Maxime Bernier Celebrates Huge Success of the 1 Million March 4 ChildrenThe line in the sand has been drawn
This week’s protests against radical gender ideology were an amazing success!
Far left extremists can try and transform our society, but indoctrinating our children crosses a line.
On Wednesday, the 1 Million March 4 Children saw tens of thousands of concerned Canadians take to the streets in cities across the country!
Canadians of every religion, background, and age proudly marched together. Chants of “no more silence” and “leave the kids alone” echoed through the streets.
I was in Ottawa where the turnout was amazing! 10 thousand people by my estimate. By far the biggest protest we’ve seen since the Freedom Convoy.
The protest in Toronto saw a similar turnout, and the support for the PPC was obvious!
And that was just the tip of the iceberg! Thousands more came out in Saskatoon, Vancouver, Halifax Montreal, and many more cities from coast to coast!
It was a beautiful day that helped restore my faith in Canada. But that was just the start of the week!
On Friday, I joined my friends Josh Alexander and Billboard Chris in Toronto for their second Education Over Indoctrination protest.
Hundreds showed up to continue to push back against radical gender ideology, far outnumbering violent ANTIFA counter-protestors.
As the lunch bell rang, students poured out of school and joined in our protest, it was beautiful to see!
A common question at both protests was: Where is Pierre Poilievre?
Despite his grassroots supporters passing a resolution rejecting gender ideology at the CPC policy convention just weeks earlier, Poilievre refused to support or even acknowledge these important protests.
In fact, he issued a memo to all of his MPs requiring them not to speak to the media or even post on social media about either of the protests!
The truth is, Poilievre does not want to speak about this issue.
He does not care about what the organizers and volunteers in his party want.
He does not care about the overwhelming grassroots movements growing.
He does not care about doing what is right.
He only cares about one thing: power, and his out-of-touch leadership team is too afraid of losing support from leftists in big cities or smears from the mainstream media to take a stand on this issue.
He won’t take any risk to defend parents and children.
He will continue to do the bare minimum on this issue, saying as little as possible and only when forced to.
But do you trust him to do anything about it if he were to win power?
I sure don’t.
I have been speaking out against radical gender ideology for years now, and I don’t plan to stop anytime soon.
Not until the medical transition of minors is made illegal!
This is the biggest child abuse scandal in our nation’s history. The mainstreaming of gender ideology is having a profound impact on a generation of children, the full impact of which we won’t know for years to come.
I will continue to defend the rights of parents and the innocence of children.
I don’t care what the media says about me. I don’t care what downtown Toronto leftists think of me.
This is the right thing to do and it is a battle I will fight until the end.
A society that doesn’t protect the innocence of children is lost.
We have a big week ahead of us in the fight against gender ideology.
There are two major protests opposing gender ideology in schools.
On Wednesday, September 20 there will be the 1 Million March 4 Children with demonstrations taking place across the country.
Parents will be pulling their kids out of school and assembling at City Halls and Legislature buildings to show that the sexualization of children is unacceptable.
A couple days later on Friday, September 22, my friends Billboard Chris and Josh Alexander will be hosting an Education Over Indoctrination protest in Toronto.
I expect these protests are going to be massive. The biggest we’ve ever seen in opposition to gender ideology.
And the Radical Left has taken notice.
This weekend we learned that the Radical Left is mobilizing across the country in counter protests.
And they have shocking institutional support.
Footage leaked from a “rapid response” meeting held by the Ontario Labour Federation with over 100 representatives of major labour unions across Canada’s largest province. You can watch the footage by clicking here.
The rhetoric they use is disturbing. They proudly refer to each other as “comrades”. They describe parents concerned about what is being taught to their children as fascists.
They believe anyone who doesn’t agree with childhood transition is “fundamentally racist, fundamentally anti-immigrant, and fundamentally queer and transphobic”. Ironically, the lead organizers of the 1 Million March 4 Children are first and second generation Muslims…
They discussed intimidation tactics to scare reasonable Canadians from participating, or to make sure they regret that they did.
Unions across Canada also made public statements, including the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU), Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), and the British Columbia Federation of Labour.
OPSEU described concerned parents as “hate groups”, CUPE Ontario described them as “the ultra-conservative right”.
Let that sink in…
In 2023, believing that children shouldn’t be taught that they are “born in the wrong body” and that the solution is pharmaceuticals and unnecessary surgeries makes you part of a hate group or the “ultra-conservative right”.
These people are unhinged!
They do not believe in parents’ rights. They believe the state knows best and should be able to raise your children with their modern, hyper-progressive values, and everyone who disagrees is a bigot or a fascist.
Since when is it the role of unions to intervene with peaceful protests? This has nothing to do with labour rights, or collective bargaining.
They do not stand for workers, they are nothing more than the foot soldiers of the morally depraved elites. Whether they realize it or not.
In fact they are the extremists! They are the ones imposing a harmful and radical ideology on a generation of our children. They are the ones confusing our children and offering permanent life altering pharmaceuticals and surgical procedures as the solution.
It is crucial that as many people attend these protests as possible.
It is not enough to be vocal on social media. We must take to the streets and demonstrate that the silent majority stands against this child abuse.
We will expose these people as the extremists they are.
The Coronation of His Majesty King Charles III is set for this Saturday, the sixth of May. As this event, the peak of the ceremony surrounding the accession of our new Sovereign, has grown nearer, the woodworks have released a fairly predictable swarm of vermin intent on spoiling things as much as they can. Liberal Party bureaucrats circumventing proper procedure to quietly commission changes to our royal symbols to make them less evocative of tradition. Special interest groups trying to make what should be a solemn yet celebratory occasion embodying unity, stability, and continuity for each of His Majesty’s realms and for the whole Commonwealth, as was the Coronation of His Majesty’s late mother, all about them. Left-wing journalists calling our institution of monarchy “outdated” and “archaic”, which it, being timeless, can never be, suggesting that we “severe our ties” to it as if it were something external and not integral to our constitution, and defaming both the monarchy and our country as a whole by insisting that our history be read through the distorting lens of BIPOC racial grievance politics. Sadly, these latter have found a strange bedfellow in the person of Maxime Bernier, the leader of what they would absurdly describe as the “far right” People’s Party of Canada. For me, this last means that come the next Dominion election I will have one less option to vote for. While on most things, perhaps everything except this, where Bernier’s views differ from those of the present leadership of the Conservative Party I agree with Bernier, this is a deal breaker. No small-r republican will ever have my support, no matter how right he is on other things.
Bernier has allowed his objections to Charles the person blind him with regards to monarchy the institution. His objections to Charles have to do with the king’s views on certain controversial points. Our prime minister, Justin Trudeau is far further removed from Bernier’s views on these same points – and many others as well – than is our king. Imagine if Bernier had tweeted that because of his objections to Trudeau we should replace parliament with something else. This would be recognized instantly as a terrible suggestion. Yet the same bad reasoning – get rid of the institution because of objections to the person – is worse in the case of what Bernier actually said. The monarchy is a non-political – in the sense of party politics – office. It is therefore much worse to attack the institution because of objections to the officeholder based on partisan political views in the case of the monarchy than in the case of parliament and the prime minister.
It is because he approaches monarchy from the standpoint of Modern democratic assumptions – yes, populist nationalist assumptions, comically labelled right-wing by those seemingly unaware that the original right was anything but populist and nationalist, are Modern democratic assumptions, well within the boundaries of historical liberalism – that Bernier makes the basic blunder of failing to recognize that it is because the monarchy is non-democratic that it is non-political and that it is because it is non-political that it can both stand above partisan politics as a beacon of unity and serve as an anchor of stability for parliamentary government in the turbulent sea of Modern democratic politics, an institution far more important and valuable even than its ancient democratic complement of parliament, which only the basest of fools would want to mess with.. This mistake can be categorized with others common to those who have so imbibed the basic assumptions of the Modern Age that they simply cannot think outside that box and find it painful to even try. These mistakes all involve prioritizing that which, important as it may be to the moment, is fleeting and ephemeral, over that which is fixed, stable, permanent, and lasting. This is the consequence of turning our backs on the consensus of the wisdom of all of human tradition until yesterday and deciding that the marketplace is a better model for the whole of society than the family.
When we speak of stability and permanence with regards to human institutions, of course, we are referring to these qualities to the extent that they can be possessed by anything in our earthly, mortal, existence. Monarchy is the state institution that has demonstrated the largest capacity for such. Family is the most permanent social institution. While I am referring to family in the general sense of “the family”, the oldest and most universal social institution, specific families also have much longer lifespans than the individuals who belong to them in any generation. We are born into families that have been around a lot longer than us and, until very recently at any rate, those families raised us to behave in ways that would ensure they would be around long after we are gone, i.e., grow up, get married, have kids, raise those kids to do the same. Like living under the reign of a king whose Sovereignty has passed down to him from those who reigned over generations of our forebears this reminds us that we are not each our own individual selves the centre of the universe around which all else revolves and to whose wills reality must bend the knee. This is a reminder we are in constant need of now more than ever since we are constantly surrounded by voices telling us otherwise.
The recognition that everything is not about us, that we are part of things bigger, more important, and longer lived than ourselves, is, paradoxically, absolutely essential to our growth as individuals, not physical growth of course, but our development into our best possible selves, the selves we are supposed to be, the kind of growth that perfection in the original root meaning of the word points to and which in the language of the ancient thinkers consists of finding and accomplishing to the best of our ability our good, that is to say, our end, our purpose, the reason we are here on this earth. For we cannot find and serve our own small-g good, if we are solipsistic prisoners of our own selves. Our individual small-g goods are not, pace Nietzsche, goods we make for ourselves out of our own wills, but are that within us which answers to big G Goodness. We do not have to be able to conceive of Goodness in philosophical terms, but none of us will ever come near being the best version of ourselves possible without acknowledging Goodness as something that is what it is regardless of what we think, say, or do about it and something to which our will must bend rather than vice versa.
Goodness is often spoken of in connection with Beauty and Truth, both of which like Goodness are what they are regardless of us and to which our wills must bend. These are stable and permanent in the absolute sense. In philosophy and theology they are called the Transcendentals, which term means “the properties of being, i.e., that which is to existence itself what “red” is to “apple”, but as has already been stated, a philosophical understanding of these things is hardly necessary. The important thing to understand is that we don’t have a say in what Goodness, Truth and Beauty are and that we are to conform ourselves to these rather than to try to force them to conform to our will.
We live in a time when we are suffering the consequences of having done the exact opposite on a massive scale. Take Beauty for an example. Our cities look as one would expect them to after a century or so of architects and city engineers designing buildings and streets with the idea that Beauty must take backseat to utility. Our countrysides, while not affected as badly as our cities, show the scarring one would expect when those responsible for projects that affect the countryside share the same priorities as the aforementioned architects and city engineers. Is it any wonder, with such disregard for Beauty being shown by the engineers responsible for city and country alike, that so many others add to the problem by strewing garbage all over both? We have art and music that looks and sounds like what one would expect from a century or so of sculptors, painters, and composers who no longer saw the primary purpose of their vocation as being to create works of Beauty but to “express themselves” and “reach the people” even if that meant shocking them with ugliness. Bernier’s objections to Charles the person are based on His Majesty’s life-long outspoken environmentalism which, in the minds of Bernier and many who think like him, make His Majesty into someone like Bill Gates or Al Gore. Even if His Majesty was that type it would still be utter folly to wish to abolish the office of the monarchy because of such a quirk in the present officeholder, but it is also an ill-informed misjudgment of His Majesty. His environmentalism began as countryside conservationism rooted in his love of the Beauty of the countryside. His love for Beauty has manifested itself in a similar outspokenness with regards to the other things discussed in this paragraph. It would be difficult to read his defense of older buildings and architectural styles and his biting criticism of modernism and functionalism as anything other than a deep traditionalism. Similarly, if you consider everything he has said and done with regards to environmentalism instead of focusing in only on climate-related matters, it is quite evident that he is more of a Wendell Berry than a Bill Gates.
Late last week a bill cleared parliament, the first of several planned by the current Liberal government, that will have the effect of severely limiting Canadians access to Truth by giving the government the same, or even stronger, control over alternative sources of information online that they already exercise over the traditional media. This is not, of course, how the prime minister and his cult of followers talk about what they are doing. They say that this first bill is intended to protect “Canadian content” on online streaming services. They say with regards to their internet legislation as a whole that they are trying to protect Canadians from “online harms” such as “misinformation”, “disinformation”, and “hate”. If one were to make the mistake of taking this language literally and seriously one could be fooled into thinking that it is the opposite of Truth that the government is trying to keep from Canadians for “misinformation” and “disinformation” as these words are properly used mean information that is false. The Liberals, however, use these words to mean information that disagrees with whatever narrative they happen to be promoting at that moment and since that narrative is almost inevitably false it is Truth that ends up being censored as “misinformation” or “disinformation”. A Ministry of Truth never promotes Truth, it only suppresses it. It is always a bad idea, but especially so when coming from someone like our prime minister who never tells the Truth when a lie will suffice. Only a few days before the Online Streaming Act passed he told an audience that he never forced anyone to get a vaccination. This was a rather audacious lie considering there were not many world leaders worse than him when it came to imposing vaccines on millions by preventing anyone without one from having any sort of a normal existence. Many opposed this bill and will continue to fight it, in the courts if need be, and to his credit Bernier is a leading example of these. This was done, however, in the name of freedom of speech, and freedom of speech was championed, not because of its necessity to Truth (without freedom of speech, including the freedom to speak that which is false, we do not have the freedom to speak Truth, the parallel to the classical theological argument that without Free Will, including the ability to choose evil, we do not have the ability to choose the Good) but because it violated our individual rights. I don’t deny that individual rights are important, but they are a liberal value, and like all liberal values their importance is greatly exaggerated in this age. Truth is more important. Sir Roger Scruton wrote “beauty is an ultimate value – something that we pursue for its own sake, and for the pursuit of which no further reason need be given. Beauty should therefore be compared to truth and goodness, one member of a trio of ultimate values which justify our rational inclinations”. (Beauty: A Very Short Introduction, 2011) Imagine how different the fight against the Liberal Party’s plans to seize control of what we can say or see online would be if those fighting fought first and foremost in the name of Truth, the permanent and lasting value, and framed their arguments accordingly.
My hope and prayer for Max Bernier is that his eyes will be opened and that he will come to see that as important as all the things he has been fighting for are, what T. S. Eliot called “the permanent things”, both the truly permanent ultimate values of Truth, Goodness and Beauty and the relatively permanent concrete human institutions such as the family and in the political sphere parliament and especially the monarchy which point us to those ultimate values, are more important and that he will repent of having allowed his minor objections to Charles the person to attack the monarchy and espouse small-r republicanism. Until such time, he will have to do what he does without my support.
Today Justice Paul Rouleau released his verdict on Trudeau’s use of the Emergencies Act to violently crush the Freedom Convoy one year ago.
Rouleau concluded that Trudeau’s use of the Act was justified.
In a delirious statement, he claims that it was reasonable to believe that this peaceful and joyful protest posed “a threat to the security of Canada”!
I have to say, I am profoundly disappointed, but not surprised.
Justice Rouleau was hand-picked by Trudeau to oversee the inquiry. We can’t forget that Rouleau has a history as a Liberal activist and worked with former Prime Minister John Turner.
This Commission was not independent, as it should have been. It was Liberals investigating Liberals.
Is anyone really surprised that Liberals protect their own?
At the end of the day, the findings of Rouleau don’t really matter.
We all know that Trudeau would not have resigned even if the Commission had found he overstepped his powers.
We all know that Jagmeet Singh would not have held Trudeau accountable by withdrawing his support and forcing an election.
No matter the findings of this illegitimate inquiry, Trudeau’s actions of one year ago exposed him as the tyrant he is.
He crushed peaceful protesters with police horses.
He threw people in jail on false charges.
He froze people’s bank accounts without due process.
The Freedom Convoy forced Trudeau to show his true colours.
It exposed the opposition, the NDP, Conservatives, and Bloc as incompetent and incapable of holding the government to account.
Frederick, we must replace these corrupt politicians with People’s Party MPs willing to govern in the best interest of all Canadians!
Maxime Bernier Hails the Anniversary of the Truckers Freedom Convoy
One year ago today marked the beginning of a historic moment in Canadian history.
The beginning of the largest human rights protest Canada has ever seen.
The beginning of the most inspiring act of civil disobedience I have ever experienced.
The Freedom Convoy.
After 2 years of government tyranny, of lockdowns and travel bans, of curfews and stay at home orders, of governments pitting families and friends against each other, of propaganda and psychological manipulation…
Brave Canadian truckers started a movement that would wake up a nation and inspire the world.
Starting in the Western heartland, they drove east. The line of trucks and cars grew as they passed through each city and province.
Patriotic Canadians gathered on highway overpasses, waving flags and raising homemade signs.
A year ago today they began to arrive in Ottawa.
The corrupt hacks and career politicians that walk the halls of Parliament were reminded that these buildings, this country, belongs to us.
They were reminded that Canadians are not just serfs paying taxes to support their insane globalist projects and inflated MP salaries.
We are a proud people not to be treated like slaves or cogs in some broken machine.
Trudeau smeared the protestors as racists and misogynists. “A small fringe minority with unacceptable views”.
The fake news media painted it as an “occupation.” They claimed the citizens of downtown Ottawa were being “terrorized” and lied about protestors committing arson and other crimes.
But I was there in person. I experienced it first hand.
And I can tell you, it was the most beautiful, peaceful, and patriotic event I have ever seen.
After two years of misery and discrimination, of being separated from friends and family, there was a special sense of love and togetherness in the streets of Ottawa.
People were proud to be Canadian again.
But just as pride and patriotism was resurging in Canada, Justin Trudeau stomped it out, like a campfire at the end of the night.
He gave himself unprecedented powers, meant to protect Canadians at times of war.
He did things that should never be done to peaceful Canadian citizens.
He weaponized the financial system, shutting down fundraisers and freezing people’s bank accounts without due process.
Storm troopers took to the streets, shooting journalists with tear gas and trampling people with horses.
Pride in our country evaporated. We were reminded the tyrants are still in control.
Even though the Freedom Convoy was violently crushed, it was still a brilliant success.
Public opinion had turned. Provincial governments started to quietly drop mandates and restrictions.
We must not forget about what the tyrannical Liberals did to us. What the NDP and Bloc Québécois enabled. What the Conservatives failed to oppose.
We must recapture the fervor and passion of the Freedom Convoy and start fighting now to make change in the next election.
We must replicate what the Freedom Convoy accomplished. After filling the streets of Ottawa with the People, we must fill the House of Commons with People’s Party MPs.
Psychological warfare! Hundreds of Dr. Jordan Peterson supporters protest outside the College of Psychologists of Ontario
Earlier this month, Dr. Peterson took to Twitter to call out the Orwellian witch-hunt against him for making statements that the college considers to be politically incorrect.
Dr. Jordan Peterson is one of the most brilliant minds on the planet today. He has authored bestselling books; he is a speaker in demand the world over; and he has helped thousands of individuals – mostly young males – turn their lives around.
So why is Dr. Peterson suddenly deemed to be persona non grata by the College of Psychologists of Ontario?
Well, incredibly, Dr. Peterson is essentially being persecuted for… wrong-thought.
Earlier this month, Dr. Peterson took to Twitter to call out the Orwellian witch-hunt against him for making statements that the college considers to be politically incorrect.
Wrote Peterson: “BREAKING: the Ontario College of Psychologists has demanded that I submit myself to mandatory social-media communication retraining with their experts for, among other crimes, retweeting Pierre Poilievre and criticizing Justin Trudeau and his political allies.
“I am to take a course of such training (with reports documenting my ‘progress’ or face an in-person tribunal and suspension of my right to operate as a licensed clinical psychologist.”
“About a dozen people from all over the world submitted complaints about my public statements on Twitter and Rogan over a four-year period (out of the 15 million who follow me on social media) claiming that I had ‘harmed’ people (not them) with my views.”
And so it is that Dr. Peterson’s colleagues think he must be… “reprogrammed”? What would George Orwell say if he were alive today? (Perhaps Orwell would lament that his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four was meant to be a work of fiction, not an instruction manual.)
Indeed, the crux of the matter when it comes to this story is that Dr. Peterson is not being investigated by the College of Psychologists of Ontario for any alleged improper behaviour with regard to a current or former patient. Rather, the college deems his politics to be offside.
This is equal parts outrageous and egregious.
And on Wednesday, a few hundred Peterson supporters held a peaceful rally outside the Toronto headquarters of the College of Psychologists of Ontario.
Some notable speakers included People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier and Church of God pastor Henry Hildebrandt, both of whom have had to deal with censorship issues during the past few years.
The statements by attendees were consistent: they support freedom of speech; they despise censorship and compelled speech; and they believe the tall forehead types who comprise the CPO are, well, out of their collective minds.
And if the brainiacs at the college think Dr. Peterson is going to bend the knee to the woke mob, they are sadly deluded.
Indeed, Dr. Peterson first came to prominence several years ago when he was teaching at the University of Toronto. That’s when he first took a stand against compelled speech – especially when it came to referring to the various spirit unicorns on campus with phony baloney pronouns such as “zee/zir”, “xe/xem”, etc., etc.
He wasn’t silenced then; he won’t be silenced now.
And by the way, who exactly looks upon Jordon Peterson as being “controversial” in the first place merely for espousing… common sense?
Is it the woke mob on campus? The thugs who comprise Antifa? Those who suffer from mental illness and/or the radical transgender community?
Two-week trial underway today in Saskatoon against Maxime Bernier and dozens of other protestors for peaceful protests
Posted On: September 12, 2022
SASKATOON: The Justice Centre announces that the trial of the Honourable Maxime Bernier, leader of the Federal People’s Party of Canada, and dozens of other protestors charged for attending an anti-lockdown rally in Saskatoon on May 9, 2021, started today in Saskatoon.
The trial is being held in Centennial Room ‘B’ at TCU Place, 35 22nd Street East, Saskatoon, and is scheduled to run for two weeks.
On May 9, 2021, a peaceful outdoor protest against government violations of Canadians’ constitutional rights and freedoms was held near the Vimy Memorial in Kiwanis Park. The Saskatoon Police Service aggressively targeted the protestors by posting images of many of them online, and subsequently issuing dozens of summons tickets, each with a $2800 fine. Later, Saskatchewan prosecutors also issued charges via Criminal Code Information against 46 individuals.
Justice Centre lawyers represent 23 of the defendants at this trial, including Mr. Bernier, a Saskatchewan freedom advocate Mark Friesen (known as the Grizzly Patriot), and Darrell Mills. On behalf of Mr. Mills and a young mother who attended outdoor protests, Justice Centre lawyers argued a constitutional challenge in the Court of Queen’s Bench (now King’s Bench) to the Saskatchewan government’s strict restrictions on outdoor protests on June 29, 2022. The Court’s decision in that matter is pending.
Meanwhile, Saskatchewan prosecutors are continuing to pursue charges against individuals who attended even small anti-lockdown protests. No charges were issued to people who participated in protests for other causes that exceeded the 10 to 30 person limits the Saskatchewan Government imposed on outdoor gatherings. In the next six months, Justice Centre lawyers are scheduled to defend protestors in more than a dozen other trials scheduled in Provincial Courts in Saskatchewan.
“There is no legal or medical justification for the strict numerical restrictions imposed on outdoor protests in Saskatchewan,” states Marty Moore, a lawyer with the Justice Centre. “Yet, an incredible amount of public resources, including prosecution and court time, has been committed to prosecuting protestors. The targeting of these protestors is not on the basis that their protests were a health risk, but rather because they expressed opposition to the government’s unjustified restrictions on Canadians’ constitutional rights and freedoms. Not a single transmission of Covid has been associated with an outdoor protest in Saskatchewan, and yet the government continues to go after protestors for exercising their constitutionally-protected freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly.”
