Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 59:42 — 68.5MB) | Embed
In his September 20 address to the United Nations General Assembly, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau seemed perversely fixated on something he called “diversity.”
As Canada’s representative before the U.N., the picture he painted of his country was not a flattering one. In Canada, explained Trudeau, people his own age “find it tough to make ends meet, even when working full time.
“Young Canadians,” he continued, “told me they couldn’t get a job because they don’t have work experience, and they don’t have work experience because they don’t have a job.”
Then as if describing some uncivilized corner of the world, Trudeau announced that “Women and girls still face inequality in the workplace and violence – just because they are women – even in a progressive country like Canada.” Just for good measure, Trudeau made a point of mentioning “the shamefully continuing marginalization of Canada’s indigenous peoples.”
With the balance of his message focused on opening Canada’s doors to the world’s refugees Trudeau then turned his attention to the “anxiety” caused by his government’s ‘diversity’ policies. “Our leaders are faced with citizens’ anxiety.” In order to allay the anxiety “we need to create economic growth that is broadly shared.
“We believe we should bring Canadians together around shared purposes like the U.N. sustainable development goals. Because what is the alternative? To reject others because they look or speak or pray differently that we do?”
Or in other words, if Canadians (the ones who can’t get a job or can’t make ends meet even if they have one) don’t like the fact that Trudeau is sending their money overseas, or redistributing their wealth to refugees, then they must be racist and prejudiced.
Thus “diversity” is the latest political perversity – a new code word for the increasingly discredited “official multi-culturalism” policies and yet another sinister reason for wealth redistribution.
With leaders like Trudeau at Canada’s helm, it’s not surprising that his government is considering dismantling Canada’s free electoral system, and even considering forcing Canadians to vote and fining them for failing to do so. Trudeau has plenty of support for his anti-democratic electoral agenda, from both wings of the left and right.
Those who support forcing citizens to vote at the point of gun are fully aware that this proposal is anti-freedom, yet they do not care.
“What’s the downside (of mandatory voting)? Ah yes: the terrible toll on human freedom, that sacred right for which our ancestors fought – the right not to vote.” So says Andrew Coyne, in his unconscionable September 10 National Post commentary: ‘Why Mandatory Voting Is A Good Fit’.
Andrew Coyne justifies his contempt for freedom with the following argument in logic:
(1) VOTING is a waste of time: “The impact of any single vote on the outcome is not worth even the time and effort…”
(2) VOTING is for crazy people: “Voting is objectively an irrational act.”
(3) Everyone should be FORCED to vote: “Mandatory voting will improve democracy.”
(4) FORCING people to vote violates our fundamental freedoms: “The imposition on liberty is trivial.”
(5) FINES for not voting would be “only” around $20: to “create a climate in which voting is the norm.”
(6) FORCED VOTING is cheaper than allowing freedom of choice: “(Mandatory voting) would improve democracy, at less cost.”
Like pregnancy and death, conditions in which there are no “in between” stages, there’s no such thing as a “trivial” imposition on liberty. You either have liberty, or you don’t.
“Life, liberty, property.” Perhaps if someone suggested shortening Coyne’s life a bit, you know, just by a “trivial” amount, he might come to understand just how truly irrational (meaning evil) his philosophy of force is.
Those who believe that there can even be such a thing as a “trivial” imposition on liberty are should be likewise regarded as trivial. To coin a phrase: “To Coyne, no praise.”
Contrary to majority collectivist opinion, majority rule is not democracy. On today’s broadcast, join us on a road to democracy that is Just Right.
2 Responses to “472 – Justin Trudeau’s diversity perversity / Mandatory voting an attack on freedom”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I grew up in Australia, where there was and is a fine if one doesn’t vote, and voting isn’t first past the post. I didn’t detect any feeling among the population that their freedom was thereby lessened.
A spot on example of a country that somehow survived this apocalypse.
It seems that the commentators think of Canadians as fools if they similarly contemplate it as a possible option?