＂Freedom is Always One Generation Away From Dying Out＂ - John Carpay on Canada's Free Speech Crisis
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 12 minutes
Words per Minute
162.42613
Summary
In this episode of The Critical Compass, we are joined by John Carpe, President and Founder of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), to talk about the new anti-terror legislation that has been introduced in Canada.
Transcript
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.
00:05:46.200
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.
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
00:08:17.280
you are killing somebody, intending to kill somebody. There's nothing gray about it. But
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
00:11:33.420
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
00:12:03.700
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
00:15:16.040
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,
00:17:36.440
the right tends to view the left as maybe silly, gullible, uh, you know, maybe uninformed or ignorant
00:17:42.500
or things like this. And whereas the left tends to view the right in terms of like biblical evil,
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,
00:24:26.620
persuade him, he could become a girl and get them castrated. They call that gender affirming care.
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
00:26:08.860
very dangerous. And the government's funding that message. So, uh, I could give you more examples,
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
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
00:32:25.500
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,
00:32:46.220
social studies is about learning that white people are bad. And she said it tongue in cheek,
00:32:50.940
like she saw through it as, as being ridiculous because you know, you're, you're born with whatever
00:32:56.140
skin color you're born with, and it's not something to be proud of or ashamed of. I mean,
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
00:36:43.100
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
00:37:31.580
Maos, uh, they see the people almost like, uh, a herd of cattle to be herded about and told
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
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
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
00:45:16.940
people who are actually attempting to oppress you with bills like C2 and C8 and C9.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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,
01:11:02.780
Mr. John Carpe, um, where can people find you online and, uh, do you have any events or speaking
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.