Archive for the ‘ Pictures ’ Category
The Toronto Star wants totalitarian government
Posted on May 19th, 2017 – Be the first to commentThe Toronto Star’s editorial board has broached a horrific new viewpoint: that entrenched, tyrannical, absolute, unaccountable state power is the answer to Donald Trump’s “runaway train” presidency. It’s a great solution, they say, and it’ll do wonders for Canada!
Being the norm for modern mass media, this is not called totalitarianism, state tyranny, fascism, communism, etc. but instead euphemistically named the “deep state”. This is merely a renaming of a frightening and ghoulish ideology in order to make it more palatable.
Consider what something like fascism actually entails:
- … dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce
There are variations surrounding this definition but this is a good midpoint for comparison.
Of course, this could easily describe communism and socialism too and that is perhaps one of the fundamental reasons why Germany’s flavour of “right-wing” ideology was called National Socialism.
All of these collectivist ideals, from communism/socialism to fascism to monarchism to so-called “moderate” examples like democracies, are all fundamentally the same: absolute, total, unquestionable government control of everything.
Some forms of government are more overt about these aspirations than others but they are, and must necessarily be, all undeniably alike.
After all, if a government doesn’t wield coercive (i.e. violent/threatening) control over it’s citizens, how can it rule … by leading through example? Through the presentation of popular voluntary ideas? Don’t be silly! people must be forced into abiding by the will of the omniscient bureaucrats and demiurgic politicians. That’s why the world’s problems are almost all solved!
Of course, the past is littered with examples of how wonderful this type of thinking is.
The Star is essentially trying to warm people to the institution of yet another round of mass horror, destruction, and suffering and they believe that you’re daft enough not to notice any parallels between what they’re pushing and what history has demonstrated time and again.
Since they won’t do so, let us compare.
Fascism’s “dictatorial power”, or rule by one entrenched person or entity (especially un-elected), is described lovingly by The Star as:
…elements of Washington’s established power class…Career officials…the bureaucracies that carry on the day-to-day business of governing, operating with long-established norms of behaviour…
These groups are described in heroic terms as the “non-partisan civil service, whose mission is to serve whichever government is in office”, but are then praised for not supporting whoever’s in power in order to maintain “well-established ways of doing things.”
In other words, the virtue of un-elected and entrenched interests is that they serve whoever’s in power while refusing to serve whoever’s in power when “well-established ways of doing things” are threatened.
To put it more briefly, they serve whoever’s in power unless it goes against what they do.
Makes perfect sense! Much logic! Wow!
The “forcible suppression of opposition” part of a fascist/communist/socialist/democratic system is touched on peripherally in the above paragraph, though The Star never explicitly states this. They do repeatedly mention the FBI though which, as everyone knows, does their job through gentle persuasion and kind words in order to protect the establishment.
No…wait…they use guns, violence and threats.
My mistake!
So, yeah, “forcible suppression of opposition” to the established order that The Star droolingly idolizes.
Regarding “control of industry and commerce”, that pretty much describes government to a “T”. Between the Federal Reserve’s fiddling with interest rates, to the numerous licensing and legislative hoops that any business owner must jump through, to taxation and government fees, to the numerous ways that governments grant monopolies — it’s actually much easier and shorter to ask how government doesn’t control industry and commerce.
The topic of overt government control of the economy is quite extensive. Here in Canada it’s estimated that the government has direct control over roughly 60% of the economy and there are many indirect ways that are not immediately obvious. This isn’t a major departure from classical fascist economic models or those of communists/socialists, as I’ve maintained since the beginning.
The Star paints the opposition to Trump as a dichotomy between “left” and “right” political viewpoints but these are ultimately nothing more than minuscule iterations within a myopic, totalitarian, government-above-all mindset. The opposite of absolute state authority isn’t more absolute state authority, and giving it a different name doesn’t make it so. The solution to the problems of government isn’t more government.
Only the dangerously blind, naive, or stupid would propose that the powers of un-elected officials (not that elected ones are necessarily better), or unchecked authority of Übermensch bureaucrats are the way to establish freedom, justice, and a modicum of equality. It requires an abject refusal to examine the reality of history to make the claim that this time, totalitarian government will definitely work!
This is the ominous age that humanity has once again entered, one in which national publications like the Toronto Star openly espouse the wisdom and benevolence of the state, a violent, bureaucratic, coercive, unaccountable entity which has almost without exception always lead to some of the most horrific chapters in human history.
If it all amounts to a “deep state,” then we won’t apologize for that.
P.S. There are some points in this post that may seem contentious, such as the lumping together of fascism, communism/socialism, and democratic government. To the casual observer who has spent up to 12 of their most formative years in government indoctrination (public schools), this may seem like nonsense, but upon closer examination it becomes exceedingly clear that various forms of governments are, by far and large, mostly the same thing. That some happen to result in more mass abuses of human rights than others is partially luck and partially illusion, an inability to see what is clearly and starkly in front of one’s face every day. These are, however, topics for another day.
P.P.S. The Star Editorial Board must not even read their own editorials!
Sigil: Invaders
Posted on April 13th, 2017 – Be the first to comment Filed under: Dispatches, Patrick Bay, PicturesAscent
Posted on March 15th, 2017 – Be the first to comment Filed under: Dispatches, Patrick Bay, PicturesSmall mercies
Posted on February 13th, 2017 – Be the first to comment Filed under: Dispatches, Patrick Bay, PicturesThe colour of street slush
Posted on November 19th, 2016 – 3 CommentsI suppose it the headlines wouldn’t have had quite the same ring to them if they’d read:
“American nature magazine’s drab choice for Canada’s national bird”
Yet, in some ways the bureaucratically-coloured “Gray Jay” seems like the perfect choice to represent Canada and its government: few people will ever get the chance to interact directly with the elusive bird, known to the Cree and Algonquin tribes as a trickster that destroyed the world, and despite the fact that it was (by a long shot) neither the first or even second popular choice of birds to represent Canada it has nevertheless been chosen by a select committee as the top finalist, being a “poster child … for climate change“.
Don’t get me wrong, it seems like a nice bird but it’s about as inspiring as the slush on the streets of Toronto come February. Couldn’t have a kick-ass bird like the snowy owl; no sir, that might send the wrong message.
What’s good for the goose
Posted on November 9th, 2016 – 1 CommentThe chickens are back and they’re ready to roost.
With the US election having run its course and everyone losing their shit about Trump’s victory I thought it might be good to remind anyone thinking of disparaging our “democratic” system that this is what it’s all about!
You really shouldn’t be complaining since you went out of your way to agree to be ruled for another four years. While I stubbornly reject the vote you chose to acquiesce because it’s “the best system we have”, so why all the fussin’? Do as you tell others to do: just accept it and get over it.
Not to mention that with November 11th just around the corner, wouldn’t it be incredibly disrespectful of you to disparage the freedoms that all those soldiers ostensibly gave their lives for? That goes doubly for any shameful attempts at shutting down anti-military protests and other displays of freedom that you are solemnly thanking the dead for — you wouldn’t dare dishonour their memory like that, would you?
While we’re on the topic of recollection, don’t you remember demanding that “our” government is the best solution to pretty much every problem, despite the “wrinkles” and “hiccups”? Feel free to sing hosanna at being given the privilege to choose from the lesser of two evils every four years. After all, isn’t it idiotic to suggest that maybe you shouldn’t be choosing evil in the first place? I mean, what’s the alternative to centralized control — warlords? Obviously death by the millions and untold suffering brought on by the state and its endless lust for violence is far better.
Besides, who would build the roads?
Anyway, let me remind you of the phrase that you so gleefully deliver when you tire of explaining why the state is God and why we should all blindly obey, a piece of advice that you so handily dole out to dismiss the stupidity and pointlessness of critical thought, your superior response to the suggestion that maybe government & friends isn’t the best way forward:
You did your duty, now go out there and proudly wave your flag!
And don’t forget to pay your taxes.
Serve & protect
Posted on October 31st, 2016 – Be the first to commentI ran across a thinly veiled op-ed in this Sunday’s Star about the changes to Toronto police vehicles, specifically that they’re being rebranded to an indistinct grey and black, ostensibly in the name of efficacy and safety.
There were a couple of things in the article that stood out like dark grey vehicles against a grey cityscape on a rainy day.
First there was a comment about police uniform changes by former Toronto police chief, OPP commissioner, and aspiring poli-tyrant Julian Fantino:
“We got that with the black shirts, this flurry of rhetoric about stormtroopers and back to the Nazi era, and on and on. In a way it was comical if not ridiculous”
It’s a far stretch to say that nazi uniforms and those of Toronto/Canadian cops are the same but drawing comparisons between their obvious similarities is neither comical, ridiculous, or unwarranted.
Perhaps these similarities are simply the result of any sufficiently demagogic and militaristic mindset. Still, if projecting a certain outward appearance isn’t so important, as Fantino insists, why not allow cops to run around in t-shirts and sweat pants?
There was another comment that Fantino made that really put the whole thing into perspective. When asked about switching OPP cruisers to their current black and white colour scheme Fantino replied:
… what inspired me was the good men and women of the OPP who wanted them back.”
The article clarifies that “He listened to what they — not the experts — said on what made them more visible and safer.”
Because that’s policing is all about: appeasing cops and keeping them safe.
This around the same time that it was revealed that the Montreal police conspired with a judge to secretly spy on a journalist to discover who his sources were. It wasn’t that the writer was suspected of breaking any laws, as if that’d be a tough thing to do, it was that he’d revealed information about two cops who were accused of fabricating evidence, lying, obstructing justice, and soliciting sexual services.
There were no charges laid. No trial was compromised. Turns out that the public just needed to be protected from discovering such damning news about their beloved police.
The Encounter
Posted on October 29th, 2016 – 2 CommentsKnocking, I stared intently at the porcine face behind the glass at it stuffed a sandwich into its slobbering maw. The dull eyes evoked the imagery of a certain humanoid Jim Woodring character, telling me immediately that I would not be dealing with a great deal of intelligence or subtlety. Indeed, the bright safety jacket enveloping the rotund body suggested that this creature was suitable only for uncomplicated manual labour. I’d had close encounters with his kind before during an uncomfortable cohabitation with my ex and her brother, someone who lent clarity to the term meathead.
With casual indifference the driver of the minivan shooed me away with a sweeping motion reserved for pestering undesirables beneath one’s station.
“You’re blocking the sidewalk! Move your van!”, I shouted. “There are people trying to get by!”
I pointed to the frail old woman clutching precariously to her walker as she tried to navigate her way around the vehicle. I heard her mumble something about not being able to handle the curb as she stepped gingerly into the path of oncoming traffic. Compounding the problem, the dolt had managed to park his van directly in the middle of a laneway so that the old woman was facing jeopardy from multiple directions as others veered around him.
He rolled down his window and began to bellow.
“You fucking shout at me one more time and I’ll knock your teeth out, tough guy!”
I felt the adrenaline immediately.
Getting into verbal exchanges under such conditions usually worries me; my heart pounds and my throat constricts to the point where I’m incoherently sputtering words. I worry that my rage will be misconstrued as fear, an emotion that savages like him pounce on to assert their perceived superiority. Might makes right. Violent domination affirms his righteousness in threatening anyone who gives him an askew sideways glance, let alone the impudence of demanding that he exhibit what is otherwise common courtesy.
Plus, I’d rather not have to park the wheelchair, ask Sarah to sit tight, and call the doctor to let him know we’re going to be late for that appointment while I engage in fisticuffs.
Despite this, however, the words flowed freely.
“Fuck you, asshole! Move your fucking van! People are trying to get by!”
He responded loudly by promising to step out and punch me in the face the next time I shouted at him.
So I did, interlacing my response with a number of expletives. I’m by no means a tough guy but I do spend a good portion of most days lifting and transporting another human being which gave me confidence that I’d be able to hold my own against his pudgy countenance.
At that point, what I’m assuming was his woman came running from somewhere out of sight and, having completed whatever business they had been there to conduct, hopped into the passenger side. She somehow managed to take no notice of the situation unfolding in front of her.
Brief montages of their domestic life flashed through my mind. I imagined him wearing, and giving fuller meaning to, the sleeveless undershirt known as a wife-beater. I envisioned his voluminous body spilling over the edges of an inflatable kiddy pool, canned beer perched atop a bulbous gut, providing him with respite on hot summer days. Meat, and plenty of it, would be the only acceptable meal at the end of a long day spent leaning on a shovel at the construction site. Did he have children, I wondered. God help them.
He wasn’t getting out and we were running short on time so I swung the wheelchair around and continued down the street, middle finger extended and a “fuck you!” shouted over my shoulder.
He caught up to us at the next intersection where he rolled down the passenger window and screamed past his still-oblivious partner.
“Hey, tough guy! Why don’t you come over here and fight me?! I’ll kick your ass! I’ll beat your face in!”
For a moment I noticed the startled look on my fellow pedestrians’ faces at seeing a ruddy-faced, rotund ruffian hurling threats at a guy pushing a wheelchair.
“I’m not going over there to fight you, idiot!”, I responded. He’d already taken up enough of our time and besides, I was supposed to go over there to make good on his threats?
I loudly suggested one last time that he copulate with himself and returned back to our original route.
At this he drove in the opposite direction and we didn’t see him again, but obviously the episode stuck with me.
On the sometimes-mean streets of Toronto it’s not unheard of for me to get involved in exchanging unpleasantries but they don’t usually ramp up so quickly. It’s rare that I’m threatened with violence. Most people respond with indolence or bored indifference and they have to be engaged in excessive assholery for the exchange to begin in the first place.
Clearly, though, there are exceptions.
It would be out of place for me to draw comparisons between the driver of the van and manual labourers in general. There’s a certain nobility to breaking a sweat, working with one’s hands, and being involved in constructing something substantive. I would be committing a gross injustice by lumping everyone who operates a backhoe or mans a forklift with the man I encountered the other day but I’ve experienced enough foul-mouthed, mulletted jerks and inebriated pickup drivers with flaming decals down the sides of their trucks to know that sometimes the stereotypes are entirely accurate.
And this guy was just a dick.