Connect with us

Opinion

GOVERNMENT GASLIGHTING

Published

6 minute read

Government Gaslighting
Wikipedia defines gaslighting as follows:
 
“is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment.
 
It may evoke changes in them such as cognitive dissonance or low self-esteem, rendering the victim additionally dependent on the gaslighter for emotional support and validation.
 
Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim’s beliefs.”
 
Psychologist Bryant Welch (in his 2008 book State of Confusion: Political Manipulation and the Assault on the American Mind) stated the following:
 
“To say gaslighting was started by the Bushes, Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, Fox News, or any other extant group is not simply wrong, it also misses an important point. Gaslighting comes directly from blending modern communications, marketing, and advertising techniques with long-standing methods of propaganda.
 
They were simply waiting to be discovered by those with sufficient ambition and psychological makeup to use them.”
 
Climate Change
 
On Dec 9/20, the United Nations produced the Emissions Gap Report 2020.
 
 
The document outlines the need to reduce global emissions in order to ensure that earth’s temperature does not increase by 3 degrees Celsius in order to overt climate catastrophe. 2030 is the date of no return according to the UN.
 
An AP News article (dated June 29, 1989) stated the following from Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program:
 
“Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”
 
“Governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.”
 
 
The United Nations has been stating that the world is going to end for the past 30+ years if drastic action isn’t taken immediately.
 
Do you believe that Liberal Party’s plan to increase the Carbon Tax over the next 10 years will save the planet?
 
Or is this merely a wealth distribution tax that shifts income from rural residents to those living in urban centres?
 
 
Clean Drinking Water
 
The Liberal government made a promise in their 2015 election campaign to end all long-term drinking water advisories on First Nations before March 2021.
 
On December 2, 2020, Indigenous Services Minister Marc Miller advised that the government would not meet this promise.
 
A new timeline for completion has not been given.
 
 
A recent report from Cooperation Canada highlighted the need for the government to increase foreign aid spending.
 
This goes beyond the billions already given on an annual basis and additional funds earmarked for COVID-19 support.
 
 
Is the government of Canada really interested in ending the long-term drinking water advisories or are these promises merely publicity stunts?
 
War on Small Business
 
Effective December 13, 2020, thousands of Alberta small businesses were again forced to close their doors as a result of new government imposed COVID-19 health restrictions.
 
 
These closures come despite the government’s lack of detail to support such closures, most notably, the compete failure of the track and trace system in the province.
 
 
Additionally, the closures come two weeks after Premier Kenney apologized for arbitrary lockdowns in March.
 
 
Where is the evidence that points to barbershops, massage therapists, gyms and other now restricted businesses as being the main driving factor of COVID-19?
 
Are the closures truly warranted or are small business owners being gaslighted by their own government?
 
COVID-19 Vaccines
 
Canadians have, for the most part, accepted restrictions on their personal freedoms in the name of the greater good throughout 2020.
 
The underlying belief in March was that we gain an understanding of the virus, find treatments or a vaccine and go on to live our normal lives again.
 
Recent articles suggest that light at the end of the lockdown tunnel may not be as close as we thought.
 
This is highlighted in an article by CBC that suggests that vaccines alone will not be enough to end pandemic measures quickly.
 
 
Given that we are nearly a year into this pandemic now, why hasn’t the government pushed all of its resources to long-term care facilities?
 
Why after the most vulnerable are vaccinated, could the general population, who are not largely impacted by this virus, unable to return to a normal life?
 
Why do the goal posts keep moving?
 
Either the health measures (including vaccines) work or they don’t. Right?

I have recently made the decision to seek nomination as a candidate in the federal electoral district of Red Deer - Mountain View. As a Chartered Professional Accountant (CPA), I directly see the negative impacts of government policy on business owners and most notably, their families. This has never been more evident than in 2020. Through a common sense focus and a passion for bringing people together on common ground, I will work to help bring prosperity to the riding of Red Deer – Mountain View and Canada. I am hoping to be able to share my election campaign with your viewers/readers. Feel free to touch base with me at the email listed below or at jaredpilon.com. Thanks.

Follow Author

More from this author
Opinion / 2 years ago

Leave our Kids Alone

Federal Election 2021 / 3 years ago

Vote Splitting

National

Anger towards Trudeau government reaches new high among Canadians: poll

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canadians’ anger towards Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government has reached a record high, according to a new poll.   

According to a national survey published by Nanos Research this month, 31% of Canadians feel anger and pessimism towards the Trudeau government, which marks an all-time low in satisfaction for government leadership.  

“Which of the following feelings best describes your views of the federal government in Ottawa?” the poll questioned.  

In addition to the 31% feeling angry and pessimistic respectively, 11% feel uninterested, while only 1% and 10% feel satisfaction and optimism, respectively. 6% were unsure of their feelings towards the Trudeau government.  

“Feelings of anger toward the federal government have increased or held steady in every region, with the largest increases among residents of Quebec (December: 12%; March: 24%) and Atlantic Canada (December: 21%; March: 38%). Pessimism and anger remain the top emotions Canadians say best describe their views of the federal government in Ottawa,” the research found.  

In recent months, Trudeau’s popularity has plummeted, with polls projecting a massive Conservative victory in the upcoming election.   

Trudeau’s popularity has been falling and his government has been embroiled in scandal after  scandal, one of the latest being a federal court ruling that the prime minister’s use of the Emergencies Act to end the 2022 Freedom Convoy was “not justified.”    

Even top Liberal party stalwarts have called for him to resign.    

Indeed, Canadians anger and dissatisfaction with Trudeau has become a topic of conversation on many social media platforms, with Canadians detailing how the Trudeau government has made their life less affordable.   

Numerous videos are being uploaded to social media by Canadians explaining that they struggling to make ends meet amid the rising cost of living and Trudeau’s ever-increasing carbon tax, while many immigrants are telling others not to come to Canada.  

 

Continue Reading

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Budget 2024 as the eve of 1984 in Canada

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Michael Melanson

Those who claim there are unmarked burials have painted themselves into a corner. If there are unmarked burials, there have had to be murders because why else would anyone attempt to conceal the deaths?

The Federal Government released its Budget 2024 last week. In addition to hailing a 181% increase in spending on Indigenous priorities since 2016, “Budget 2024 also proposes to provide $5 million over three years, starting in 2025-26, to Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to establish a program to combat Residential School denialism.” Earlier this spring, the government proclaimed:

The government anticipates the Special Interlocutor’s final report and recommendations in spring 2024. This report will support further action towards addressing the harmful legacy of residential schools through a framework relating to federal laws, regulations, policies, and practices surrounding unmarked graves and burials at former residential schools and associated sites. This will include addressing residential school denialism.

Like “Reconciliation,” the exact definition of what the Federal government means by “residential school denialism” is not clear. In this vague definition, there is, of course, a potential for legislating vindictiveness.

What further action is needed to address “the harmful legacy of residential schools” except to enforce a particular narrative about the schools as being only harmful? Is it denialism to point out that many students, such as Tomson Highway and Len Marchand, had positive experiences at the schools and that their successful careers were, in part, made possible by their time in residential school? If the study of history is subordinated to promoting a particular political narrative, is it still history or has it become venal propaganda?

Since the sensational May 27, 2021, claim that 215 children’s remains had been found in a Kamloops orchard, the Trudeau government has been chasing shibboleths. The Kamloops claim remains unsubstantiated to this day in two glaring ways: no names of children missing from the Kamloops IRS (Indian Residential Schools) have been presented and no human remains have been uncovered. For anyone daring to point out this absence of evidence, their reward is being the target of a witch hunt. As we recently witnessed in Quesnel, B.C., to be labeled as a residential school denialist is to be drummed out of civil society.

If we must accept a particular political narrative of the IRS as the history of the IRS, does our freedom of conscience and speech have any meaning?

To the discredit of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, fictions of missing and murdered children circulating long before the Commission’s inception were subsumed by the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission). Unmarked graves and burials were incorporated into the TRC’s work as probable evidence of foul play. In the end, the TRC found no evidence of any murders committed by any staff against any students throughout the entirety history of the residential schools. Unmarked graves are explained as formerly marked and lawful graves that had since become lost due to neglect and abandonment. Unmarked burials, if they existed, could be construed as evidence of criminal acts, but such burials associated with the schools have never been proven to exist.

Those who claim there are unmarked burials have painted themselves into a corner. If there are unmarked burials, there have had to be murders because why else would anyone attempt to conceal the deaths? If there are thousands of unmarked burials, there are thousands of children who went missing from residential schools. How could thousands of children go missing from schools without even one parent, one teacher, or one Chief coming forward to complain?

There are, of course, neither any missing children nor unmarked burials and the Special Interlocutor told the Senate Committee on Indigenous People: “The children aren’t missing; they’re buried in the cemeteries. They’re missing because the families were never told where they’re buried.”

Is it denialism to repeat or emphasize what the Special Interlocutor testified before a Senate Committee? Is combating residential school denialism really an exercise in policing wrongthink? Like the beleaguered Winston in Orwell’s 1984, it is impossible to keep up with the state’s continual revision of the past, even the recent past.

For instance, the TRC’s massive report contains a chapter on the “Warm Memories” of the IRS. Drawing attention to those positive recollections is now considered “minimizing the harms of residential schools.”

In 1984, the state sought to preserve itself through historical revision and the enforcement of those revisions. In the Trudeau government’s efforts to enforce a revision of the IRS historical record, the state is not being preserved. How could it be if the IRS is now considered to be a colossal genocide? The intent is to preserve the party in government and if it means sending Canada irretrievably down a memory hole as a genocidaire, so be it.

Michael Melanson is a writer and tradesperson in Winnipeg.

Continue Reading

Trending

X