The Critical Compass Podcast - ＂Freedom is Always One Generation Away From Dying Out＂ - John Carpay on Canada's Free Speech Crisis

00:00:00.000 Freedom is always one generation away from dying out. And it cannot be bequeathed like a beautiful old grandfather clock where you just, you do a bit of maintenance and you call in the specialist to put oil on the gears. And it like, it's not a piece of inheritance or, you know, a one ounce gold nugget that just gets inherited from generation to generation or a piece of jewelry.

00:00:22.460 Freedom has to be relearned and appreciated by each new generation. And we have failed badly on that front in recent decades.

00:00:31.320 Welcome back to another episode of the Critical Compass. I'm James. This is my co-host, Mike. And today we've got a return guest.

00:00:55.940 We've got John Carpe, president and founder of the JCCF, the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms. Welcome back, John. It's great to have you here.

00:01:05.740 Glad to be with you guys and with all your viewers and listeners.

00:01:08.980 Yeah, it's, well, it's nice to have you back, but it feels like when we have you back, it's partially for a reason. It's because Canada's not in a good place. Is that a, is that an accurate assessment?

00:01:19.740 It's, it's, it's an understatement. Uh, there are so many problems and you may have had a chance to see a video I put out about three weeks ago where I said, uh, Canada will be a police state by Christmas.

00:01:34.960 If Parliament passes bills, C2, C8, and C9 in current form, along with the reintroduction of the Online Harms Act and the prior passage of the Online Streaming Act, you get those five pieces of legislation together.

00:01:49.960 And, uh, we're going to be, we're going to be locking up or, or arresting thousands of people like what's happening now in the United Kingdom, where if you have a, uh, salty or vociferously worded tweet, uh, denouncing immigration policies or something politically incorrect, you can get arrested or almost as bad as you can get a policeman knocking on your door to give you a warning.

00:02:14.500 So, yeah, that, that seems like, it seems like that's the direction that we're going, especially if there's examples of how this kind of legislation can be overused in the UK. Could you, uh, maybe break down just a summary of like, well, what does each of these bills focus on? And then like, what's the problematic like sections that we're actually concerned about?

00:02:38.200 Sure. Well, just do the tip of the iceberg. So the earlier piece passed about two years ago was the Online Streaming Act and it gives the Canadian radio tele, radio telecommunications and television, the CRTC gives the CRTC, uh, authority over the internet in Canada to dictate Canadian content, to define what Canadian content is, and to monitor and regulate, uh, every podcast, every website for,

00:03:08.200 Canadian content. They haven't started to exercise that power yet, but the law is in place and they can do so. So that was a problem from two years ago. Uh, the problem was the passage of a bad law. Again, it hasn't yet been, uh, abused. As far as I know.

00:03:23.200 Then we have C2, which is the Strong Borders Act. Uh, I call it the Strong Surveillance Act. And while it does contain provisions, uh, to change our immigration and refugee policies and, you know, things pertaining to the border, it also has provisions to authorize Canada Post to search letter mail without a warrant. It bans the use of cash in amounts greater than $10,000 for donations to charity and for paying bills.

00:03:52.200 It creates an authorized access to information act, which gives federal officials, the power to search our computers and cell phones without a warrant. So that's really bad news. It's been denounced across the spectrum. There's so many different, uh, groups, academics, professors have denounced it that the government's actually put it on the back burner, which is good. And it shows that activism, uh, does achieve some results.

00:04:20.200 Again, just the tip of the iceberg. Bill C8 is the Cybersecurity Act and it empowers the federal cabinet to kick individual Canadians off the internet without warning, without due process. If the cabinet minister decides that the, uh, individual constitutes a threat to Canada's telecommunication system.

00:04:46.200 Now, in theory, that should only apply to hackers and fraudsters and foreign terrorists, domestic terrorists. Uh, but there's nothing in there to prevent a cabinet minister from kicking a Canadian off the internet because he doesn't like her social media posts, podcasts, uh, website, et cetera. And if you are kicked off the internet, theoretically, you can go to court.

00:05:16.200 So, uh, you can go to court.

00:05:46.200 Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, with this new Authorized Access to Information Act.

00:05:51.480 It's all about warrantless searches. I can get into details on that. Bill C-9 is the

00:05:59.660 Combating Hate Act, and it authorizes judges to vastly increase punishments imposed on people

00:06:08.420 convicted of crimes if the judge feels that the crime was motivated by hatred. It also removes

00:06:15.940 a current sober second thought process whereby when local police, local Crown prosecutors in

00:06:23.680 Edmonton, Vancouver, Ottawa, Halifax, Montreal, local Crown prosecutors have to get the permission

00:06:31.840 of the Attorney General of the province, the Justice Minister, to prosecute the Canadian for hate speech.

00:06:40.780 And that kind of puts the brakes on it. That's why we haven't seen too many

00:06:44.720 hate speech prosecutions in Canada. There might be two, three, four per decade. Maybe there's a bunch

00:06:52.140 that don't get into the news, but they're so rare that they often do hit the news. They're going to

00:06:58.060 get rid of that requirement that local police and local Crown prosecutors have to get the approval

00:07:03.700 of the Justice Minister. They're scrapping that. And so it gives much more leeway if a policeman feels

00:07:09.420 that something is hateful. You can lay criminal charges. And even if the judge disagrees with a police

00:07:16.440 officer and acquits you at the end of the day, you've now had criminal proceedings against you for the past

00:07:22.240 nine months or 18 months or two and a half years. And so that's very menacing. If Bill C-9 passes, we're going to see a lot

00:07:30.660 of a lot more Canadians. I couldn't tell you what number being prosecuted for hate speech and hate

00:07:37.020 cannot be defined because it's an emotion. Bill C-9 tries to define hatred by saying that ridicule to

00:07:46.580 ridicule someone, discredit, offend, hurt the feelings of somebody is not hate speech, dislike and disdain are not hate speech.

00:07:53.700 However, detestation and vilification are hate speech. I mean, it's just ridiculous. 0.97

00:08:00.640 You need a thesaurus to understand that.

00:08:03.280 Yeah. You know, a good law, a just law by definition is clear. So when the criminal code says,

00:08:10.480 essentially, thou shalt not kill, you know, it's pretty clear. Unless you're insane, you know that 0.71

00:08:17.280 you are killing somebody, intending to kill somebody. There's nothing gray about it. But 0.97

00:08:22.860 how do you, how do you avoid a hate speech prosecution? And it's going to have a chilling

00:08:27.800 effect whereby Canadians self-censor. Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act is also very political because

00:08:35.360 it bans the Nazi swastika, but does not ban the communist hammer and sickle, which many people,

00:08:41.500 including many immigrants to Canada would see that as a symbol of hatred towards business owners and

00:08:48.080 aristocrats and all kinds of people. But you could wave around the communist hammer and sickle,

00:08:54.160 the banner under which tens of millions of people were murdered by communist regimes in Russia,

00:08:59.640 China, Cambodia, et cetera. You can wave that around, but not the Nazi swastika. So, you know,

00:09:06.340 maybe not a big deal, but I just, I see the politics in it. And, uh, you know, if we're going

00:09:11.960 to start, if we're going to start banning one hateful symbol, uh, we should ban more of them.

00:09:17.560 And then fifth, last but not least is the Online Harms Act, which died on the order paper when we had

00:09:23.320 our election in April, 2025. That bill would give new powers to the Canadian Human Rights Commission

00:09:31.720 to prosecute Canadians for non-criminal offensive or discriminatory, another fake word, discriminatory

00:09:39.960 speech. And people who support that love to say, oh, it's not criminal, you know, therefore chill,

00:09:46.680 relax. It's not a big deal. But if you're found guilty by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal of

00:09:52.580 discriminatory speech, uh, you can be fined up to $50,000 plus having to pay an additional up to $20,000

00:09:59.920 to the complainant whose feelings were hurt. Uh, the Online Harms Act also, uh, empowers judges to

00:10:09.040 place you under house arrest, curfew, ankle bracelet. If your neighbor fears that you might

00:10:16.140 commit a hate speech crime in future, then without having been charged, without having been found

00:10:22.360 guilty, you can actually have a judge restrict your freedom with house arrest or an ankle bracelet

00:10:28.620 based on what you might do in future. So it's like minority report. Um, it also empowers this,

00:10:35.940 this is the Online Streaming Act. Still, it empowers the federal cabinet to write all kinds of

00:10:40.560 regulations governing the content of the internet, uh, without any parliamentary scrutiny. And then

00:10:46.380 there'll be this brand new digital safety commission, which will enforce those federal regulations.

00:10:52.000 And there'll be massive fines and penalties for companies that don't themselves start to remove

00:10:58.880 content that they think is discriminatory. Uh, so the government can essentially get all the private

00:11:04.800 companies to do their dirty work for them because if you're a private company and you don't want to

00:11:09.020 face, you know, million dollar fines, you're going to, uh, hire your own sensor to kick anybody off

00:11:15.760 your social media platform or, or other platform. So Online Streaming Act already passed two years ago,

00:11:22.680 C2, C8, C9, and then the, um, potential return of the Online Streaming Act. You put those five

00:11:29.680 things together and you've got a police state.

00:11:33.420 This summer in the UK, we saw a lot of, um, uh, Britons, uh, being, uh, arrested and actually

00:11:41.660 faced significant jail time for posts made on social media about, um, comments related to, uh,

00:11:48.300 the, the problem that the UK has right now with grooming gangs. Uh, do you see this as an, as like

00:11:54.260 Canada's kind of follow-up attempt to enact similar legislation that allowed the UK to

00:11:59.300 perform those acts this summer?

00:12:03.700 Sadly, yes. And to give you two examples of where Canada is at culturally, politically, legally,

00:12:09.940 we've had Charlie Angus, I think he's now retired, but he's an NDP member of parliament put forward

00:12:15.700 a proposal to make it illegal to speak positively about the oil and gas industry. Yeah. Now it didn't

00:12:22.580 get passed by the House of Commons and it was not adopted by the government, but the very fact that

00:12:26.540 somebody would put this forward as a serious proposal, we had another NDP, uh, member of

00:12:32.220 parliament from Winnipeg said that residential school denialism, uh, which could include, uh,

00:12:39.480 it could include saying that, that, uh, the residential schools experience was not necessarily

00:12:45.880 bad for everybody or, uh, you know, challenging the unproven claim that there's 215, uh, children

00:12:53.580 buried at the, uh, Kamloops Indian residential school. So she would actually, if it was within her power,

00:13:01.500 she would criminalize the, um, uh, uh, opinions, uh, the incorrect opinions about, uh, Aboriginal

00:13:10.360 residential schools. Now, David Suzuki is another example. He's not a member of parliament, but he

00:13:16.080 said that people who deny the forthcoming impending climate Holocaust and who are not on board with him

00:13:22.600 that we need to, uh, you know, move ourselves into poverty by, by getting rid of oil and gas,

00:13:29.040 um, that they should be jailed. They should be locked up and, and jailed for disagreeing with

00:13:34.520 David Suzuki. So it's, uh, you know, again, those were private members bills, but there's a lot of

00:13:43.060 Canadians that, uh, think that you should be locked up for, uh, for saying the wrong thing.

00:13:48.680 Well, I think that you touch on a huge point there is that if these bills are not very clear,

00:13:54.980 and if even the definition of hate is kind of nebulous and it's subject to the interpretation

00:14:02.360 of the society, you'll have a cultural, like the, whatever the dominant cultural force is at the

00:14:08.420 time will be the one defining what that hate is. And currently that is a, a very leftist slash

00:14:15.580 neo-Marxist way of thinking where if words are violence, well harm harmers were like words can be

00:14:23.600 harm. There can be something as climate violence while you're polluting, like your CO2 emissions.

00:14:30.420 That's a form of violence. You are threatening the world and a threat must be met with some action

00:14:37.420 to neutralize that threat. And you see how these word games set, it sets up an overreach just by its

00:14:45.720 very nature. And I feel like sometimes you have people, if not voting for it, they, they see some

00:14:52.300 of these things and like, well, it won't be abused. It's kind of necessary. We need to protect our

00:14:56.540 environment. We need to protect these vulnerable people. And it comes from a place of, I quote,

00:15:03.980 like in quotations, it's compassion, but it's misplaced compassion. It's being weaponized by those

00:15:10.440 who want to have more control over citizens.

00:15:16.040 Yeah, it's, it's, it's extremely dangerous. And I, I have to agree with what you just said.

00:15:21.840 Another manifestation of that was the response to the political assassination and murder of Charlie

00:15:29.560 Kirk. And he gets demonized by the CBC as being far right in the words of the CBC, which is can anybody

00:15:37.220 that disagrees with woke neo-Marxist perspective. So you could be a conservative, which is not far

00:15:43.960 right. You could be a classical liberal, which is not far right. But you know, Charlie Kirk,

00:15:48.960 because he's got these views, he's, he's against abortion. He's in favor of free enterprise and

00:15:54.980 small government. And you know, that's, that's called far right, but more worrisome than that.

00:16:00.960 And I mean, the CBC is not even, it's a taxpayer funded advocacy group for big government and woke

00:16:07.420 ideology. It's not even a media outlet in any meaningful way. But in addition to that, you've

00:16:14.400 got university profs stating on the internet that, you know, oh, it's, it's, it's, I don't have the

00:16:22.100 exact words, but you know, it's great that Charlie Kirk got assassinated. And they think it's great

00:16:27.280 because they disagree really strongly with his message. There's a Manitoba cabinet minister who

00:16:32.900 said publicly on, on Twitter that it is just a vile, hateful, blah, blah, blah, complete denunciation.

00:16:41.660 I have no sympathy for him. I do have sympathy for his children. I hope that they will grow up in a

00:16:47.760 world that will be the opposite of what their father advocated for. It's a very nasty, vicious

00:16:52.280 message. And she was reprimanded by the premier Manitoba and she issued a retraction apology.

00:17:00.320 But again, it's a, it's a sign of where our culture is at, where you've got elected officials

00:17:05.640 in that case, at least, and academics who are shaping our young minds are publicly proclaiming

00:17:13.520 that it's a good thing to assassinate somebody who has the wrong ideas. That's scary.

00:17:21.060 It's very scary. And we've, you know, we've mentioned this before. We may have even mentioned

00:17:25.260 it on our last show together, but you know, we, we talk about how, uh, in, in modern politics now,

00:17:31.600 um, the way that the left and the right view each other and by and large, the left tends to, 0.97

00:17:36.440 the right tends to view the left as maybe silly, gullible, uh, you know, maybe uninformed or ignorant 0.99

00:17:42.500 or things like this. And whereas the left tends to view the right in terms of like biblical evil, 0.99

00:17:48.560 you know, and like, how do you evil? Yeah. And how do you engage in a, in a, in a conversation

00:17:52.780 with somebody who you view as evil and, and, and sort of to go on to James's point there? Um,

00:17:59.840 you know, we, we've, we've talked about another context as well. Like what would,

00:18:03.460 what would the reaction of somebody on the left be if it were a conservative government putting

00:18:08.100 forward these bills? You know, would they still agree that government should enjoy all these

00:18:12.620 powers to discern what is and isn't hateful? Because they would know that of course the definitions

00:18:17.080 would be different depending on the parties that are in power.

00:18:20.320 Yeah. Well, when Stephen Harper's government tried to introduce, uh, restrictions, federal

00:18:25.100 government, uh, restrictions on the internet or power over the internet. And I, I apologize.

00:18:30.940 I forget the name of the bill. Uh, but the, the, the pretext, the justification that was trotted

00:18:37.320 out was, uh, we've got to crack down on child pornography. So we've got to give all these broad

00:18:42.800 powers to the federal government. And at one point the justice minister, um, I don't know

00:18:49.180 if it was Vic Taves or somebody else said, either you're with us or you're with the child

00:18:53.100 pornographers. And he thought he had a great soundbite, but it went over like a dead balloon.

00:18:57.440 And there was so much pushback in the opposition, the liberal liberals, NDP block were just howling

00:19:03.800 about how outrageous and wrong it would be for the government to acquire more power over

00:19:11.640 the internet. And now, you know, some of the same people are, uh, with, with these, the five

00:19:18.200 bills, online streaming, C2, C8, C9, and the, uh, online harms act, which has not been reintroduced,

00:19:24.880 but with those five bills, uh, all of them are about government control of the internet and they

00:19:31.420 have to be seen together because if you read your bill C8 by itself, I was just going through it

00:19:36.700 again today. Um, if it was the only piece of legislation and the other four didn't exist,

00:19:43.180 uh, you know, it wouldn't be necessarily a grave threat, but in, in combination with the other four

00:19:50.500 bills, it's, uh, terrifying. So for example, um, you, you could see how this would be easily weaponized

00:19:59.020 against a independent independent media outlet. Let's say they've got a few journalists. They

00:20:05.100 have, they have a network of people they get information from, et cetera. And if they can search,

00:20:12.300 they can pull up all their emails. They can get their contact lists. If that can be done without a

00:20:17.100 warrant, like you could say, well, they had an article that was hateful. Like, well, you already have some of

00:20:25.180 that there's enough there that they can somewhat justify a case where like, well, this is a law.

00:20:32.220 We're just following the laws that exist. And, and we have to crack down on this hate and this

00:20:37.900 outlet's being hateful. And, and then they will use the tools that they have available if they are

00:20:43.340 there. So one tools, uh, like scary enough, but to have four or five different ways of potentially

00:20:52.380 punishing speech or advocacy groups or media, like especially alternative media, it's going to be

00:21:01.820 weaponized, especially when these conclusions, these opinions are contrary to the governing party.

00:21:09.900 Now, the issue comes with people not seeing the bigger picture. And we try to do this on our show. We

00:21:17.020 try to like exactly flip the switch as the flip the script and think about like, well, what would it,

00:21:23.900 what would happen if somebody else was in power or what would happen if these, this government

00:21:31.180 did not share your views? Like, would the liberals be comfortable with any of this? Because as soon as

00:21:38.460 you open this door, it's hard to, it's hard to like roll these back and you can draw parallels to like,

00:21:46.540 well, there was a time there was no income tax. There's no GST. There's no, this, no that. And

00:21:52.140 we've opened the door to so many more, like we're just offloading so much to the government. And then

00:21:58.540 now it's seeming normal place. So I could foresee a time where if you have more of these bills and they've

00:22:04.060 been around for 10 years and maybe they haven't had a huge impact yet, and maybe they don't abuse

00:22:11.020 it, but it's there in law, but it just seems normal. And it's just seems like a, well, we have these just

00:22:16.620 in case you, it's not going to be undone easily. These things are, they're put in swiftly there. And

00:22:26.540 you were mentioning before that some of these are massive bills. They're hard to read, hard to

00:22:32.060 understand. It seems like a lot of our MPs aren't, aren't even fully reading and understanding

00:22:37.580 everything that's in there. So how, how prepared are we? Like how accountable it like are, is any of

00:22:48.700 this right now? Well, past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. So many management

00:22:56.700 analysts and academics say, and I think it's true. It's not a perfect prediction. People

00:23:03.660 sometimes do change their ways, but, but past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior.

00:23:08.540 So the, the past and current behavior of, of governments in terms of media is that we are

00:23:16.540 forced with our tax dollars to subsidize, not only the CBC, which is funded entirely by taxpayers, but we

00:23:23.980 also have to give a huge sums of money to CTV and global and the global mail, the national post,

00:23:31.420 every newspaper in Canada. Uh, most, if not all radio stations that are kind of the more listened

00:23:38.140 to broader ones. And there's not a dime going towards say Ezra Levance, the rebel or Juno news, uh,

00:23:47.900 true north, um, the Western standard, these publications are not getting any money. And

00:23:55.820 I think nobody should get any money. Just to be clear, I'm not advocating that, that taxpayers

00:24:00.300 be forced to contribute to, to the rebel, but you can see this very clear bias where the government by

00:24:07.100 its actions has very clearly said that there's a certain viewpoint that they will fund. And that's

00:24:12.380 a mainstream viewpoint. So, you know, the, the, the so-called mainstream media, they will refer to,

00:24:19.420 um, if you, if you encourage a boy to take puberty blockers and estrogen and eventually, you know, 0.98

00:24:26.620 persuade him, he could become a girl and get them castrated. They call that gender affirming care. 0.98

00:24:33.420 That's the language used by the CBC. It's very biased. Um, so, you know, and on, on lockdowns and

00:24:40.940 vaccine passports, uh, the CBC, as well as all these other government funded media, they, they rarely,

00:24:46.060 if ever interviewed anybody who said, uh, lockdowns are useless. You cannot stop the spread of the virus.

00:24:52.780 Uh, the dangers of COVID have been exaggerated. Lockdowns are causing a lot of harm. Uh, mandatory

00:24:58.700 vaccination policies are a violation of the Nuremberg code, uh, which provides the idea of,

00:25:06.140 of fully informed, fully voluntary consent for any medical treatment. They didn't interview,

00:25:12.780 uh, you know, with very few exceptions, they did not interview anybody who gave a contrary

00:25:19.580 perspective. And now on, on Aboriginal issues, the media parrot the, uh, the, uh, the Kamloops Indian

00:25:27.180 band with their allegations that there's the bodies of 215 children buried there. There's not

00:25:31.900 a shred of evidence to support that claim. The only way to find out is through an excavation.

00:25:37.100 They've received $12 million to excavate. They haven't done it. And the media treated this like

00:25:42.780 this was, you know, truth. Uh, the, you look at the media coverage on the freedom convoy in Ottawa,

00:25:49.500 which was amazing that you had thousands of people in Ottawa over a period of weeks and there's

00:25:55.100 no cars set on fire. There's no, uh, shop windows smashed in, there's no violence. And yet the media

00:26:03.340 get into this. Oh, these are dangerous white supremacist, neo-Nazi racist criminals, and they're 1.00

00:26:08.860 very dangerous. And the government's funding that message. So, uh, I could give you more examples, 1.00

00:26:14.220 but if the government, if you see how the government's behaving in which media they're giving money to and

00:26:21.020 which ones they're not. And when you hear politicians talking about the threat of disinformation and

00:26:26.620 misinformation, you know, as if they're not capable of putting, putting out misinformation and

00:26:31.980 disinformation, we've got to combat misinformation. Well, it's pretty obvious, uh, what's going to

00:26:39.100 happen when you give government all this power over the internet. It's very obvious.

00:26:43.980 Yeah. I wonder if, um, this is maybe a little bit out there in philosophy land, but I wonder

00:26:51.740 if you would, if you have a comment or any thoughts on, you know, it seems to me that

00:26:56.300 rather than being a left, right issue as so many things we try to boil down to, it seems to me that

00:27:01.260 this is a, this is an issue. That's a by-product of, uh, the type of person who is naturally most

00:27:07.740 susceptible to propaganda, which tends to be emotional. It tends to be very, um, kind of

00:27:15.420 very surface level, uh, instant sort of gut reaction type things. You know, like you can,

00:27:20.380 if you can, uh, scare somebody into, you know, putting a mask on and, you know, lining up for a

00:27:26.060 unproven medical treatment, if you can do that to somebody, it actually doesn't really matter what

00:27:30.220 their political opinion is. If you can, if the people who it's in the best interest of to distribute

00:27:37.900 that propaganda can maintain control over them. So do you have any thoughts on that? Like, is there,

00:27:42.620 I don't even really know what I'm asking, but, um, is there a, could, could you see, you know,

00:27:47.980 should the, should the political winds shift a little bit, say Alberta gains its independence,

00:27:53.500 for example, that's a different discussion, but should, you know,

00:27:56.060 Polyev's conservatives, uh, you know, win the next election and maybe they, they win it in a

00:28:00.540 majority fashion. Can you see the same sorts of, uh, really socially destructive policies that we've

00:28:07.500 been experiencing the last half decade here, just still, still happening and propagating throughout

00:28:13.020 society, but maybe with a different angle to try and capitalize on whatever the social, uh,

00:28:19.100 zeitgeist is of the moment. Well, we saw it happen here in Alberta under Jason

00:28:24.300 Kenny, who's supposedly small government, supposedly conservative. Uh, he once wrote a

00:28:29.900 column a few years prior to the imposing lockdowns in Albertans where he said, you know, we cannot,

00:28:37.180 we should listen to experts and glean from it and, you know, take the nuggets and think about it. We,

00:28:42.780 it's good that we have experts, but we can't put experts in charge of society and, and have a

00:28:48.540 technocracy instead of democracy where these so-called experts are basically legislating. They, they

00:28:55.660 replaced the legislature, they replaced democracy. We can't have that. And he was entirely correct.

00:29:00.540 So this is a small C conservative guy that, uh, you know, has been advocating for smaller government,

00:29:05.900 religious freedom, locks up pastors in jail. And this is coming from, you know, what,

00:29:11.900 uh, back in the day, I don't know about today, but you know, people, if you had asked people, well,

00:29:17.660 is, is, uh, is Jason Kenny a man of the left or a man of the right? Most people would say, well,

00:29:22.380 he's a man of the right. He's not a man of the left and took away all of our rights and freedoms.

00:29:27.740 Uh, you know, the governments with the name of conservative in, uh, Manitoba, in Ontario,

00:29:36.460 in the Atlantic provinces, uh, the, uh, coalition Avenue, Quebec, supposedly a conservative party.

00:29:43.660 So yeah. Um, freedom is always one generation away from dying out and it cannot be bequeathed

00:29:50.300 like a beautiful old grandfather clock where you just, you do a bit of maintenance and you call in

00:29:55.420 the specialists to put oil on the gears and it like, it's not a piece of inheritance or, you know,

00:30:01.740 a one ounce gold nugget that just gets, uh, uh, you know, inherited from generation to generation,

00:30:08.540 uh, or a piece of jewelry. Freedom has to be relearned and appreciated by each new generation.

00:30:14.540 And we have failed badly on that front in recent decades.

00:30:19.740 Almost because things have been seemingly easy, we've been seemingly prosperous. We're seeing atrophy

00:30:27.180 of this freedom muscle in a sense. Like it has to be something it needs to be challenged. Um,

00:30:34.460 like with, if there is no, not to say struggle, but if there's nothing that makes you aware of like how

00:30:46.060 fragile some of these freedoms are, I, I feel like there's no push for people to be like, they're not

00:30:52.460 double checking things. They're not really seeing how we could turn into like Soviet Russia, the kind

00:31:01.820 of conditions and we can find parallels. And it's often the people who came from the USSR and they

00:31:09.900 left that are some of the first ones to speak up about some of these bills or some of the patterns.

00:31:16.220 Their pattern recognition is finely tuned for that in a way that a lot of these, like our generation were

00:31:25.020 like, we didn't grow up with the same kind of, like these things feel a little bit farther away.

00:31:30.460 World War II felt farther away. Like, uh, the communist scare and all that, like, feels like

00:31:38.700 something you read rather than something that we experienced.

00:31:42.620 So it's going to talk to, uh, just to piggyback on that. We talked to a, uh, a Polish couple this 0.72

00:31:48.620 weekend at the I am Alberta event. And, um, they said they, they've been in Canada for,

00:31:54.460 I think they said 10 or 15 years or something around there over a decade anyway. And, and they're

00:31:59.020 like, you know, we, we left this, we left this in Poland. Like, and now, and now we're seeing the

00:32:03.420 last, you know, half decade here, we're seeing, it feels exactly the same as the, the, the, uh,

00:32:08.460 political environment that we left. And it's like, why, you know, they wouldn't be the first, uh,

00:32:13.180 Eastern European people I've talked to that have said the same thing. And it's like, why are we not

00:32:17.100 listening to these people? Cause they, they do have the radar for this and they can see the signs

00:32:21.420 before us, uh, soft Westerners can.

00:32:25.500 Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's up. This is why we need to teach history in schools, but we've, we've seen the

00:32:31.500 near elimination of, of history as a, as a subject at school has been transformed into social studies

00:32:39.580 and social studies has been, uh, the way my 15 year old daughter described it not that long ago, 0.96

00:32:46.220 social studies is about learning that white people are bad. And she said it tongue in cheek, 0.89

00:32:50.940 like she saw through it as, as being ridiculous because you know, you're, you're born with whatever 0.95

00:32:56.140 skin color you're born with, and it's not something to be proud of or ashamed of. I mean, 0.73

00:33:00.780 it is what it is, but, um, the, the, um, see if you teach history, then, you know, even if our own

00:33:12.140 country has not for the past, uh, 80 years suffered through, uh, the hardships of, of World War II,

00:33:20.860 you know, we had some suffering during the Korean war and the Vietnam war. We had, uh, Canadian soldiers

00:33:25.820 that died in, in both of those wars. But if your own country hasn't been through a war and occupation,

00:33:33.900 state surveillance, uh, people arrested and jailed for political reasons, even if you haven't

00:33:40.140 experienced it in your own country, you can learn about it in other countries and you can have that

00:33:44.380 awareness. But when somebody, a person, when somebody is ignorant of history, you can persuade that

00:33:50.860 person of anything. And, you know, we see democracies. There's so many examples. I mean,

00:33:57.020 Spain had a democracy until 1936 and then war broke out and the fascists won the war. They didn't have

00:34:04.060 elections, uh, for the next 40 plus years. You know, they, they got their democracy back, but you had 40

00:34:09.660 years there. Chile had a functioning democracy with the peaceful transfer of power between government and

00:34:15.580 opposition parties. In 1973, they, they have a coup, they get, uh, Pinochet in power for the next 17

00:34:22.220 years. Uh, there are so many examples. Germany had a functioning democracy prior to, uh, the Nazis winning

00:34:30.860 power, but you had a situation in Germany where more than half of voters were voting for the two

00:34:36.140 parties that promised to abolish democracy, namely the national socialists and the communists together

00:34:41.180 between the two of them. They got more than 50% of the vote. So even in a democracy, you can have

00:34:46.300 the majority of voters actually voting to abolish democracy. So it's something that, uh, you know,

00:34:54.060 we need that in our culture where people believe that we have fundamental human rights that the

00:35:00.700 government is not allowed to violate and that these rights come from God, not from government,

00:35:05.180 because if rights come from, you don't need to be a Christian Muslim Hindu per se. You can believe in

00:35:09.340 natural law, uh, but that these rights don't come from government because if they do, then government

00:35:15.180 naturally has, has every right to limit them as much as government deems best.

00:35:20.380 Yeah. I was actually, I'm glad you brought that up because I was going to say that too. I mean,

00:35:23.420 it seems to me that there is a, um, there is sort of a, if you were to, I don't know, maybe put it on a

00:35:29.020 graph or something, there is a pretty clear, uh, association between the, uh, as a, as the secular,

00:35:37.020 secularism in a country rises and the, the loss of what people tend to view as their, uh, you know,

00:35:43.420 like you say, your God given rights or your natural rights or things like this, because yeah, it's

00:35:47.740 people tend to view rights as some nowadays. Anyway, it seems like people tend to view rights

00:35:52.700 as something that are conferred upon you by a government rather than something that can only

00:35:57.740 actually ever be limited by a government because you are the, it's, it's part of what made,

00:36:03.900 I've heard people talk about this as part of what makes the American constitution so valuable and

00:36:08.140 that it describes, uh, uh, your rights as being inalienable, which really, when you get down to it,

00:36:14.940 meaning, um, that not even you can give them up, like you don't actually even have the power to give

00:36:19.660 up your own God given right. Uh, and so that's a very powerful concept that people don't seem to

00:36:24.700 really appreciate until it's, until it's, uh, uh, threatened. So yeah, that's, um, yeah, I would,

00:36:32.780 would you say that, I don't know if you're a religious man or not, but would you say that maybe,

00:36:37.420 uh, maybe we, we would do well as a society to get maybe a little bit more in touch with our

00:36:41.740 traditional kind of roots like that?

00:36:43.100 Hmm. Well, Ben Shapiro, uh, about two years ago was speaking at a, at a, at an event in, uh,

00:36:51.740 in Calgary. And he said, he said, I, as an Orthodox Jew urge you all go to church. So he, uh, there's,

00:37:00.060 I don't know if, uh, I see like the justice centers got, you know, a lot of atheists and

00:37:11.100 agnostics among our supporters, as well as people, Jews and Christians and people of other religions.

00:37:17.580 So it, it need not be a religion per se, but there has to be an appreciation there of our inherent human

00:37:24.860 dignity and that we are not farm animals. Yeah.

00:37:27.420 And that's the thing about the totalitarians, about the, the Hitlers and the Stalins and the 0.89

00:37:31.580 Maos, uh, they see the people almost like, uh, a herd of cattle to be herded about and told 0.99

00:37:42.060 where to go and what to do and castrated and, and, uh, inoculated, injected with vaccines, et cetera,

00:37:49.500 et cetera. And, you know, cattle don't have any rights and it's the government that controls them.

00:37:56.140 And they have a similar vision of, of their own people that, that their people are like cattle

00:38:01.900 that can be managed by the government who is the farmer. And, you know, sometimes a good farmer can

00:38:08.220 take good care of his, and in fact, a good farmer does take good care of his animals, but it's to

00:38:13.900 serve the farmer's service, uh, it's to serve the farmer's interests because he's going to slaughter

00:38:19.340 them at the end of the day and sell their meat. Yeah. And, um, the religious components, just

00:38:25.260 it, I feel like not that it's a proxy, but there's multiple factors. And I think one of the factors is

00:38:31.660 that you mentioned cattle and like, well, what, what have we seen? We've seen the, we've seen

00:38:38.220 the institution of families weaken, the institution of churches, which act as a kind of, uh,

00:38:44.700 uh, it, it was part of the community and you had that extension of the family through church and

00:38:52.060 through communities. You had this glue that kept people together in a way that made them resistant

00:39:00.300 to a lot of top down control from a government because they were, um, they were navigating

00:39:06.940 through their own communities rather than a self-imposed top down version. And I think this

00:39:13.340 goes in hand in hand with, um, so you have more and more people not, uh, not being religious, but you

00:39:20.300 also have, um, you have the departure from like, uh, the gold standard. Uh, we have a weakening of our

00:39:28.460 currency. Uh, you have feminism saying that, well, it's the best thing for a woman to do is to get a 1.00

00:39:35.660 job and being a mother is oppressive. So now you have people moving away from you moving away from

00:39:43.580 home. You have less multi-generational homes. You have less of this like tight community of families

00:39:50.220 that live within a couple of kilometers. Now they're across the city. You're seeing less of your family

00:39:55.180 members. You're kind of growing apart. You have more family members who might have wildly different

00:39:59.900 views than you. So we're, we're almost very like we're surrounded by people in the cities, but we are

00:40:08.220 isolated in a way because these communities have broken down. So I'm seeing this a little bit more

00:40:14.380 on the right of a push towards communities. And this sometimes is faith-based and sometimes it's just

00:40:22.380 through the love of freedom or the love of, sometimes you have farmers still connecting on

00:40:27.580 this way or just like hunters and there's still push for the community. And I feel like some of

00:40:34.540 these problems, I feel like that's an antidote anyways. And without that community piece, um,

00:40:40.780 without that connection, people are just easily led by top down. They, they need,

00:40:46.540 they need that somewhere. And if you're not getting it from the bottom layer, then it comes from a top.

00:40:54.860 Absolutely. The, the, the weaker that marriages, families, and communities are, the stronger

00:41:01.660 government gets. And, uh, the, we got a dose of this during lockdowns where the government did in fact

00:41:09.900 make it illegal for people to connect socially. And yet we need that human connection. Uh, uh,

00:41:16.940 as much as we need water, the difference is, you know, with, with water after three or four days,

00:41:22.940 you'll be dead. Whereas if you get cut off from, uh, community and from in-person social interactions,

00:41:30.460 it's not going to kill you after three days, uh, but it will, and it does harm your health.

00:41:35.660 Prior to lockdowns, uh, there was abundance and there still is abundant medical literature showing

00:41:41.340 that, um, people who are, have in-person connections, whether, and you know, it could

00:41:48.060 be church, but it could be, uh, every, every Saturday night, you're connecting with some good

00:41:54.060 friends over beers at a pub, uh, whatever the case might be, but people within with, with, uh, more

00:42:01.420 in-person connections, they enjoy better health and live longer lives than people who did not.

00:42:09.340 And so, you know, phones and zoom calls can be wonderful substitutes, but we should have the new

00:42:15.580 technologies as our servant, not our master. And what the governments did with lockdowns was really

00:42:21.100 to weaken our, our mental health, spiritual health, um, by forcibly preventing us from connecting.

00:42:29.980 Even at church, uh, you know, you couldn't, uh, couldn't have more than 15 people at church.

00:42:35.340 BC shut them down entirely. So that's really important for a healthy society. And for me,

00:42:43.020 the big question that I wish I had an answer to is how, how can you reconcile

00:42:47.020 urbanization with still maintaining strong communities? This seems to be in the nature

00:42:51.100 of cities to have, you know, a million people or even a hundred thousand people living fairly

00:42:56.860 close together, but they're all isolated from each other. I don't know what the solution is to that,

00:43:01.100 but that would be, that would be a really good, if somebody has a good solution for creating strong

00:43:06.300 communities, uh, within large cities. Uh, that, that would be a really good thing.

00:43:13.020 There is even, uh, a push or is homeschooling or functional school units of like 15 kids.

00:43:20.380 And that could be a vessel of community or partially on the, like ensuring that like,

00:43:26.380 well, these kids are learning something. That's, it's not just

00:43:30.940 neo-Marxist depression history. Like they're, they're learning actual practical things.

00:43:36.780 Um, and, or like, what's the cost of including how to read and write.

00:43:41.500 Yeah. Maybe a little bit of that, maybe a little bit of arithmetic.

00:43:46.140 Uh, but so that could be that, that could be one vessel of, uh, of community as well. Sorry to

00:43:52.300 interrupt you, Mike. So no, that's okay there. I was just going to say there's a, um, you know,

00:43:58.700 one thing that certainly won't do it is by, uh, uh, disseminating through the, you know, from the,

00:44:05.180 from the prime minister, no, no less that Canada, the idea that Canada is a post national state,

00:44:10.540 that we don't have any national identity. That's no way to build communities. In fact,

00:44:14.300 that's a way to specifically break up communities. And actually, I don't know if you're familiar with

00:44:18.700 this, there is a, um, I don't know if it was necessarily a study or if it was just an observation

00:44:23.180 that was done at, um, uh, uh, Amazon warehouses. And they found that the Amazon warehouses that had

00:44:30.060 the highest, uh, that had the, the greatest mix of different cultures, races, male, female split,

00:44:38.060 like the most mixed up ones. Yeah. The most diverse ones. Yeah. We're the least likely to attempt to 1.00

00:44:44.620 unionize versus ones that were Amazon warehouses that were based in more, uh, homogenous communities.

00:44:51.820 And so I think that that idea is not lost on, uh, those who would seek to control us, that the more

00:44:58.540 you can diversify a community, the more you can keep people occupied with, uh, thinking about the

00:45:06.460 differences between their cultures. And maybe even if you're lucky fighting about it and complaining

00:45:11.820 about shit that doesn't matter instead of actually focusing their efforts on, uh, combating the 0.83

00:45:16.940 people who are actually attempting to oppress you with bills like C2 and C8 and C9. 0.98

00:45:21.580 And I, I do have a question for you on that. And that brings up a good point. You mentioned unions

00:45:28.780 and a union being an organization to help protect people from corruption, more, more so at a

00:45:36.940 government level or that kind of organization exploitation. Yep. I'm wondering, and we're

00:45:43.660 seeing this in Alberta right now, what is protecting union members from the corruption of a union? Do

00:45:49.580 you need another union? Like, do you just keep on going down and you keep it's unions all the way down,

00:45:57.020 it's, uh, cause it, the case like right in Alberta right now, it feels like

00:46:02.060 it's kind of a messy situation. It feels like the union's more of a political arm and this ties in

00:46:11.500 directly with these bills that are coming out feel like very political in nature, but it also seems

00:46:17.820 like what's happening in Alberta with the teacher strike is also just an extension mostly of the NDP

00:46:23.420 party. Um, it feels like it's driven by a little bit of hatred towards the UCP. Um,

00:46:30.060 do you feel like the union, the teachers association, do you feel like they are acting,

00:46:37.660 uh, in good faith as union or is there any evidence to show otherwise?

00:46:44.460 Well, you know, specifically on the, on the current teacher strike, I, I heard a interesting and sad

00:46:53.980 story from a teacher a few months ago in the summer, Calgary school teacher, I think she's in a Catholic

00:46:59.260 school. She says one fifth of her class is, is one or more of the following. They can't speak English.

00:47:07.020 They are mentally challenged. They have a severe learning disability. They're a severe behavior 0.99

00:47:11.980 problem, uh, possibly have a very toxic home environment, which obviously contributes to

00:47:18.220 kids misbehaving at school. And so a fifth of the class has got one or more of those can't learn,

00:47:24.700 can't speak English behavior problem, acting up, acting out. And she said, there's no learning,

00:47:30.780 very little learning going on in the class. And it's already hard to teach a class when you have,

00:47:35.660 uh, uh, if you have 30 students, uh, and they can all speak English and none of them have significant

00:47:41.660 learning disabilities, it's already difficult to try to teach math or English, uh, in a one size fits all 0.98

00:47:48.220 kind of a way. That's already challenging. Add to that a fifth of the class that is not even able to

00:47:56.300 grasp what most or all of the other 80% is capable of learning at various speeds at various levels.

00:48:03.980 So I'm saddened by the teacher strike because it's so superficial. It seems like they're just arguing

00:48:10.220 about money when you've got, uh, we could do so much with the same amount of money. Uh, if you gave

00:48:17.580 every parent a grant, like let's say currently, and I, I once heard, and this might be out of date,

00:48:22.060 it's probably higher now, but the, the Alberta government was spending $10,000 per child per

00:48:28.700 year in the publicly funded public schools and Catholic schools, $10,000 per child per year.

00:48:34.940 If you gave a certificate, uh, for $10,000 or a voucher or a credit or an account, I mean,

00:48:41.660 there's, there's ways of doing it. If you gave every parent the 10,000 to spend on their own child's

00:48:46.860 education, you're going to see a flourishing of all kinds of different schools. Uh, there might

00:48:52.620 be one or two schools that, you know, they're going to promote transgender ideology. They're going to tell

00:48:57.340 little five-year-old Johnny in kindergarten that he might be a girl. You might see a little bit of

00:49:01.740 that. Maybe there's some parents that want that. Okay. Well, you can use your 10,000 for that kind

00:49:05.820 of a school. Um, but you know, you're going to get some schools will emphasize sports. Others will

00:49:11.980 emphasize music. Others will emphasize a religion. Otherwise others will emphasize a language. Others

00:49:17.740 will emphasize a more classical curriculum. And you're just going to get, uh, and you know,

00:49:24.300 who needs the ATA in that context, uh, that the whole union thing just, just disappears. But

00:49:30.860 unfortunately, even though, um, I think the government in some ways tries to innovate,

00:49:37.820 wants to be innovative, they're really stuck in their thinking. They're, they're, they're boxed in.

00:49:44.140 They're not thinking outside the box there. Daniel Smith announced two or three years ago,

00:49:48.380 there was going to be X number of billions to build a whole bunch of more brick and mortar schools.

00:49:52.140 Uh, but these schools are, are not, they're doing a poor job. Right. And I think, uh, yeah,

00:49:58.220 we do need some spaces, but if you give, if you gave $10,000 to every parent and, and let the parents

00:50:04.540 spend that money, uh, most parents, they're, they're not going to homeschool. They want to be

00:50:09.180 working doing this or that. Most parents are going to send their kids to school, but you're going to get

00:50:12.940 all kinds of schools and there'll be direct accountability. And if a school is performing poorly,

00:50:18.540 uh, parents are not going to send their kids there. They're going to be upset. They're going to look for

00:50:21.420 another kind of school. So you get a real accountability there that currently does not exist.

00:50:27.980 Yeah. My wife was a teacher for some years. Um, and, uh, she, she knew quite a few people who had

00:50:35.580 gone, uh, quite a few teachers actually, who had gotten disillusioned with, uh, the, uh, the Alberta,

00:50:41.100 uh, the, the Edmonton public school board anyway, and, uh, and kind of gone off on their own and done.

00:50:46.540 They'd work at charter schools or they did tutoring and things like this. And when you talk to those

00:50:50.780 people, you realize very quickly that actually, um, at least for, uh, um, primary grade, uh, you know,

00:50:58.300 one through five or six education, uh, really at the end of the day, there's only about an hour and a

00:51:03.820 half or two hours of actual, uh, instructional material time to, to have a successful, like you

00:51:09.500 can complete like a grade one or a two or three student can complete their education in a couple

00:51:13.980 of months really of like dedicated daily, you know, one or two hours a day. Uh, and the rest

00:51:18.700 of the time is filler. And the rest of the time is, you know, sit down, you can't go to the bathroom,

00:51:23.500 you know, stop yelling, don't move over there, stop throwing your stuff. Like this, it's not a,

00:51:28.780 it's a, it's a glorified daycare essentially now with how many behaviors that are out there, because,

00:51:33.340 you know, you can any number of factors, but really there is a, um, the more that people

00:51:39.900 start to catch on to that and the more they realize how poorly optimized the public school

00:51:44.540 system is to what their kids could be achieving. You hear the argument about, well, you know,

00:51:49.500 they get invaluable socializing time and stuff. Well, well actually not really, because that,

00:51:53.660 that socializing is actually fairly, fairly toxic and can actually kind of be dangerous depending

00:51:58.620 on the situation. Nothing of which wouldn't be very easily, uh, uh, substituted with, uh,

00:52:04.860 you know, a couple extracurriculars, a sport and a martial art or a music class, something like this,

00:52:09.500 you know? So yeah, it's a, it's a very, um, it's a very inefficient system. And, um, I think you're

00:52:15.180 sort of seeing, well, I think what we're seeing now, at least from the union is sort of the,

00:52:18.700 the dying gasps of a, of an institution that sort of sees its future, uh, in the AI revolution as

00:52:26.780 sort of, uh, they're in the dusk of their, of their, uh, relevancy. I don't know, that may be just me,

00:52:31.900 but. Well, and this is also existing at the same time as, uh, the book ban that the UCP put in place.

00:52:42.940 Mm-hmm. And, um, is that a, or is that the UCP trampling on the rights of,

00:52:51.420 of kids, of teachers, of, because people will frame that as a,

00:52:56.780 they wrongly say that the UCP created a list of banned books and it included Atlas Shrugged and

00:53:03.740 some others. Where the reality is that they put in, they got complaints from teachers that, uh,

00:53:10.140 blankets and genderqueer and some books with some graphic novels were accessible and found in the

00:53:15.500 backpacks of some very young kids. And these teachers had no clue that these materials were

00:53:20.340 available. So the teachers asked the government to step in because the public schools were not self,

00:53:26.540 policing and creating age appropriate curriculums. So I guess in this case, what is the government's

00:53:34.300 role in setting out like guidelines for explicit material in that sense? Is this an overreach or is

00:53:41.180 this, is this within the acceptable bounds? Well, children don't have charter rights. Uh, so when

00:53:49.020 a related topic, and I will talk about the books and the kids libraries, but when the, uh,

00:53:53.580 when Danielle Smith, I think it was getting on close to two years ago, I know it was in January,

00:53:58.460 I know if it's January, 2025 or earlier in any event, she announced that the Alberta government would

00:54:05.660 insist that on, on parents being informed about their child's, uh, transgender journey, which typically

00:54:15.740 starts with the boy starting to wear girls clothes and use a girl's name, use a girl's bathroom.

00:54:22.780 Uh, that's kind of the starting point. And then it moves into, uh, puberty blockers and opposite sex 0.63

00:54:29.020 hormones. And then it moves into castrations and mastectomies eventually, et cetera, et cetera.

00:54:35.500 And so the government quite wisely, quite appropriately said that parents have a right to be informed.

00:54:42.300 And, uh, the government also recognized that you're too young to make these irreversible

00:54:47.260 life altering decisions. You should not be allowed at the age of 12 or 14 or 16, uh, to make for, for a

00:54:54.220 girl to make decisions, to take testosterone and grow facial hair and acquire a deep voice and render 0.99

00:55:03.500 herself permanently unable to bear children or for a boy to take the estrogen and, and, uh, never become

00:55:11.580 a father of his own children. Uh, you're way too young. You know, we require the consent of parents

00:55:17.820 for a tattoo for crying out loud. We require signed consent for a teacher to give an aspirin to a kid

00:55:24.620 with a headache. We require signed consent for a school field trip. And yet somehow the whole

00:55:30.540 transgender journey, parents should be kept in the dark. So it was, it was a wise policy and it was in 1.00

00:55:36.220 line with what's, uh, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, countries all over the world are backing

00:55:42.940 away except Canada, not yet from this whole, uh, transgender ideology. So there's a gay rights 0.95

00:55:51.260 group, a gal took this to court and got a court injunction against it. And their argument is that

00:55:58.780 somehow, and they don't word it this way. So I'm, I'm paraphrasing it, but, uh, children have a

00:56:04.860 charter right to keep their own parents in the dark about their journey towards, uh, becoming the

00:56:11.180 opposite sex. And it's ridiculous. Children don't have charter rights. They can't vote. They can't 1.00

00:56:16.940 drive before the age of 16, et cetera, et cetera. We've got these rules in place. Why? Because

00:56:21.260 children are not adults. They need to be, uh, loved and nurtured and guided and cared for and protected by

00:56:28.860 their parents or, you know, if the parents are not there by, by legal guardians. So now back to the

00:56:36.780 schools thing, uh, you know, children don't have some sort of a charter right to read whatever they

00:56:42.860 want. Um, if you don't have, uh, a, a voucher system or a grant system where every parent gets

00:56:49.980 10,000 and they can spend it, uh, you know, in, in the way that they deem best. If we don't have that

00:56:56.380 kind of a sensible system, if it is going to be brick and mortar, and if it is going to be

00:57:01.580 ultimately run by the government, then in that context, yeah, the government has legitimate

00:57:07.900 authority to decide what children will or will not read. And it's entirely appropriate and not

00:57:13.740 censorship in the same way that it would be if the federal parliament passes bills C2, C8, C9, and

00:57:19.900 starts to censor what we can see and hear on the internet. It's not censorship to, uh, prohibit

00:57:26.060 children from getting exposed to certain books. Yeah. Yeah. That's a, maybe just, I'll, I'll make

00:57:32.060 one final comment on that and then I'll, I'll, uh, I'll ask you, uh, uh, just to kind of, we'll circle

00:57:37.340 back. Uh, that censorship argument is so I, it boils my blood when I see it, because I see, I see people

00:57:43.420 who should know better adults, you know, online talking about this and it's like no one, there is

00:57:48.140 no one in the government who is, who is going to chapters or indigo and saying, you can't carry these

00:57:53.900 books in your store there. No, one's preventing you from buying these books, these filth for your

00:57:57.980 children at, at, uh, in a private context. It's, it's a completely different context when you're

00:58:02.620 talking about a publicly funded school. So, um, thank you for saying that. Um, maybe just to kind

00:58:08.380 of circle back again to bill C2, uh, eight and nine, uh, in your opinion, maybe, I don't know,

00:58:15.180 this has been a depressing one, a good one, but a depressing one, John. So can you, do you have any sort of,

00:58:20.140 um, uh, what can, what can an average citizen do to kind of combat these, you know, to sort of have

00:58:27.180 their voice heard or to have, like, what, what tools would you equip the average citizen, the,

00:58:32.620 maybe the view of a viewer of our show to have, uh, to start the kind of conversations necessary

00:58:38.700 to prevent these bills from, uh, going unopposed in our government?

00:58:44.300 The long-term solution is to change our culture so that Canadians, uh, understand with their minds

00:58:51.500 and appreciate their hearts, what our rights and freedoms are and appreciate the government

00:58:56.940 should be our servant to carry out certain tasks, but government should not be our master

00:59:01.900 who tells us what to think and what to believe and how to live. So the cultural change is the long-term

00:59:08.060 solution because to the extent that that's achieved, it will trickle up into the police forces,

00:59:13.900 the crown prosecutors, the lawyers, the judges, the law societies, the medical establishment,

00:59:19.100 the legal establishment, uh, the universities, et cetera. So that's long-term. Short-term,

00:59:26.060 the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.

00:59:30.220 And there's an awful lot of Canadians who love truth, love justice, love freedom, been completely

00:59:35.820 disengaged from, uh, being involved in the democratic process. They don't pay attention to school board

00:59:42.780 elections. Uh, they don't run as a candidate. Uh, they're not involved in provincial federal municipal

00:59:49.340 politics. And the way democracy works is that the squeaky wheel gets the oil. And if you are very

00:59:56.540 active, you tend to get your way, not a hundred percent of the time. And the more active you are,

01:00:02.460 the more that you tend to get your way. And there's a lot of good people who love truth. They love freedom.

01:00:07.020 They love justice. And they're just not engaged. And they, there's a lie out there that it makes

01:00:15.500 no difference. And that's false. I mean, we see here in Alberta, we used to have a premier named

01:00:19.260 Jason Kenney, who was removed by Albertans who got engaged in the democratic process. They took

01:00:27.900 they voted, uh, against him in a leadership review and he was forced to resign. Why? Because there were

01:00:33.580 thousands, I think it was thousands, not just hundreds or thousands of Albertans who joined a

01:00:38.540 political party to get busy. And, uh, and it was a beautiful thing to see. It was wonderful, uh, to,

01:00:44.940 to, to see this tyrant and human rights violator removed from office. Um, and yet people will whine

01:00:51.660 about, you know, oh, my, my school board's dominated by a bunch of blue haired, woke transgender activists. 0.99

01:00:58.380 And they want to, you know, force everybody to, to, to, to, to wave the rainbow flag and we're just

01:01:04.300 victims here. And the truth is, no, you're not a victim, roll up your sleeves, get to work

01:01:09.100 and replace those people with, uh, with parents who are going to make sure that, that their,

01:01:15.340 their kids are not exposed to garbage in the schools. Now that takes a lot of thankless, hard work,

01:01:23.100 uh, for which in most cases you're not going to get any recognition or applause. And that's just the

01:01:30.620 nature we, we, of democracy. We've got to roll up our sleeves and be far more involved than what we

01:01:35.580 have been. So that's a short-term solution. Long-term solution is cultural change.

01:01:40.060 And regardless of what direction things go in, if people are more engaged, that's just going to bring

01:01:47.180 more accountability because then more things bubble up to the surface. You're aware of it,

01:01:52.540 it's being talked about. Um, I think we're seeing this a little bit in the Alberta independence

01:01:58.460 movement is partially what's fueling that is people stepping up and they're making a stand,

01:02:04.620 they're speaking their minds, they're pushing this forward. I do hear from some people, they,

01:02:11.580 they're like, oh yeah, I want Alberta to be independent. And they're like, yeah,

01:02:14.460 I don't really feel like driving out to this thing. And we're like, well, to build,

01:02:18.860 if you're going to build a country, it's going to take some work. Uh, there are going to be some

01:02:23.500 uncertainties, let it be like fixing Canada or Alberta going its own way. It's not going to be easy.

01:02:31.180 It's going to take time. It's going to take a lot of hard work. Um, there might be some difficult

01:02:37.340 moments. Um, but if it's truly worth it, then like, I see no other choice for people if,

01:02:48.540 if they truly believe that I did have one last question though, about, um, just on the topic of,

01:02:56.300 independence and the pathway, the legal pathway there we mentioned last time, uh, the 1998, uh,

01:03:04.700 reference the Supreme court decision, which the clarity act is the federal interpretation of

01:03:10.380 that decision. Um, we hear often from people saying that Alberta cannot separate, um, because

01:03:18.860 they will not get enough votes to change the constitution. They say that while the clarity

01:03:23.580 act opens, well, the, both the Supreme court decision, it mandates good faith negotiations,

01:03:29.740 but they're saying, well, what if all the, what if seven provinces don't agree to, um,

01:03:37.580 to change the constitution, you would need to change the constitution if Alberta was leaving.

01:03:42.860 So it does, is this, does this apply differently? Does the principle of the democratic will,

01:03:49.580 is that more important? Like that expression is more important than,

01:03:53.580 than, than that process that is normally kind of, uh, reserved for amendments to the existing framework.

01:04:01.740 Like how does, how does that work? Well, the, the Supreme court of Canada released its, uh,

01:04:08.220 reference re Quebec secession in 1998, as you mentioned at that time, the Supreme court justices

01:04:14.300 were fully aware of the fact that generally changing Canada's constitution requires the consent of the

01:04:22.300 federal parliament and seven provincial legislatures of seven provinces, which together represent more

01:04:29.100 than 50% of Canada. So that's our amending formula, uh, seven provinces plus the federal government.

01:04:36.060 And I believe it has to be done within a time period of five years.

01:04:40.460 And so if you wanted to remove, uh, section 33, the notwithstanding clause from the charter,

01:04:46.140 for example, that could be done a majority vote of federal parliament and, uh, majority votes in,

01:04:53.820 uh, seven provincial legislatures. And you could say, okay, we're going to get rid of the notwithstanding 1.00

01:04:58.780 clause. That's the general approach. The Supreme court of Canada was fully aware of that when they

01:05:03.980 issued their ruling in which they said a province, if the majority of the people that vote in a referendum,

01:05:11.900 in a province, vote to leave Canada, uh, neither the federal government nor the other nine provinces can

01:05:18.540 force that province to stay. Now they did say that about Quebec, but there's nothing, there's nothing in that

01:05:26.620 ruling that does not apply to Alberta. So if there's a referendum, it has to be a clear question.

01:05:33.260 Like, do you want to leave Canada? Do you want Alberta to cease to be a province of Canada and become an

01:05:38.860 independent country? I mean, there's, there's, there's probably a half dozen ways that are clear.

01:05:42.940 Okay. If it's a clear question and the majority of voters in a referendum vote, yes, to leave,

01:05:49.660 then, uh, the rest of Canada, primarily the federal government, but I'm sure they would consult with

01:05:55.020 the other nine premiers. The rest of Canada has to negotiate and yeah, the negotiations would be a

01:06:02.220 lot of hard work, but you know, Slovakia separated from Czechoslovakia and I'm sure there's

01:06:08.860 lots of hard work involved to negotiate all these various details. Uh, you know, the Czechs probably 1.00

01:06:15.260 had military bases in Slovakia, this and that they had to negotiate that, you know, when Norway

01:06:20.140 separated from Sweden, uh, they used to be one country together. Uh, there's just so many examples.

01:06:27.180 So it is definitely a lot of hard work, but, uh, where there's a will, there's a way. And the moment

01:06:33.740 that more than half of Alberta voters, uh, vote to leave, then those negotiations are going to get

01:06:40.780 started and, uh, Alberta can become an independent country.

01:06:47.740 Fantastic. Um, John, is there, or just want to be respectful of your time. Is there anything

01:06:53.420 that we didn't ask you or didn't talk about today that you wish that we would have?

01:06:57.020 Just briefly, um, the world health organization, international health regulations,

01:07:04.940 uh, the world health organization deems them to have come into force, uh, as of September,

01:07:10.060 two months ago. And these are regulations that Canada is very enthusiastic about, and it would

01:07:16.140 empower the director general of the world health organization to declare a pandemic emergency and to

01:07:22.300 order every country in the world to, uh, lock down their citizens, impose travel restrictions,

01:07:28.620 uh, pressure people into getting injected with whatever, uh, you know, uh, safe and effective

01:07:36.540 substance is being peddled at that time, et cetera, et cetera. The only holdouts as of right now are the

01:07:43.260 United States, Italy, Israel, and Argentina. Those four, uh, for various reasons are not going along with it,

01:07:50.700 but I find it amusing that the same people who, if they hear us president, Donald Trump talk about

01:07:57.660 Canada being a 51st state, which would obviously violate Canadian sovereignty. Right. Uh, and they

01:08:04.060 get very upset about that. And these same people are saying we should give up our sovereignty to

01:08:08.620 unelected bureaucrats in Geneva, Switzerland. So one more thing you can contact your member

01:08:15.020 parliament about and say, uh, protect Canadian sovereignty. We don't want to be governed by

01:08:21.740 unelected, unaccountable world health organization bureaucrats, uh, in, in Geneva.

01:08:28.220 And, uh, now the silver lining on that cloud is that the world health organization has no police force,

01:08:33.820 no army, no courts to issue rulings. And so if three months from now, three years from now,

01:08:41.420 13 years from now, if the director general declares a pandemic emergency and orders the whole world to

01:08:48.940 violate human rights through lockdowns, it'll be up to the government of the day, whichever people are in

01:08:57.340 power in the 200 countries of the world, it'll be up to them whether to comply or not comply with those

01:09:04.220 regulations because the who has no army to enforce it. Nevertheless, people should contact their MP about

01:09:10.540 that. And, and one note, uh, one last note on the contacting your MP, um, depending on what matter

01:09:17.500 this is about, sometimes it's good to, um, also contact the minister, which falls under that domain

01:09:24.220 and or the shadow minister as well, because sometimes the minister is not really on board

01:09:29.100 with what you're saying. You're technically giving a voice or giving ammo to the shadow minister to

01:09:35.500 paint a case and, uh, provide some opposition. So those are just some tips. Absolutely. Yeah.

01:09:42.460 Yeah, absolutely. And we just, one more thing, some good news. There, there was so much outcry

01:09:48.140 against bill C2 and it came from across the political spectrum. You had, uh, you know,

01:09:53.180 Canadian civil liberties association, not what you would call a right wing group. Um, you had this,

01:09:58.860 uh, uh, uh, Michael Geist, a very respected law professor at the university of Ottawa,

01:10:04.060 who also, he would be offended if you called him a conservative or a right winger, but there's

01:10:09.180 people across the spectrum in the justice center and all of our supporters. We, uh, there's so much

01:10:15.260 outcry against bill C2 that the federal government still wants to push it through, but they've actually

01:10:21.020 taken out the immigration and refugee and border parts of bill C2, put it into a separate bill C12

01:10:29.580 for fast tracking. And I think they're hoping to get the support of the conservatives and, and

01:10:34.700 they probably will. So they're, they're fast tracking C12. And then that still leaves C2 as a

01:10:40.860 bad piece of legislation, but they've put it on the back burner, uh, because there's been so much

01:10:45.180 opposition and, and MPs of all parties have heard that and liberal MPs have heard from their own

01:10:50.140 constituents that, uh, C2 is bad news for freedom and for privacy. And so yeah, contact your MP and,

01:10:59.980 uh, that's, what's going to make a difference.

01:11:02.780 Mr. John Carpe, um, where can people find you online and, uh, do you have any events or speaking

01:11:08.860 engagements coming up?

01:11:09.740 Mr. John Carpe, we've got for your Ottawa listeners on, uh, Thursday, the 30th,

01:11:14.860 we have our celebrating victories for freedom event in Ottawa. You can buy tickets at www.jccf,

01:11:22.060 justice center, constitutional freedoms, jccf.ca. Uh, and if you're not in Ottawa, still go to the

01:11:28.220 same website. You can sign up for an email newsletter and we, if you want to donate, uh,

01:11:33.660 we get a hundred percent of our funding comes from voluntary donations. We're a registered charity.

01:11:38.860 We issue official tax receipts in February. So if you'd like to make a donation online, uh,

01:11:44.140 www.jccf.ca, or if you want to mail in a check, we've got our snail mail address on, on the website

01:11:50.700 as well. And, uh, and if you don't want to donate to be, you just want more information,

01:11:55.260 uh, go to our website and sign up for our email newsletter.

01:11:59.580 Fantastic. Thank you so much, sir. We'll, uh, we'll link to all those below. Uh,

01:12:04.460 always appreciate your time. Uh, you're, uh, you're a absolute font of knowledge. So thank

01:12:09.660 you for sharing with us and our listeners and, uh, and we're looking forward to the next one.

01:12:13.580 It's great to have you on. Thank you for having me on your show.

01:12:16.620 Thank you, sir. Okay. We'll chat soon. Cheers.

01:12:29.580 Cheers.

01:12:31.580 Cheers.

01:12:33.580 Cheers.

The Critical Compass Podcast - November 21, 2025

＂Freedom is Always One Generation Away From Dying Out＂ - John Carpay on Canada's Free Speech Crisis

Episode Stats

People

Summary

Transcript