On Oct. 3, The Rebel News Network featured a brief video of Andrew Lawton interviewing Pierre Poilievre, the present leader of Canada’s Conservative Party. While The Rebel is constantly demonized by the brain-dead Left as a far-right instigator of hatred, 99% of its content is rooted in simple common sense.
No doubt to dispel the ludicrous myth that most conservatives are racists, Poilievre discussed his recent interaction with Canada’s Tamil community, a significant portion of which lives in the Toronto area. Their main concerns, he said, were those of most “small c” conservatives, the preservation of law and order, the health of their businesses, the preservation of their family values, etc., etc.. They were not, it would appear, eager to embrace a government intent on submitting them to the dictates of its politically correct dementia, of, for example, submitting their children to the rantings of self-centered transgender simpletons in their grade 3 classrooms.
Poilievre’s contention that it is the Conservative Party that will defend the rights and freedoms of Canada’s approximately 250,000 Tamils, leads directly to a denunciation of the intrusive, authoritarian nature of the Trudeau government. But while I absolutely agree with his assessment, I must point out that all Leftist governments these days are equally so, less interested in defending the safety and rights of their citizens than in telling them how they ought to see the world! Whereas “conservatives” are concerned with letting people live their lives, “liberals” insist on telling them How they ought to live their lives. Theirs is a perspective that is authoritarian, elitist, arrogant and absolutely Undemocratic.
One brief example: Affirmative action programs are common these days, designed to impose the Left’s definition of social justice throughout both the private and public sectors. But these initiatives are absolutely arbitrary, based on a ludicrous refusal to acknowledge the very real diversity of the species. If Women do not share every socio-economic niche equally with men, for example, it is apparently due to male oppression rather than the very real differences in the sexes. While I would absolutely descry any company or institution guilty of a bias against Women, I must nevertheless insist that the statistical parity revered by the Left is simplistic, arbitrary and, in many cases, actually unjust.
Infected with Egalitarian dementia, many post-secondary educational institutions in N. America insist that a prescribed percentage of their admissions must be people of Color. But apparently Orientals do not qualify! Hence the articles I have read deploring the fact that they are frequently denied admission to their college of choice because they are not Black! That their marks are decidedly better than those who have been accepted, is apparently irrelevant. This is but one aspect of the contemporary Left’s disdain for merit, a disdain that is literally no more than a form of religious dementia. Yet the governments of both Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau felt entitled to impose such criteria on their citizens even if they clearly violated their democratic rights. Poilievre’s use of the word “dictatorial” in referring to the contemporary Left, is justifiable. Indeed it is today’s “conservatives” who are in fact the defenders of the liberal, democratic rights of all their citizens!