Juno News - CBC’s “Being Black in Canada” series is straight out of an Orwell novel

00:00:00.240 The CBC creates an Orwellian list of words it would like banished from the English language,

00:00:05.600 all of Ottawa is in collusion to push a ridiculous bill, and the CBC celebrates working from home 0.99

00:00:11.840 because apparently it stops awful white people from being so racist. 0.98

00:00:16.160 It's Fake News Friday, I'm Candice Malcolm and this is The Candice Malcolm Show. 0.93

00:00:24.000 Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning in to The Candice Malcolm Show. It is Friday,

00:00:27.600 happy Friday everyone, and as you know on the program on Fridays we devote the entire show to

00:00:33.440 debunking the ridiculous media narratives that exist out there. We talk about all of the problems

00:00:38.480 with the media in Canada stemming from the fact that they take money from the government so we

00:00:43.120 have no separation between journalism and state in this country. The major journalists, especially

00:00:48.640 the ones covering Justin Trudeau and the federal government in Ottawa, are paid by Justin Trudeau

00:00:53.600 and the federal government in Ottawa. It is such a conflict of interest and because of all of these

00:00:57.840 various problems we encounter so many stories that require us to do a deep dive into, pay closer

00:01:05.040 attention, dissect and help raise the issue and help everybody out there fully understand how corrupt

00:01:11.280 this system of Canadian media attached to Canadian government is in this country. But first, before we

00:01:16.960 get into the show today, if you're watching this video on YouTube right now, I'm going to ask you to

00:01:21.040 please like this video, don't forget to subscribe to Trenorth, and if you like what we do here on

00:01:24.800 The Candice Malcolm Show, hit the little notification bell so that you never miss an episode. If you're

00:01:28.720 watching over on Facebook, make sure to like the video, share it, and head on over and like the

00:01:33.120 Trenorth page. Finally, if you are listening to this podcast over on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts,

00:01:38.720 or wherever you enjoy listening to your podcasts, don't forget to subscribe to The Candice Malcolm Show,

00:01:43.040 and if you like it and you want to support the show, please consider leaving us a five-star review,

00:01:47.760 it really helps us out. Okay, so this is the big story of the week, and this is just the CBC being

00:01:52.800 the CBC. The CBC sees themselves as the arbiter of truth. They also apparently see themselves as the

00:01:58.400 arbiter of the English language. So here, CBC Ottawa has put together a list of words that you

00:02:04.720 should just stop using. They're not even hiding their hatred of free speech. They're putting it right

00:02:10.000 out there. They've come up with a ridiculous list that talks about the historical and cultural 0.94

00:02:15.760 problematic words that we should just all stop using. You know, the funny thing about this story,

00:02:21.120 when I first saw it, it just gave me the creeps. It gives me chills when I see CBC pushing this kind

00:02:26.880 of nonsense, because to some people out there, they'll see a story like this and they'll take

00:02:31.520 it seriously. They'll take it to heart. Nobody wants to be racist. Nobody wants to be out of date

00:02:35.360 and using terms that could accidentally offend somebody. But what this story does and the reason

00:02:41.280 it gave me chills is because the purpose of it isn't just to inform the reader or educate us.

00:02:47.520 No, the purpose is to instill fear in society, instill fear in the reader to say, if you use these

00:02:53.360 words, you are a racist. And the purpose is to play on that fear that people have. And therefore,

00:02:58.960 it does have a chilling effect on speech. It has a chilling effect on our freedom to think. Jordan

00:03:03.840 Peterson talks about this phenomenon that in order to be able to be free, you have to be able to think.

00:03:09.440 In order to be able to think, you have to be able to speak. And sometimes you say things that don't

00:03:13.200 come out right. And that is part of the process in a free society of coming to terms, of processing

00:03:18.240 new information, and having debates in civil society. So this sort of thing is just so creepy

00:03:22.480 and so wrong. But I think when CBC puts stuff like this out, it has the adverse effect. Because almost

00:03:27.920 everyone I saw commenting on this, almost anyone who shared it with me, people who I saw sharing on

00:03:33.200 social media, the unanimous response to it was to make fun of it, to laugh at it, not to take it

00:03:38.560 seriously. So that's good. That's a good sign that people aren't taking this seriously. But

00:03:42.560 regardless, it's still worth going through. Because this is the kind of thing that the CBC

00:03:46.000 thinks is news. This is the kind of thing that the CBC spends its resources, your resources,

00:03:50.160 taxpayer resources, on coming up with a list to accuse Canadians of being racist, to hector us,

00:03:55.440 and to shame us, and to try to get us to change our language. So here's the article. It says,

00:04:01.760 Have you ever casually used the term spirit animal, first word problems, or spooky?

00:04:06.400 It might be time to rethink your use of these phrases and remove them from your daily lingo.

00:04:12.000 CBC Ottawa compiled a small list of words submitted by readers and some of our journalists who are

00:04:16.880 black, indigenous, or people of color. We ran some of the words by anti-racism language experts who said

00:04:23.280 some of these phrases can be hurtful to various groups of people for their historical and cultural

00:04:28.720 context. And then it goes on to interview one such anti-racist language expert. And here that person

00:04:38.080 says, Being an English speaker doesn't entail you to necessarily know the racist etymology automatically,

00:04:44.480 said this linguist and associate language professor at the University of Toronto, Mississauga.

00:04:49.280 Etymology is a study of the origin of words and the way their meanings change over time. The fact that

00:04:54.960 you said it oblivious to the etymology doesn't automatically make you a bad person. So it's

00:05:00.480 interesting because they're talking about the etymology, which is sort of just like a niche

00:05:03.520 academic area for people that are really interested in the English language. They're saying that you

00:05:09.120 shouldn't be an expert on it, but maybe you should become aware. But then the interesting thing is so

00:05:13.040 many of the words that they list, the etymology isn't racist. It isn't racist. It just sounds like

00:05:18.080 something else that might have been racist. And so we'll go through some of these words and you can learn how

00:05:22.800 ridiculous they are. So they start off with the words blackmail, blacklist, and black sheep. 0.98

00:05:28.000 And we hear from another anti-racism expert. The issue here is that these are all negative terms.

00:05:33.600 It connotates evil, distrust, a lack of intelligence, ignorance, a lack of beauty, the absence of white. 0.99

00:05:39.600 Black became associated with a particular group of people and that group of people received all the 1.00

00:05:43.840 negative connotations. That's why we try to move away from these types of words. And then they come up

00:05:48.640 with a bunch of words that you should use instead. So instead of saying whitelist and blacklist when

00:05:53.520 you're talking about whether maybe you're going to hire someone, instead they want you to use blocklist,

00:05:57.920 denylist, and allowlist, which just doesn't really have the same ring to it at all. So again, remember

00:06:04.000 we were told that we're supposed to know the etymology of words to find out that they're racist.

00:06:08.160 Well, here's an example of something that has nothing to do with the etymology of these words. They're

00:06:12.400 just talking about the colors. And to be fair, it's sort of an interesting argument when it comes to myths and

00:06:17.440 stories in our society and the imagery associated with that. There typically is a dichotomy between

00:06:23.520 good and bad, evil and good. Black and white are used as sort of symbols for that. But to me,

00:06:30.000 it doesn't really have anything to do with race at all. It has more to do with just the nature.

00:06:34.800 Nighttime darkness, of course, there is symbolism there of something being dark and negative. And then

00:06:40.720 when it comes to light and daytime, that of course is going to have positive connotations and it helps with

00:06:47.120 cultural storytelling. It doesn't really have anything to do with race whatsoever. So again, they're

00:06:51.360 talking about the etymology and then the examples they give have nothing to do with that. Okay,

00:06:55.680 let's go to a few more. They say ghetto and inner city. So one of their anti-racist experts says

00:07:01.200 terms like ghetto and inner city grew out of the industrial revolution in North America. The word ghetto

00:07:07.600 also has a painful historical root in Europe during the Holocaust and was likely derived from Jewish

00:07:13.120 settlements in Italy centuries ago. Gettos and inner cities were typically seen as places where

00:07:18.240 less refined people lived. The people who weren't up to date culturally developmental wise, he said.

00:07:23.840 So we're not supposed to use terms like ghetto because it can apply negative connotation towards

00:07:29.840 racialized people. I mean, this is sort of an interesting argument as well. Most people don't

00:07:33.600 know that the word ghetto has its roots in Europe. It doesn't come from North America at all. And when

00:07:38.320 you're reading historical documents or reading about exactly what they say here in Jews and in Europe

00:07:45.600 where the Jews lived, they used to call them the ghettos. And so they don't really make a good case as

00:07:50.640 to why not to use this other than that what it might sound classist or something. I mean, most people

00:07:54.480 who use the term ghetto use it in jest anyways, and it's not really meant to be hurtful at all. Okay, okay,

00:07:59.920 let's move on. The next one here is spooky. So according to the dictionary, the term spooky means a

00:08:05.920 sinister or ghostly in a way that causes fear or unease, or it could be easily frightened and

00:08:11.440 nervous. So that's what the word means. But CBC has come up with some different meaning. It says

00:08:16.320 that the term spook has a history of being an anti-black slur when white soldiers began calling

00:08:21.920 fellow black soldiers spooks during World War II. It's offensive because of who and what it used to 1.00

00:08:27.840 apply to, said this anti-racist expert. So again, nothing to do with the term spooky. It just sort of

00:08:34.240 sounds like a different word that people use 100 years ago that nobody uses anymore. So I don't

00:08:40.400 really understand why we wouldn't be able to use the term spooky in a totally different context,

00:08:44.640 talking about something totally different. This is, again, nothing to do with etymology,

00:08:49.280 everything to do with the CBC hectoring people and accusing everyone of being racist. I mean,

00:08:53.920 I could go on another one here, grandfathered in. Phrases like grandfathered in date back to the 19th

00:08:58.400 century policy called the grandfather clause, which indirectly stopped black Americans from voting by

00:09:04.880 limiting their eligibility of who could vote based on their ancestors. I can't imagine anybody in the

00:09:10.800 world other than someone who gets paid to be an anti-racist expert who would hear the term

00:09:16.160 grandfathered in and think back to something that happened in the 19th century and say, yeah,

00:09:20.880 you know what, you're racist for using that term. So ridiculous. These people have way too much time on 0.99

00:09:25.040 their hands. They've created an entire profession here, anti-racist experts whose entire job is just

00:09:31.040 to come up with stuff to accuse people of being racist. And this is the best they can come up with.

00:09:35.120 This is the best that they found. We're not supposed to use terms like spirit animal, powwow,

00:09:39.440 or tribe because cultural appropriation, I guess. We're not supposed to do that. And this is one that

00:09:46.000 people were making fun of quite a bit. First world problem. We're not supposed to do that because

00:09:51.120 it shows our privilege. It's funny because usually people use the term first world problem in a

00:09:55.680 self-deprecating way to, to talk about how the things that are upsetting them aren't real problems

00:10:00.560 in the scale of things, the scope of things. So it actually does get people thinking about how silly 0.87

00:10:05.440 their problems may seem compared to real suffering out there. Like for instance, I'm ordering new

00:10:10.000 furniture for my house, but there were all kinds of supply chain issues with the ports and because of

00:10:15.280 COVID and because of the holidays. And so because of it, a lot of the furniture that I ordered

00:10:19.040 isn't going to be here in time for us having guests at the, at the holidays, right? This,

00:10:23.760 this in a nutshell is a first world problem. You know, it's, it's, it's frustrating for me,

00:10:27.840 but you know, I, I have some context here and I know that there are real people suffering out there.

00:10:33.120 So again, saying that, that using this term is classes, no, it's the opposite. It's, it's being aware

00:10:39.040 that the problems you have, uh, pale in comparison to other problems in the world. So CBC just really being

00:10:46.160 out of touch. Okay. Next we're not supposed to say brainstorm, blind, decided or blind spot.

00:10:52.400 This is funny. Okay. Because the prefix blind is offensive to blind people. Okay. And using the term

00:10:58.000 brainstorm could be insensitive to those who have brain injuries or who aren't neuro diverse. Okay. So,

00:11:05.440 so basically you can't say anything about anything that could offend anyone. That's, that's basically

00:11:10.160 the gist of the CBC's story. And, and at the bottom here, we are reminded that this is part of their

00:11:15.680 being black in Canada series. So for more stories about the experiences of black Canadians from

00:11:21.040 anti-black racism to success stories in the black community, check out being black in Canada, a CBC

00:11:26.480 project, black Canadians can be proud of it. And you see a bunch of the Marxist revolutionary arms up

00:11:32.400 in the air. Again, the CBC created this idea that, that they're going to have an entire section on what

00:11:37.840 it's like to be black in Canada. And then they're kind of running out of ideas. So this is the kind of

00:11:41.680 stuff they come up with. It is completely ridiculous and deserving of all the mockery that it is 0.99

00:11:46.880 receiving online. Okay. Moving on. I want to talk about the story that completely preoccupied and 0.99

00:11:51.040 captivated Perman Hill this week. You know, last week we were told by the legacy media and the liberals

00:11:56.160 over and over and over again, that the biggest story in the country was the vaccine status and the

00:12:00.880 medical health exemptions of conservative MPs. Of course, it was a total distraction. Not the kind of

00:12:05.280 thing that people are sitting around the dinner table talking about. However, that's what the media

00:12:09.280 wanted you to care about. They wanted to distract you with that. This week, it was like that with

00:12:12.880 the conversion therapy bill. So from my understanding of this bill, the liberals devised a bill. The

00:12:18.080 entire purpose of it was to trap the Tories. So they deceptively named it the conversion therapy bill,

00:12:23.840 or that's what they started calling it, in the media. And they knew it was overstepping. They knew

00:12:28.880 that it was something that the conservatives would instinctively reject because it was an attack

00:12:33.600 on religious institutions and religious freedom. And there was a chilling effect on freedom of speech

00:12:38.640 as well because, as I'll explain what the bill does, it prevents fully consenting adults from engaging

00:12:45.040 into conversations when it comes to gender identity and sexual orientation. And so it was devised as a

00:12:52.400 wedge. It was devised as a trap by the liberals. The first two times the liberals brought this forward,

00:12:56.800 conservatives, many conservatives, opposed it. They had a vote on this on June 22nd and it resulted in

00:13:02.560 263 in favour of the bill, 63 opposed. So 62 Conservative MPs and one Independent voted against

00:13:10.480 what was then called Bill C-6. And so the bill failed to go through Parliament the first time

00:13:15.920 because Trudeau probed the Parliament, the second time because the 2021 election. So we've seen this

00:13:21.920 bill. This is the third time this week that it was sort of introduced. It's now called Bill C-4,

00:13:25.920 but it used to be called Bill C-6. And so before I talk about what happened this week,

00:13:31.360 let me just talk about the previous Conservative opposition to this. So one of the 62 MPs that

00:13:37.120 opposed it was Alberta MP Garnet Jenis. Garnet is a friend, friend of the show, and he was one of the

00:13:42.960 leading Conservative MPs who advocate against this bill. The tagline of his campaign was called

00:13:48.000 Fix the Definition. This is all from Garnet Jenis. This is not from me. This is from him. So these are

00:13:52.800 quotes. This is what he said. All politicians oppose conversion therapy in principle, but Bill C-6 proposes

00:13:58.720 to use an overreaching definition of conversion therapy that would needlessly criminalize normal

00:14:04.160 conversations between children and their parents, teachers, counselors, and mentors about gender and

00:14:10.080 sexual behavior. Let's fix the definition. Bill C-6 could open the door for law enforcement to tap into 0.94

00:14:16.800 private family communication to investigate discussions that might fit the bill's broad definition

00:14:22.640 of conversion therapy. Further, while Bill C-6 expressly allows counseling, medical, and surgical

00:14:29.040 efforts to change a child's gender, it expressly prohibits any support for a child seeking to

00:14:34.800 detransition back to their birth gender. If passed, Bill C-6 could restrict the choices of LGBTQ2 Canadians

00:14:42.880 concerning sexuality and gender by prohibiting access to any professional or spiritual support freely

00:14:49.520 chosen to limit sexual behavior or detransition. So pretty compelling stuff here, right? What the

00:14:55.200 what the conservatives are saying is that the liberals have written this bill in a very clunky

00:14:58.960 way. The definition is too broad. It could criminalize regular conversation with people

00:15:04.400 that are confused, kids that are confused. Let's be honest. Part of what the left does, part of their

00:15:08.560 mo is to sort of create confusion, sexual confusion. They say just because you're born a boy doesn't mean

00:15:13.760 that you're a boy. You could be a girl in a boy's body. You could be a boy in a girl's body. 0.83

00:15:16.800 You know, you could you don't have to just be attracted to the other sex. You could be attracted

00:15:21.120 to multiple different sexes and look at the 72 different types of gender that we have. Look

00:15:26.000 at the 72 different types of sexual orientation you can be. I mean, they're creating confusion.

00:15:31.600 And then if a kid wants to go and talk to someone about it, their parents, a counselor, someone in

00:15:36.240 their church, that could be criminalized. I mean, again, this isn't really an important issue to me.

00:15:40.480 I know there's so many other important issues out there, but based on the conservatives own opposition

00:15:44.400 of this bill, it makes sense. And I found that Garnet Jennings' campaign that he ran and the

00:15:48.640 whole fix the definition thing was logical. It seemed like this is the kind of thing that

00:15:52.560 conservatives should oppose. So forgive my confusion this week when a conservative MP, Rob Moore,

00:15:59.600 made an announcement on the floor of the House of Commons saying that he would like to introduce a

00:16:03.600 motion to fast track this bill. He wants to fast track it straight to the Senate, holding no vote in

00:16:08.640 the House of Commons. And the MPs were given the opportunity to either say yes, let's just give it

00:16:14.000 to the Senate, or no, let's continue debating it and have a proper debate. And so I'll show you the

00:16:19.120 clip. This is what it looks like. This is the House of Commons. This is all of the MPs, Conservative,

00:16:24.960 Liberal, NDP, Green, Bloc, and Independent, all of them giving this motion unanimous consent, meaning,

00:16:31.040 no, we don't want to have a record. We don't want to have a vote. Let's just say yes to this bill,

00:16:36.320 all in accordance with each other, and allow it to go into the Senate. So here's what that looked

00:16:41.360 like. Mr. Speaker, I'm asking for unanimous consent to adopt the following motion, that notwithstanding

00:16:46.800 any standing order or usual practices of the House, Bill C-4, an act to amend the Criminal Code,

00:16:52.720 conversion therapy, be deemed to have been read a second time and referred to a Committee of the

00:16:57.520 Whole, deemed considered in Committee of the Whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in

00:17:03.280 at the report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.

00:17:21.360 This being a hybrid sitting of the House for the sake of clarity, I will only ask those who are

00:17:26.240 opposed to the request to express their disagreement. Accordingly, all those opposed to the honourable

00:17:32.400 member moving the motion will please say nay. Agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion.

00:17:40.480 All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

00:17:45.040 There being no dissenting voice, I declare the motion carried.

00:17:50.640 And here you can see all of the members of Parliament standing up, cheering, and look at these

00:17:55.120 people. It looks like they've just solved world peace or like they've just ended world hunger or

00:17:59.600 something. They're all so excited. They're jumping up and down. They're hugging each other. They're

00:18:03.520 clad-handing. Like, we did it. We all came together to pass this super liberal progressive

00:18:09.040 bill that may have a chilling impact on free speech. It may criminalize normal conversations

00:18:14.480 between little kids and their parents, teenagers and their counsellors, or if someone wants to go

00:18:19.760 talk to someone in their church about gender or sexuality. It could all be illegal, according to

00:18:25.440 Garnet Jennings' previous campaign. And yet, for some reason, they're all just so ecstatic that

00:18:30.880 they're on the same team. You can see dancing. There's Michelle Rumpel in a red blazer. She's 0.58

00:18:35.440 dancing around, you know, jumping up and down. Look at them. They're still clapping. They're giving

00:18:40.560 themselves a two-minute standing ovation for all being so progressive and liberal. This is not what you

00:18:47.600 want from your government. This is not what you want from conservatives. This is not what you want from

00:18:52.400 the official opposition. The reason in Canada that we have an official opposition is to oppose bills.

00:18:59.200 There are very few times where you want unanimous consent in the House of Commons. Maybe when we're

00:19:03.040 talking about going to war against an enemy, or maybe when we're talking about a grand national

00:19:08.640 project going together. Those may be the one or two exceptions. Otherwise, the reason they're called

00:19:14.240 the official opposition, the reason we have an official opposition in our parliamentary system, is to

00:19:19.600 oppose bills. Exactly what the conservatives did the first two times this bill was presented. But this

00:19:25.680 time around, maybe because Erin O'Toole demanded that they all vote this way. Maybe because they

00:19:30.720 lost the will to fight. Maybe because they just wanted to give up. Maybe because they wanted a feel

00:19:34.720 good moment. As you can see, they're all jumping around and congratulating themselves. Regardless,

00:19:39.760 this is not what you want to see from conservatives. And I know this isn't really fake news. When fringe

00:19:44.400 activist left-wing journalists like Justin Ling are congratulating you, you know you've done something

00:19:49.360 wrong. So here's Justin Ling. He says, just a positive, nice thing from the conservatives quelling

00:19:54.640 their internal skeptics to do the right thing. To the liberals prioritizing getting the thing passed

00:20:00.480 over dragging it out and the general unanimity of it all. And the conservatives were the ones that

00:20:06.720 sought unanimous consent. Just makes your heart warm a bit, doesn't it? No, this is not what you want

00:20:11.600 as conservatives. This is not what you want. You want them to oppose. You want them to fight to

00:20:16.240 protect free speech, to protect the religious freedom, to protect little kids from being able 0.97

00:20:21.280 to talk it out and talk to people before going ahead with whatever it is they're going ahead with.

00:20:28.080 And here's more of the legacy media congratulating the conservatives for being more like liberals.

00:20:32.880 Liberals thank conservatives who champion conversion therapy bill as it passes the house. So they're all

00:20:37.840 celebrating. They're all feeling warm and fuzzy together. But let me just say, when conservatives

00:20:42.080 seek strange new respect like this, when they bow to the liberals, when they bow to the legacy media,

00:20:46.560 this sort of positivity, this good press, it lasts for about a minute. And then the media will go back

00:20:52.720 to bashing conservatives and the liberals will go back to coming up with new wedge issues to trap

00:20:57.280 the conservatives. This is the name of the game. The conservatives failed this week. They fell into the

00:21:01.520 trap. And Canadians deserve so much more from the party that we call the official opposition. Okay, final

00:21:07.200 story I want to talk about. I know we don't have much time left on the program, so I'll go through

00:21:10.960 it pretty quickly here. But here is another story from the CBC from their series called Being Black

00:21:17.440 in Canada. Here it says for BIPOC employees, remote work meant a welcome break from office microaggressions.

00:21:25.120 So BIPOC for people who aren't hip on the leftist lingo and all of their obsession with weird acronyms.

00:21:33.440 BIPOC means Black, Indigenous, and people of colour. And I know you might be confused because wouldn't a 0.66

00:21:38.400 person of colour include someone who's Black and Indigenous? Well, of course, these things are never logical. 1.00

00:21:43.600 So yes, they called this group of people BIPOC. Again, going with the left's obsession of separating us,

00:21:49.200 putting us into little categories and trying to pit us against each other. So here we have an entire article

00:21:54.960 written about an angry person who says that working in an office is filled with discrimination and she

00:22:01.200 was just so happy to get to work from home because she didn't have to deal with all of the microaggressions,

00:22:05.840 all of the racism from all of the people around her. She could just sit at home and she didn't have

00:22:10.480 to be worried about it. So here it says, as a Black woman in the corporate world, Mila, age 35, knows what

00:22:16.720 it's like to experience microaggressions at work. And if you don't know, microaggression is just simply

00:22:22.640 when someone says something with no racist intent, no bad intent, but the person misconstrues that or

00:22:29.520 digs in a meaning that isn't there to determine that the person must be racist. It's just like anyone who

00:22:34.960 used those words and phrases from the first segment there, that you might not even know it,

00:22:39.200 you might not even feel it, but by saying something, it's a social faux pas and it means that deep down

00:22:45.280 you're racist. So that in a nutshell is what a microaggression is. And so she says,

00:22:49.840 I cannot tell you how many times someone has come up to me and touched my hair.

00:22:55.120 So touching someone's hair is microaggression. Usually microaggressions are much more subtle

00:22:59.200 forms of discrimination, such as confusing one person for another person or one racialized co-worker

00:23:05.600 for another by a white manager or being scrutinized by security or having your name constantly mispronounced.

00:23:13.440 Working from home throughout the pandemic made it easier to avoid such behavior. I would say that on

00:23:18.800 zoom, I didn't really have the thought like, Oh, I'm the only woman of color here. And maybe that's

00:23:23.440 because I felt safer in my own space. Okay. Here's a person who is so, so sheltered, so unprepared to

00:23:29.920 deal with the real world that they can't handle day-to-day things that happen, things that happen to

00:23:35.040 everyone, by the way. Yes. Sometimes people mispronounce my name. Maybe it doesn't happen as much to

00:23:39.200 someone who has a more challenging name, but, but these kinds of things are very minor in, in the scale of

00:23:44.320 things. I might even say that they are first world problems. And yet here we have an entire CBC story

00:23:49.920 telling us about how awful it is to not be white and how racism is so awful. And working from home

00:23:55.840 just gave these individuals a reprieve from all the terrible racists around them in Canada. And that's

00:24:02.800 CBC in a nutshell. They live for this kind of thing. They love identity politics. They love to divide us.

00:24:07.600 Hence why they have an entire series called Being Black in Canada. The entire purpose of it is just to go out 0.99

00:24:13.280 there and try to find examples of how horrible and racist Canadians are. If this is the worst that 0.93

00:24:18.400 they can come up with, this is the worst stuff that they can find, I think we're in pretty good shape

00:24:22.160 as a country, regardless of what the CBC is trying to do, which is pit us all against each other.

00:24:26.240 The reality is that things aren't that bad. Things are pretty good in Canada. Thank you so much for

00:24:30.560 tuning in. I hope you have a wonderful weekend. This has been Fake News Friday. I'm Candace Malcolm,

00:24:34.320 and this is The Ken Smolkham Show.

Juno News - December 04, 2021

CBC’s “Being Black in Canada” series is straight out of an Orwell novel

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript