered to those groups, and was rewarded with votes. It can be argued that [he] created the modern entitlement challenge that so bedevils both parties.

[Roosevelt adopted] Keynesianism, named after John Maynard Keynes, [which] emphasized consumers, who were also voters. The theory gave license for perpetual experimentation. [It] also emphasized government spending. Yet focusing on consumers meant that Washington neglected the producer. Focusing on the fun of experiments neglected the question of whether unceasing experimentation might frighten business into terrified inaction.

Admiring the short-term action of spending drew attention away from its longer-term limits -- economies often go into recession when the spending disappears. 

Thus endeth the lesson. If you understand and agree with Ms Shlaes' analysis, you might bring it to the attention of your Congressperson or Member of Parliament. Chances are they won't "geddit", or, even if they do, won't dare -- if they are Democrats or Liberals -- to challenge their political masters. But when they finally admit that our economy is in recession, you'll be able to say "I told you so."

The Ant & The Grasshopper - Canadian version

A reader has passsed along an updated Canadian version of the Aesop fable. 

Old Version: 

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house, and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold. 

Modern Canadian Version: 

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. 

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving. CBC, CTV and Global show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. 

The Globe and Mail does a feature story. Canada is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so? Kermit the Frog appears on CBC News with Adrienne Arsenault. along with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, "It's Not Easy Being Green."

People Against Poverty stage a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We Shall Overcome". Then Justin Trudeau has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper's sake. Chrystia Freeland condemns the ant and blames former Prime Minister Harper, Former Premiers Jason Kenney, Brad Wall and Cristy Clark and Conrad Black for the Grasshopper's' plight. 

Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh explain in an interview with Rosemary Barton that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share. 

Finally, the Liberal/NDP coalition drafts the Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs, not consulting with First Nations, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes; his home is confiscated by the government's Green Czar, Stephen Guilbeault, and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his freeloading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it. 

The ant has disappeared in the snow never to be seen again. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize and ramshackle the once prosperous and peaceful neighbourhood. The entire nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it. 

Moral of the story: Be careful how you vote in the next election, because you are an ant! You may wish to pass this on to other ants, but don't bother sending it on to any grasshoppers because they wouldn't understand it anyway.

Note from Ed. to our American readers: You can easily adapt this cautionary tale to the American politico-economic situation. Just subsitute, for the Canuch lickspittle media named, CNN, NBC, CBS, etc. For Justin Trudeau and Stephen Harper, read Joe Biden and Donald Trump. And for Liberal/NDP coalition, read Democrats and Bernie Sanders. I should have posted this before the mid-terms, since some  American ants appear not to have got the message and are still voting for the grasshoppers.  

VIDEO: Michael Matt calls Biden the Democrats' kiss of political death

"This is fun!", Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant newspaper, returns to YouTube (!) just in time to celebrate "The Great Reject" -- the response of ordinary Americans, the real people, to President Brandon's left-liberal policies and politics. "The lunatics of Davos," he says, "have clearly become a political liability for a whole host of small-minded Democratic politicians...whose political future has now become understandly more important to them than the globalist ideology these whack-jobs -- Gates, Soros, Schwab and the rest of these nutters!" 

In this latest episode of "The Underground" from Remnant TV,  Mr Matt analyses this week's big wins for pro-life, pro-God, and pro-American politicians. Will Tuesday's rejection of the Democrats and their extreme liberal ideologies carry over into the 2022 mid-term elections? Michael is cautiously optimistic.

But wait (as Vince Offer used to say), there's more! What (Mr Matt asks) do Elon Musk, Bill Maher, and Greta Thunberg have in common? They’re all fed-up Leftist influencers, who are obviously not going to go down with the USS Biden. Are the wheels coming off The Great Reset even before liftoff?

Meanwhile, inside the Vatican, the situation goes from Woke to Weird. On October 28th, the Cardinals responsible for promoting Christian unity called on bishops to "listen to non-Catholic Christians" during the latest synod, which some have already dubbed "Vatican III". 

Some of Mr Matt's critics are asking why he doesn't just leave the Catholic Church and join the Orthodox or the Protestants (!). Mr Matt answers them in this video. Every minute is well worth watching!

George Carlin: Political correctness = fascism

Words of wisdom from the late, much-missed George Carlin.

 

Red Green on climate change: we're getting too comfortable

First it was "global warming". After a couple of unusually harsh winters, the Luddites, liberals and tree-huggers changed the the name of the game to "climate change". That way they were covered no matter whether the temperature went up or down. But ordinary people like Walt (and you, dear reader) remain unconvinced. So now it's been upgraded to a "CLIMATE EMERGENCY". So says the Liberal majority in Canada's House of Commons, in a vote taken in the last days of the current Parliament.

Last night the Canuck Minister of the Environment and Climate Change [sic] Catherine McKenna (aka "Climate Barbie") put forward a motion describing climate change as a "real and urgent crisis, driven by human activity." In their wisdom, the MPs noted how the "crisis" is impacting Canadians, and affirmed the need to pursue clean growth methods to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The House of Commons passed the motion declaring a national climate emergency, and supporting Canada’s commitment to meet the Paris Agreement emissions targets, by a vote of 186-63, with only Andrew Scheer's Conservatives mildly opposed.

"CLIMATE EMERGENCY! Lordy, lordy! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Walt doesn't believe it. Every day, when I log into Win10, Bill Gates shows me pictures from around the world of beautiful natural landscapes, untouched by fire, flood or other disasters attributable to "climate change". Here is a picture I took just a couple of weeks ago -- postcard quality, if I do say so myself -- of one such scene.

When Two Jack Lake dries up, or is covered in ice in July, or a bubbling brown pool of shit, then and only then can you talk to me about "climate emergency"!

On the same point, kind of... I just stumbled upon a short essay by my old buddy Steve Smith (aka Red Green), from Duct Tape Is Not Enough (Hatherleigh Press 2002). It's called "We're Getting Too Comfortable".

Every generation gets a little wimpier than the one before it. Our ancestors lived in wooden shacks without running water or electricity. We have central heat, central air, central vac...humidifiers, dehumidifiers, carbon filters, ozone detectors, smoke detectors, chest protectors, bomb deflectors and house inspectors.

We can push one button in our house and another in our car and as long as we have an attached garage, we will never leave an atmosphere of constant temperature, humidity, oxygen content, and clarity. It makes for an easy, comfortable life, but, over time, Mother Nature will devolve us to the point where we can't handle any change in our environment.

Sure it might be nice to never shiver or sweat -- but not if it means that every time you open the fridge or oven door, you have a massive cardiac infarction. So don't try so hard to make it so easy. Human beings survive a lot better when they have something to fight against.

VIDEO: Jordan Peterson: How far is too far? Conservatives know, liberals don't

Here's a video to make our left-leaning readers [Both of them? Ed.] uncomfortable. Dr Jordan Peterson argues that we on the right side of the political divide have learned how to "box in" the extremists who preach such things as white supremacy. The left, on the other hand, can't draw a line in the sand to exclude the radical socialists and communists who advocate such things as forced equality. The failure to keep out the antifa types, Dr Peterson says, is the fatal flaw of leftist American politics. Something to think about before the football games come on...

VIDEO: Bannon vs Frum: The future of Western politics is populist - COMPLETE Munk Debate

On November 3rd Walt posted "Bannon vs Frum debate goes on despite antifa near-riot", a video showing the lengths the NPC and antifa types went to in their effort to silence the voices of conservatism (David Frum) and populism (Steve Bannon), who were scheduled to have a debate on "The future of Western politics is populist, not liberal" the previous night.

In spite of the violent protests of the leftists, the debate went ahead anyway. Thanks to CPAC, we now have video of the complete debate. Running time (skipping the introduction) is under an hour and a half.



Who won? You can't participate in the "rolling poll" that the moderator talks about, because that was two weeks ago, but you can judge for yourself. Enjoy.

"You disagree with our liberal ideology? You must be insane!"

Speaking of rightist parties led by good-looking women (see below)... there was a disturbing item on the mojo wire a couple of days ago. Seems that Marine Le Pen, the leader of France's Rassemblement National (formerly Front National) has been ordered by magistrates in Nanterre to "undergo a psychiatric examination".

WHY? It's all part of an exercise in political correctness, the mainstream parties' vendetta against her for daring to challenge the liberal orthodoxy which refuses to acknowledge the intrinsic evil of Islamic extremism, as espoused and practised by the Islamic State.

In December of 2015, Mme Le Pen tweeted three pictures of killings carried out by ISIS terrorists, accompanied by the text "Daesh [Arabic term for ISIS] is THIS!" One of the pictures showed the body of James Foley, whom the Muslim extremists beheaded in August 2014.

Mme Le Pen posted the graphic images, since deleted, in response to journalist Jean-Jacques Bourdin, who had compared her nationalist rhetoric to that of the Islamic terrorist group. Speaking to French meeja earlier this year, she said that she is being charged for having "condemned the horrors of Daesh." For that, she said, "the 'justice system' has referred [me] to a psychiatric assessment. How far will they go?!"

That's a good question. A number of politicians have lambasted the magistrates' decision. Matteo Salvini, Deputy Prime Minister of Italy, took to Twitter to express support for the French politician. "A court orders a psychiatric assessment for Marine Le Pen. Words fail me!", he wrote. "Solidarity with her and with the French who love freedom!"

Gilbert Collard, a member of the National Assembly called the order "the psychiatrization of political opinion." And so it is. It comes down to this: Our liberal policies are reasonable and progressive. You disagree with our policies. Therefore you must be insane. Right out of the Soviet and Chinese Communist textbooks on the stifling of dissent.

If you think that equating dissent with insanity isn't part of the liberals' grand strategy, consider the title of Matt Taibbi's recent book, Insane Clown President. Good book, but that's not the point. My point is that if the expression of politically incorrect, "anti-progressive" views can be labelled as a symptom of mental illness, none of us is safe from having our wigs picked by people who are themselves teetering on the brink.

What happens then? No psychiatrist worth his or her $200/hour ever found a subject who didn't need "help". Next thing you know... One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest! And, as the movie (one of my favourites) shows, once you're in the clutches of the "mental health system", you don't get out unless and until those who control the system are good and ready. Mark my words, dear readers. I know whereof I speak.

Adam Smith says POTUS is wrong on tariffs and trade

Who dares to take issue with President Trump's desire to raise tariffs on steel, aluminum and a wide range of goods America imports from its friends and allies, and thus provoke a trade war? Adam Smith, that's who!

Mr Smith was a Scottish economist, philosopher and author as well as a moral philosopher, a pioneer of political economy and a key figure during the Scottish Enlightenment era. He is best known for two classic works: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776) and The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759). The former, usually abbreviated to The Wealth of Nations, is considered his magnum opus and the first modern work of economics.

Adam Smith was a classical liberal -- the good kind -- and a firm believer in free trade. In The Wealth of Nations, he argues for three foundations of modern economics, viz.:

1. pursuit of self-interest - It's OK to look out for Number One
2. division of labour - It's folly to have everyone build his own house when different people can be employed to dig the foundation, do the framing and put the roof on
3. freedom of trade - I give you something you want, and I get something I want, which goes back to the first principle. 

The Wealth of Nations is a huge book -- huge in its impact on political thought and, unfortunately, huge in size -- over 900 pages even in an abridged edition. Everyone who fancies himself [or herself! Ed.] a thinker refers to Adam Smith, but few actually quote him because few have read this literally magnum opus. P.J. O'Rourke has done so, or skimmed through it at least, and has produced a remarkably slim "Best of Adam Smith" book called On the Wealth of Nations (Douglas & McIntyre, 2007), from which I've drawn this passage (from Book 4 of the original work). The words of Adam Smith, himself, are shown in italics.

Smith disdained trade retaliation: "Those workmen...who suffered by our neighbours' prohibition will not be benefited by ours. On the contrary, they and almost all the other classes of our citizens will thereby be obliged to pay dearer than before for certain goods."

And Smith gave the lie to claims that tariffs protect working stiffs: "To lay a new tax upon them...and because they already pay too dear for the necessaries of life, to make them likewise pay too dear for the greater part of other commodities, is certainly a most absurd way of making amends."

As for all our money going overseas, Smith had shown in book 2 of Wealth why this doesn't harm an economy: "we must not imagine that it is sent abroad for nothing." And Smith was referring to gold bullion. Gold always has some value.... The American money that the Chinese are getting is fiat currency that could turn into wastepaper at any time.

By holding dollars and dollar-denominated securities, China is buying our debt. Smith had declared, "A man must be perfectly crazy who...does not employ all the stock which he commands, whether it be his own or borrowed." If Americans think they're using all the capital they can get their hands on "in the way that they judge most advantageous to themselves," they'd be crazy not to be in debt.

As I pointed out in "MAGA to MAAA - Walt explains President Trump's 'trade war' strategy", WWW 1/6/18, Making America Great Again doesn't necessarily involve Making America Alone Again. Reverting to the protectionism of a hundred years ago will almost certainly be counter-productive. If POTUS persists in making war on America's allies (no matter how irritating their leaders may be), it will not end well. Lifetime pct .986.

MAGA to MAAA - Walt explains President Trump's "trade war" strategy

The (((controlled media))) in the USA, Canada and western Europe are aghast at the American government's announcement, yesterday, that punishing tariffs against imported steel, aluminum and other products would go into effect today.

The importation of such good from coutries such as Canada and Mexico, the administration says, constitutes a threat to national security. Mr Dressup, the Acting Prime Minister of Canada, calls that claim "absurd", and for once he is right. But that doesn't mean President Trump is wrong to fire the first shot in what could become a global trade war. Walt will explain.

Next weekend Canada is due to hose ["host", shurely! Ed.] the G-7 summit, a meeting of the leaders of the world's seven most economically important countries, including Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Canada, and the USA. [That's only six. Ed.] [I can't remember the seventh. Would you believe Italy? Walt] A few years ago they were trying to bring Russia into the circle, to make it G-8, but President Putin wasn't having any. Now the libtards on the "At Issue" segment of the CBC national news are suggesting that the coming meeting will really be the G-6+1, since (they say) President Trump has clearly signalled his intention of "taking the USA out of the world community". That is not absurd. Walt will explain.

The "world community" is a pretty sick community. With the possible exception of Japan and the certain exception of the red half of the Paranoid States of America, the G-7 is infected with four fatal diseases, which are killing western, Christian (?) civilization, slowly but surely. The diseases, which are now not epidemic but endemic, are:
Globalism - aka one-worldism; the rich must give their wealth to the poor
Multiculturalism - all races and cultures are equally good, but the white race is not so good as the others
Secularism - denying religion and the need for religion; making man into god
Relativism - the notion that all cultures, are civilizations are of equal value

We could add liberalism and "progressivism", which are the creeds of all right-thinking people in western Europe and North America, according to the elites and opinion-makers who know (better than you and I) what's wrong with the world -- racism, colonialism, white supremacy, yada yada yada -- and what must be done to fix it. What's that, you ask? Why, the establishment of a one-world government, of course, so that the Disunited Nations can rule us all. Political rock stars like Canada's Trudeau II are practically wetting themselves in anticipation of being chosen Benevolent Dictator of the Brave New World.

"Join us! Join us!", the one-worlders say to the only country which stands apart from the movement to make us all one big happy family. That country is the USA. The Prez nearly succeeded in eradicating American exceptionalism and surrendering the country to the feckless foreigners. Truly, Americans dodged a bullet by rejecting Barry's anointed successor, the one who would carry on his "legacy". Under President Trump, America stands alone against the suicide of the west, and a good thing too!

It's not easy to read POTUS' mind [Reminder: Comments are moderated! Ed.] but my take on the imposition of tariffs against America's "allies" -- like the French surrender-monkeys -- is that it's just part of a bigger vision, which is... wait for it... to take the USA out of the so-called "world community". However timidly, Britiain is backing out of the European Union. Why can't America leave the G-7, the World Trade Organization, the UN, and any other international organization which exists chiefly to subjugate the USA and "redistribute" American wealth to the shithole countries of the world? If that's President Trump's real goal, Walt says GO FOR IT! Make America Great Again is a good idea. Make America Alone Again is even better!

Further reading:
Burnham, James: The Suicide of the West: an essay on the meaning and destiny of liberalism - 2nd ed. - Encounter Books, 2014
Murray, Douglas: The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam - Bloomsbury Continuum, 2017 - see "Douglas Murray explains the lie of multiculturalism", WWW 24/9/17 - includes video
Steyn, Mark: America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It - Regnery Publishing, 2006 - see "Muslim journalist admits Mark Steyn was right", WWW 22/6/16

VIDEO: Tom Wolfe, RIP - interview with Michael Moynihan

Thomas Kennedy Wolfe Jr. died yesterday at the age of 88. Farewell then, Tom Wolfe. With Ken Kesey (who was not not nearly so prolific) and Dr Hunter S. Thompson (who followed in your footsteps), you created and exemplified the New Journalism. You made us -- or me, at least -- see the realities of contemporary American society, the little things that everybody notices but pretends don't exist.

For half a century, you were a monumental figure not only in the English language, but also in the American culture. Through your eyes and your words on the printed page, you showed us the spirit of 50s (The Right Stuff), the 60s (The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test and Radical Chic: Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers), the 70s (The Me Decade), and the awful mid-80s (Bonfire of the Vanities, your best novel, IMHO).

Although I can never hope to grasp the English language as tightly as you did, I do try to emulate your style. OK, I "borrow" from you, occasionally. As the old saying goes, it's the sincerest form of flattery. I will remember you.

In a December 2012 interview with Michael Moynihan, Tom Wolfe discussed not just a forthcoming Newsweek cover story (on the 25th anniversary of Bonfire of the Vanities), but also class in America, why the Prez made life difficult for Jesse Jackson, what's wrong with the stock market and a host of other still-relevant topics. Running time 1:21:48.

Why the Brits voted to leave the European Union

The dust has not settled yet. Arguments rage as to what Brexit means. Was it the beginning of a populist revolution against the elites, or a triumph for xenophobia and suicidal narrow-mindedness? Or both? Walt will try to sort it out, and divine some lessons for North American politicians.

To begin with, it wasn't "the British" who voted to leave the European Union. The people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain. The people of Northern Ireland also chose the "in" side, although not so decisively. It was the English and the Welsh who wanted out of the dysfunctional European "community".

That doesn't mean, though, that the Scots and Ulsterpersons voted against resurgent nationalism. The Scots now appear to be in favour of separating from the Disunited Kingdom. A second refendum on the issue is expected in due course, giving the Scots an opportunity to stay in the EU and take control of their country back from the English. The people of Northern Ireland voted along nationalistic and sectarian lines, with the pro-UK Protestants voting with their compatriots in England, and the Catholics voting to remain in the EU, which might well entail uniting Ulster with Eire, at last. Sinn Fein has already called for a vote on that proposition.

So we see that nationalism was one of the key factors motivating the voters on both sides. Those who voted "Out" had other things in mind. This week's Economist cites polling done by Lord Ashcroft (a Conservative peer) which suggests that "opposition to multiculturalism, social liberalism, feminism, the green movement, the internet and capitalism all translated into votes for Brexit."

Euroscepticism is about more than immigration, says their columnist. "It is unmistakably cultural, ineffably emotional. There is a feeling, he writes, "that the world is increasingly unknowable and uncontrollable.... It also has to do with the wider world: fears of terrorism, the erosion of national identity, the erasure of borders (and) politicians in the grip of shadowy international forces." Hence the Leave campaign's winning slogan "It's time we took back control."

There would seem to be some hard lessons in there for the political and other elites of North America -- the USA more so than Canada, since Canucks won't get a chance to upchuck the Trudeau Koolaid until 2019. So let's see if any of the issues identified by Lord Ashdown are in play in the Land of the Free(?).

Nationalism versus globalism? Not a problem for La Clinton, since Americans don't seem to want their country to be great again. What about multiculturalism, social liberalism, feminism? What right-thinking person could be against those things? Look at all the "progress" that's been made under 7 years of Obama's maladministration. Who could want to undo that?

How about that green movement? Ah yes. Let's all put solar panels on our roofs, charge up our battery-powered cars and wind up our radios and TVs. Leave the oil in the ground. Decommission the nuclear power plants. (We know from The Simpsons how risky they are!) And will the last treehugger to leave the room please switch off the lights... Oh... wait...

I confess that I didn't understand Lord Ashdown's finding that those who voted "Out" were against the internet, unless he meant that to be a metaphor for "progress" generally. I'm all for the internet, insofar as it empowers the likes of YVT to get our ideas out there, in spite of the control of the lamestream media by the PC police and "shadowy international forces".

As for being against capitalism, if by that is meant resenting being in the thrall of the said "shadowy international forces" -- Hello Goldman Sachs! -- then I'm against that too. What about you? If you too are opposed to liberal globalism in all its guises, who are you going to vote for in November? The choice couldn't be more clear!

Further reading (on the last point, about globalization and capitalism): "Not just bigots and boors oppose trade deals" by Linda McQuaig in the Toronto Star.

VIDEO: Pope Francis honours Hollywood lefties

On Monday Walt shared with you "6 ways Pope Francis promotes political liberalism", an excerpt from an article by Christopher A. Ferrara which you can read by following the link in my post.

Mr Ferrara's article was written before the latest egregious example of Francis the Humble's pandering to the liberal elites. I refer to a ceremony held at the Vatican on Sunday in which the Pope bestowed his "Olive Award" on three Hollywood stars -- George Clooney, Richard Gere and Selma Hayek -- who are all activists in the promotion of environmentalism, gender ideology, gay rights and suchlike liberal secular humanist claptrap.

One of these paragons of virtue claims to be a Buddhist. The other two are apostates -- lapsed Catholics -- or, I should say, not just "lapsed" but actively anti-Catholic! Listen to what The Remnant's Michael Matt has to say about them and about why the Pope is taking a leading role in destroying our Western Christian culture.

6 ways Pope Francis promotes political liberalism

The following is excerpted from "The Undertaker Pope: A Brief Study of an Infallibly Politically Correct Pontificate", an article by Christopher A. Ferrara, featured in The Remnant Newspaper.

In the fourth year of his pontificate, Pope Francis continues to deliver regular payloads of explosive off-the-cuff remarks that delight the media and shock the Catholic faithful....

For Francis, "magisterium" and "what I think" are one and the same thing. What Francis thinks -- and speaks incessantly -- generally serves the ends of political liberalism and state power while confirming the Church’s post-Vatican II demotion to a mere religious constituency under the secular sovereign. Witness, for example:

· Francis’s warm relations with socialist dictators;

· his lauding of pro-abortion and pro-“gay” politicians;

· his abuse of the papal office as a platform for globalist environmentalism (thus advantaging the same transnational corporations he professes to deplore);

· his refusal to intervene in opposition to the legalization of “gay marriage” because “the Pope belongs to everybody, he cannot enter the concrete, domestic politics of a country. This is not the Pope's role”;

· his demand -- flatly contradicting his professed abstention from domestic politics -- for universal abolition of the death penalty (while declining to demand the abolition of abortion), open borders in Europe and America, and policies of environmental regulation and wealth redistribution;

· his conspicuous failure to identify government policy, particularly in socialist countries, as a primary cause of the poverty he attributes entirely to the greed of the wealthy.

Not even during a post-conciliar epoch marked by the generalized surrender of churchmen to the zeitgeist have we seen a Pope willing to serve as the veritable pontifical undertaker at the funeral of the Church Militant, glibly reciting a few last words at the graveside in superficial remarks to reporters that he insists are "magisterium".... How is it possible that a conclave could have placed such a spectacularly unsuitable man on the Chair of Peter?...

I propose no answer to the question. Only history will provide the answer. Meanwhile, however, one can only wonder whether the unprecedented circumstances surrounding the elevation of Cardinal Bergoglio to the papacy are in some mysterious way related to the unexampled recklessness of his reign, so pleasing to the world that sings his praises.

US political pendulum swings... to the right!

For the last few days, Walt has referred several times to two books which, read together, offer a fine guide as to how to bet in the US elections due in November. The books are: Rick Perlstein's Nixonland (Scribner, 2008) and Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail (Straight Arrow, 1973) by Dr. Hunter S. Thompson (PBUH). The former owes a great debt (largely unacknowledged) to the latter, if for no other reason than its restatement of the "pendulum theory" of US politics, which Walt will elucidate forthwith.

In a nutshell, the pendulum theory posits that American "swing voters" -- those who are not lifelong Democrats or Republicans -- have, since 1945, swung back and forth between left and right, liberalism and conservatism, in cycles of about eight years. The liberal, statist Roosevelt era ended in 1952 with the election of Eisenhower. After eight years of McCarthyism, the Cold War and resurgent capitalism, the American public were beguiled by visions of Camelot, and elected a handsome young prince -- the Justin Trudeau of his day -- who promised sunny days and sunny ways.

What America got instead was eight years of what Mr Perlstein calls the "liberal consensus", described by Dr Thompson as "left-bent chaos". Lyndon B. Johnson, much reviled though he was, in fact pushed through more liberal "reforms" than any president since Abraham Lincoln -- federal control of education, integrated schools (complete with forced busing), the expansion of the welfare state, various and sundry "civil rights", etc etc.

What was the result? By 1968, Dr Thompson writes, "the Silent Majority was so deep in a behavioral sink that their only feeling for politics was a powerful sense of revulsion. All they wanted in the White House was a man who would leave them alone and do anything necessary to bring calmness back into their lives -- even if it meant turning the whole state of Nevada into a concentration camp for hippies, niggers, dope fiends, do-gooders, and anyone else who might threaten the status quo."

And so, through the great fissure in their society which developed in the hippy-dippy 60s, Americans entered "Nixonland". But, in Perlstein's view four decades on, the gap between liberals and conservatives, left and right, never closed. The pendulum kept swinging, although the feckless Carter presidency limited the leftward swing of 1976 to just four years. The ignominious defeat of Jimmy Carter lengthened the swing to the right by one administration, that of the almost-as-feckless George H.W. Bush, but since 1992 the eight-year cycle has been as predictable as peristalsis.

Eight years to the left (Clinton), eight years to the right (Dubya), eight years to the left (Barack Hussein Obama), and here we are in 2016, with the mood of the electorate much the same as that described by Hunter Thompson, quoted above. Except that we wouldn't use the N-word today, would we... Walt is certain (lifetime pct .988) that at least 45% of Americans are ready to vote against political correctness, pandering to minorities, a socialistic health care system that doesn't work, weak foreign policy, LGBT "rights" and the rest of the status quo (H. & B. Clinton, props.). Can Donald Trump pick up another 5% + 1? Stay tuned!

Further reading: "Ten Reasons Why the Trump Train's Given the Cocky, Lazy, PC-crazed Washington Elite the Spanking it Deserves -- And Left Hillary Shaking in Her Goldman-Financed Boots", by Piers Moron [Ed., please check surname. May be "Morgan"], in the online Daily Mail (UK), 5/5/16.