Gary Goodyear and the Harper Government's Attack on Science

In 1995 Ontarians elected their first neoconservative premier, Mike Harris. It was an experiment that failed badly due in large part to the fact that many candidates who rode the wave of the movement into power, had no government experience.

Many were from rural areas and lacked higher education.

On the surface this is not a problem. Rural communities need a voice and who best to speak for them, than one of them.

However, the difficulty was in choosing a cabinet, because ministers not only speak for their constituents but for their 'clients' who fall within their mandate.

Now Harris had people in his caucus who could have represented the interests of these groups. Who had enough (and often more than enough) expertise to understand the needs of schools, farmers, etc. But that is not how neoconservatism works.

Harris wanted to tear down government departments, so he needed ministers who would become the nemesis of their 'clients'. Ministers who were 'movement' oriented and knew what had to be done. If they felt any empathy or concern for the problems facing these 'clients', that would run contra to the neoconservative agenda.

Political scientist and author Brooke Jeffrey explains how Harris chose his cabinet:

First and foremost, Mike Harris chose people like himself. That meant white, middle-aged men. It also meant self-made men were in and well-educated
upper-middle-class ones, for the most part, were out. In addition, Harris picked a third of his cabinet from rookie MPPs with no experience in the legislature, let alone the cabinet. The advantage, for Harris, was that they would always perceive themselves to be in his debt. After all, they had been elected on his coat-tails ... The combination of these two selection criteria alone was likely to cause serious problems for the government, but Harris did not stop there. Ignoring conventional wisdom once more, he deliberately (and some would say perversely) placed individuals in portfolios for which they had no relevant experience or training.

His theory was unique, but understandable if one considers his neoconservative perspective. (1)

So in Harris's world the Minster of Agriculture did not speak for the farmer, but promoted fewer farmers and lower prices, which meant more imports. The Minister of Education did not speak to the quality of education but only to reducing the number of schools and teachers, promoting private education.

In her new book, The Armageddon Factor, Marci McDonald discusses the appointment of Gary Goodyear to the Science portfolio. Goodyear was an obscure backbencher who had dropped out of university and instead chose a career as a chiropractor. This doesn't mean that his chosen path was not in the scientific field. Far from it.

However, McDonald suggests that Stephen Harper chose Goodyear in part to exact revenge on academics and climate scientists. (2) After all, their demands stood in the way of big business.

But she also draws on the fact that Gary Goodyear is a devout Baptist who 'embraced a personal belief in creationism' and 'regarded evolution as a theory concocted by scheming humanists in academia to undercut the very foundations of Christian doctrine.' (2)

So to Goodyear he would be the foe of the science community because they threatened his beliefs. Ignoring the fact that scientists could use their "God given" talents for the betterment of mankind, he was only concerned that their 'theories' violated the Old Testament.

So though I'm sure to some degree Harper liked sticking it to the academics, who are often viewed as the enemy of the movement, I think his choice of Goodyear was to appease the Christian fundamentalists who represent his base. This was a clear message that with Goodyear at the helm, funding to scientific research would become a thing of the past.

Unless that research was to prove their theory, that mankind evolved from one man and one woman, Adam and Eve. The fact that if this were true, early generations came about as a result of incest, did not factor in.

Courting the Theocons

In 2003, Stephen Harper gave a speech to the secretive Civitas Society, of which Jason Kenney is a founding member. Donald Gutstein, author of the book Not a Conspiracy Theory* (another must read), covered the meeting and reported on Harper's views:

The state should take a more activist role in policing social norms and values, Harper told the assembled conservatives. To achieve this goal, social and economic conservatives must reunite as they have in the U.S., where evangelical Christians and business rule in an unholy alliance. Red Tories must be jettisoned from the party, he said, and alliances forged with ethnic and immigrant communities who currently vote Liberal but espouse traditional family values. This was the successful strategy counselled by the neocons under Ronald Reagan to pull conservative Democrats into the Republican tent. Movement towards the goal must be "incremental," he said, so the public won't be spooked. (3)

Marci McDonald also mentions that meeting:

The only route, he [Harper] argued, was to focus not on the tired wish list of economic conservatives or “neo-cons,” as they’d become known, but on what he called “theo-cons”—those social conservatives who care passionately about hot-button issues that turn on family, crime, and defence. Even foreign policy had become a theo-con issue, he pointed out, driven by moral and religious convictions. “The truth of the matter is that the real agenda and the defining issues have shifted from economic issues to social values,” he said, “so conservatives must do the same.”

Arguing that the party had to come up with tough, principled stands on everything from parents’ right to spank their children to putting “hard power” behind the country’s foreign-policy commitments, he cautioned that it also had to choose its battlefronts with care. The social-conservative issues we choose should not be denominational,” he said, “but should unite social conservatives of different denominations and even different faiths.” (4)

Exploiting religious beliefs is unconscionable, but just how far is he willing to take this? One of his mentors, through Charles McVety, is John Hagee who believes in "God's Foreign Policy". And what this means is that Israel should be left alone to do their job, which he explains is to launch a nuclear attack in the Middle East. Are those the foreign-policy commitments of the "theocons" that he's willing to endorse?

Goodyear Does not Disappoint

Carolyn Abraham wrote a comprehensive piece for the Globe and Mail, concerning the attack of Gary Goodyear on Canada's scientists. Mike Harris himself couldn't have selected a better soldier for the mission.

The screaming erupted last Wednesday afternoon, just down the street from Parliament Hill, in the offices of a Conservative cabinet minister. Two officials with Canadian Association of University Teachers sat on one side of a boardroom table and on the other sat Gary Goodyear, Minister of Science and Technology, his policy adviser Wesley Moore and a civil servant ready to take notes.

CAUT, a lobby group that represents 65,000 staff at 121 colleges and universities, had planned to raise concerns over the government's handling of research funding. But within moments, it became clear they wouldn't get very far. “The minister was very angry,” said David Robinson, associate executive director of CAUT. “He was raising his voice and pointing his finger … He said everyone loves their [federal budget] and we said, ‘A lot of our members don't love it'… and he said, ‘That's because you're lying to them, misleading them.'” The talks, Mr. Robinson said, went from bad to worse. In 15 years on the job, he “never had a meeting like that.” (5)

The battle lines were clearly drawn and this was going to be war.

James Turk, CAUT executive director, said the meeting with the minister typifies the chill many scientists feel coming from the government, calling the reception “nasty pit-bull” behaviour.

... The most common complaint since the Conservatives came to power in 2006 is the lack of support for the three arm's-length agencies that finance basic research: the National Science and Engineering Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

After years of double-digit budget increases in the early 2000s, government contributions in recent years to NSERC, SSHRC and CIHR have barely kept pace with inflation – and last year they underwent a government-mandated strategic review to reduce their spending. (5)

And while the government claims to be investing in 'science', and have indeed poured millions into the ministry, much of it has gone into the repair of buildings which should have fallen under a different mandate.

The Only Adversary in a Culture War is Secrecy

The media has recently begun talking about a culture war, between the Reform-Conservative Movement and the opposition parties. No doubt Harper will try to paint this as an assault on Christianity. He is already suggesting that his caucus is under attack because they go to church.

But it's not as simple as that.

This is not about their religious beliefs but the secrecy. If they really believe that this is what Canadians want, why not lay it out there. Tell us that they think that homosexuals should be "cured". Or that they not only oppose abortion but contraception and any form of family planning, that goes against "God's plan", which is for women to keep popping out babies until their uterus explodes.

And they don't just want the Canadian government to only consist of Christians, but they have to be "Born again" Christians. Lay that out there.

And if the reason why the Religious Right in Canada is accepting millions of dollars from the Religious Right in the United States, is because they believe that we are Narnia of the C.S. Lewis novel and that Canada will play a significant role in the end times, lay it out there. Shouldn't we get to decide whether or not we want to host this little shindig? I may be busy that weekend.

But the one I have the most trouble with is that they don't believe there is a place in the world for Muslims.

Link Byfield was an early Reform party supporter. He is also a member of the Civitas Society, and his father was a founder. Several years ago he and Stephen Harper helped to found the Northern Foundation (6) which was to be a vanguard group for the Far-Right. He is also on the executive of the new Wildrose Alliance Party in Alberta.

He spoke at a REAL Women's** conference about three possible outcomes to our future.

Scene I. If Islam Prevails ... "An invasion by Islam will not be by force of arms, as they do not have the technology for that. The power of Islam is in its birth rate. Islam cannot be removed or replaced, and it grows by way of its large families ...

Scene II. If Materialism (Secular Humanism) Prevails ... To populate the nation, society has implemented the ideas set out in Aldous Huxley's book, "Brave New World." For example, we are increasingly playing with providing babies in nurseries without mothers and fathers and families, just as predicted by Mr. Huxley ...

Scene III. If Christianity Prevails ... Christianity is about God saving man from himself. God saves us out of an unfathomable love. He saves us from idolatry. He saves us from our enemies. Will we win? Who knows? Looking at the Christian case, it seems to be the weakest. But Mr. Byfield believes Christianity will prevail.

And yet there is no 'Scene' where harmony will prevail. Where Christianity and Islam can both survive. And what about Judaism? Buddhism? Hinduism? What they see is a final, no holds barred, contest between Islam and Christianity. A fight to the finish.

I'm revisiting some of my old postings on the threat of the Religious Right, because it appears that we may finally be debating this issue in Canada, and that's a good thing.

Because all Canadians have the right to believe what they want. It's the beauty of a free society. But they don't have the right to force those beliefs on the rest of us, and by cutting funding to areas that are important to all Canadians, or basing foreign policy on Biblical prophesy; their "forced beliefs" could have devastating results.

So I just want some honesty. Is that too much to ask?

Footnotes:

* Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy, By Donald Gutstein, Key Porter Books, 2009, ISBN: 978-1-55470-191-9

*REAL women were also under the Northern Foundation's umbrella.

Sources:

1. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 174-175

2. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

3. Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy: Close advisers schooled in 'the noble lie' and 'regime change', By Donald Gutstein, The Tyee, November 29, 2005

4. Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons: The rising clout of Canada’s religious right, By Marci McDonald, The Walrus, October 2006, Pg. 2

5. Researchers fear 'stagnation' under Tories, By: Carolyn Abraham, Globe and Mail, March 2, 2009

6. Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper demonstrates continued ultra right wing affiliations by blocking pro social justice Toronto candidate, By Dr. Debra Chin, The Canadian

7. REAL Women of Canada 2002 Conference, "The Impact of Feminism on Society".

Public Means That CBC Belongs to Us Not Stephen Harper

"You gained power by using the highest and noblest thing in life – religion – to appeal to the lowest – to greed, selfishness, cupidity. By using this fiendish combination, you set loose an uncontrollable flood of passion. You set neighbour against neighbour, friend against friend, brother against brother, man against wife. And then you crucified a suffering people upon the cross of your vanity and ambition." (1)

Those words were written in 1937 about the first leader of the Reform movement, then called Social Credit; William Aberhart. And seventy five years later they ring just as true for their latest head honcho.

Stephen Harper intentionally exploited religious beliefs for political gain and is now scrambling to clean up his mess.

It took more than four years for the media in Canada to start to pay attention to the threat imposed by the Religious Right in this country. A handful tried to sound the alarm, but no one listened.

Now Marcie McDonald's book has hit the stores, and CBC ran a segment. It was news.

But true to nature, the Reform-Conservatives are crying religious persecution.

I'm sorry but speaking out against a government that wants to engineer a nuclear attack in the Middle East, so they can fulfil a biblical prophesy, is not religious persecution. It's an intervention.

Yet now CBC risk losing their funding (a Reform Party goal for years) because of it. When Canada was a democracy they were allowed to report the truth. But under our fascist regime, they may soon learn that the truth is a dangerous concept.

Lots of people go to church in this country but not many have an agenda other than spiritual renewal. They use their faith to do good and understand that all humans have value.

The Christian extremism employed by this government marginalizes gays, women and Muslims. This is not who we are as Canadians and if Harper cuts even a dime from the CBC budget, we need to scream, and scream loudly. I can't believe I'm linking to an article written by Jane Taber. I gave up on her a long time ago. Who knows. Maybe she'll see the light. (pun intended)

The CBC is fuelling a “faith war” and using its taxpayer-funded position to “foment religious division,” the Prime Minister’s strategists in their latest attack on the public broadcaster.

In a memo to supporters, the backroom operatives note that this is just the next step in the CBC’s “ongoing campaign against the Conservative Party.” At issue is a story about the rise of the right-wing religious groups and their connections to the Stephen Harper’s government that ran on The National last night.

This poison ruined the Republican Party in the United States, and they may never recover. It's time more people in the media stood up to this sanctimonious hatred.

Stephen Harper, John Hagee and Christians United For Israel

"The Quran teaches that all Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians and Jews. Yes, it teaches that very clearly." John Hagee

John Hagee is the author of the book Jerusalem Countdown, in which he describes an end day prophesy, where all the Jews are herded to Israel (after the Middle East is levelled). They will then accept Christianity or be slaughtered, so that born again Christians can feel "the rapture".

It might be tempting to roll our eyes or chuckle, but unfortunately a large number of people who not only believe this but feel they have to accelerate it, belong to our current government; the Conservative Party of Canada, and their supporters.

And Stephen Harper is even basing our foreign policy on the wish list of what has been called the Canadian Religious Right, which explains his unprecedented support of Israel.

Many theologians denounce his actions, and several are speaking out, but they are not being given a proper platform. One of them is Stephen Scheinberg. Dr. Scheinberg was emeritus professor of history at Concordia University (1), and Co-chair of Canadian Friends of Peace Now.

He explains how the group came about:

McVety and his associates are associated with the dispensationalist brand of the evangelical movement, a grouping sometimes termed Christian Zionists. They are fundamentalists, believing in the authority of an error-free scripture and opposed to abortion access, gay marriage, or use of embryonic stem cells for medical research, while favouring traditional roles for women and protection of the public from what they deem to be pornography.

The appeal of these extremist Christians to the Jewish right is obvious, since the prophecies of the former cannot be implemented until the return of all the Jewish people to all the lands of ancient Israel. CCanadian dispensationalist clergy are part of Hagee’s Christians United for Israel and claim to have taken a lead in establishing that organization, beginning with a telephone call from McVety to Hagee in November of 2005 to notify him that there would be a Toronto “Night to Honour Israel” the following May. Hagee is said to have replied that “there’s no reason why we can’t do the same thing in every major city of North America.”

Subsequently, on February 7, 2006, 400 pastors and others joined together at Hagee’s Cornerstone Church to establish Christians United for Israel with Christian rightist leaders Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson prominently included and with Charles McVety named National Chairman for Canada. Others in the Canadian group are John Howarth (Executive Director), who is on the faculty of McVety’s college, Reverend John Tweedie of Brampton (National Chairman) and Reverend Dean Bye of Centralia, Ontario.

[From] Reverend Bye ... North American Jews must recognize they must all “return” to Israel and he warns: “the time of the U.S.A. being a safe haven for the Jews has ended!” ... He adds that “we don’t throw them overboard [like Jonah] but lovingly assist them home to Israel.” I believe that Bye’s implicit judgment, then, is that like Jonah North American Jews have turned their backs on God and must recognize that their only true home is in Israel.

Unfortunately for Dean Bye, most of the Jewish community has not responded to his generous proposal that they leave their homes for aliyah to Israel.

It is no surprise that Reverend McVety also has close ties to the Conservative Party. Liberal MP Garth Turner claimed that McVety told him that he can call and get Prime Minister Harper on the phone within minutes.

A good many of the party’s candidates in the last election were social conservatives, including several current cabinet members, for example Attorney General Vic Toews, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day and Flaherty. It was perhaps through Day that McVety made his connections to Ben-Ami and then his alliance with B’nai Brith. (2)

Raising the alarm over the religious Right does not mean that you are persecuting Christians. Nor does it mean that you are denouncing evangelism. These people are Christian extremists and their beliefs conflict with those of the majority of Canadians. And yet they are the ones who are currently directing both the domestic and foreign policies of our government. This is a very dangerous thing.

We need to not only hold our current government to account, but also our media. They have a duty to inform Canadians and yet most have failed to perform that duty.

Marci McDonald has written a great book (1) on the subject, but it's still up to us to get the word out. We can think of this as our holy mission.

Sources:

1. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

2. Partners for Imperium: B’nai Brith Canada and the Christian Right, By Stephen Scheinberg, Outlook Magazine, July-August, 2008

The Not so Invisble Hand of John Hagee

"All hurricanes are acts of God, because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that." John Hagee

John Charles Hagee is the founder and senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, that boasts 19,000 regular members. He is also the chief executive officer of Global Evangelism Television and John Hagee Ministries. And he is the founder and National Chairman of the Christian-Zionist organization Christians United for Israel, incorporated on February 7, 2006.

Born in 1940, he came upon his calling early, having travelled with his family in a mobile home as the Hagee Family Singers. His father would preach revivals all over Texas, and John, his older brother Bill, and parents provided the music. Today his wife and children have revived the Hagee Family singers and the sale of their CDs show a very handsome profit.

Some critics believe there is a bit too much profit taken from Hagee's ministry.

With the dozens of men bearing glinting platters in the aisles, and six cameramen capturing the moment, Hagee instructs church members to hold their money toward the heavens. The thousands repeat after him: "Give and it shall be given."

"When you give, it qualifies you to receive God's abundance," he tells his listeners. "If God gives to you before you give to him, God himself will become a liar. ... If you're not prospering, it's because you're not giving ... And it is a message that has helped his nonprofit television arm, Global Evangelism Television, become a prosperous, global, moneymaking family enterprise that has netted millions year after year peddling prayer, inspirational books, tapes and the promise of prosperity.

Since Hagee and his wife, Diana Hagee, founded GETV 25 years ago, the organization has gone from a back-room operation broadcasting Sunday sermons to San Antonio area viewers to a 50,000-square-foot multimedia studio broadcasting to 127 television stations and 82 radio stations nationwide. "God has blessed it until it has literally reached the Earth," Hagee recently said at his studio about his television evangelism enterprise. (1)

However, like many key players of the American Religious Right, Hagee has set his sights on Canada and has firmly entrenched himself with Stephen Harper and the Reform-Conservative movement.

He has rented office space at the Canadian Christian Bible College and is business partners with the College's owner, Charles McVety. McVety is a cohort of Jim Flaherty, Stockwell Day and Jason Kenney. The Bible college also sells Hagee's books and tapes. (2)

And the Texas preacher is a fan of Stephen Harper's.

Hagee lauded one of Stephen Harper’s first post-election acts: after Hamas militants won power in the Palestinian Authority, Harper became the first world leader to cut off its funding, trumping even Bush ...“I am so delighted that Canada’s prime minister immediately denounced Hamas terrorism when he became the leader of this great nation.”Hagee’s assessment of Harper isn’t based on news clips alone. His Toronto host, not to mention his longtime Canadian major-domo, was Canada Christian College president Charles McVety, one of the most outspoken players in this country’s religious right wing.

During the last election, as head of a handful of pro-family lobbies including the Defend Marriage Coalition, McVety emerged as a power to be reckoned with. He bought up the rights to unclaimed Liberal websites such as josephvolpe.com and stacked a handful of Conservative nomination contests in favour of evangelical candidates adamantly opposed to same-sex matrimony, a campaign he has vowed to repeat.

As Harper navigates the tricky waters of minority rule—keeping the lid on any eruptions of rhetorical fervour from the rambunctious theo-cons in his caucus—it is noteworthy that he has continued to cultivate a man regarded as the lightning rod of the Christian right. Last spring, those around the prime minister drafted McVety to help sell the government’s contentious child-care policy, and on budget day he was the personal guest of Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in the Commons’ vip gallery.(3)

But more importantly, Hagee appreciates Stephen Harper's blind devotion to Israel.

During this summer’s Middle East war, Harper reversed decades of Canadian foreign policy with his adamant support for Israel, even after its jets smashed a clearly marked United Nations observation post, killing a veteran Canadian Peacekeeper. His admirers argue that steadfastness could turn the burgeoning bond between evangelical Christians and Jews into a powerful and unprecedented alliance that could leave him unbeatable at the ballot box.

But a growing chorus of critics warns that Harper has already paid a high price for that strategic calculation, irrevocably alienating Canada’s mushrooming Islamic population and leaving in shreds the country’s reputation as an even-handed peace broker. (3)

We should be very concerned with this relationship because as Marci McDonald points out:

Harper’s stand has also raised more unsettling questions. What does it mean if and when a believer in the infallibility of Biblical prophecy comes to power and backs a damn-the-torpedoes course in the Middle East? Does it end up fuelling overenthusiastic end-timers who feel they have nothing to lose in some future conflagration, helping speed the world on Hagee’s fast track to Armageddon? (3)

What does it mean?

Sources:

1. Critics say John Hagee's compensation is too high, By: Analisa Nazareno, San Antonio Express-News, June 20, 2003

2. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Rndom House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

3. Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons: The rising clout of Canada’s religious right, by Marci McDonald, Walrus Magazine, October 2006

New Book Reveals Harper's Links to American Religious Right

In November of 2006 a CBS reporter visited Toronto and wrote an article entitled: Evangelicals to the North; With Bush ally as Prime Minister New Christian Right Rises Up.

When things get bad in the United States, it is reassuring to turn to Canada, a country with a high standard of living, a small military and a national health care plan. Canada always seemed to be, if a bit duller than America, also a bit saner.

But this is changing. The new Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper, inspired by the neocons to the south, appears determined to visit the worst excesses of George Bush's presidency on his own country.

He goes on to discuss all of the changes he had made to both foreign and domestic policy based on scripture and not reason. He discusses the American Christian Right and their new "love of Canada:

And in the Harper government they have found not only a willing convert but an important ally. Harper's hold on power, like that of George Bush, is shaky. He too has no clear mandate to transform Canada, but this has not stopped his minority government from steadily undermining social programs and a once-enlightened foreign policy that liberal Americans could only envy.

The tools he is using are familiar to many Americans, who stood sleepily by as Pat Robertson and other religious bigots hijacked the Republican Party and moved into the legislative and executive branches of government. As I walk the windy streets of Toronto I wonder if those who push past me will wake up and see in Harper's government our own malaise or watch passively as Canada becomes a demented reflection of George Bush's America.

Sadly we watched passively as Canada became a "demented reflection of George Bush's America." Much of the reason for that is because our media allowed this government to work in almost total secrecy and though they saw the horrendous actions of Canada's religious right, they kept quiet not wanting to offend someones spiritual beliefs.

Everyone has a right to believe what they want to believe but when they are in government and decide to force those beliefs on citizens who don't share them, it's a problem. They have even attacked other Christian groups, who don't follow every single word in the Bible to the letter.

Marci McDonald's new book; The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada has arrived in book stores and is a must read for every Canadian. She explains how the American religious right has channelled funds to Canadian religious organizations, who in turn channelled funds and support to the Harper government.

But they expected something in return and Harper has not disappointed.

Antonia Zerbisias has an excellent column in the Toronto Star, discussing McDonald's book. (Zerbisias was one of the few in the media who recognized what was happening and wrote of it even before the release of the book)

The Armageddon Factor, which examines the religious right across the faiths and how Stephen Harper’s government has forged bonds with it, comes after weeks of reports on Conservatives opposition to abortion and family planning, the defunding of activist womens’ groups, the withdrawal of subsidies to gay pride events across the country, the cuts to KAIROS and the publication of an unprecedented amount of grants to Bible schools.

“My problem was, as my book went to bed, headlines were coming daily,” McDonald says over the phone from her Toronto home. “All my worries about having to prove my case that this government is intent on cultivating the social
conservative constituency in this country were nothing to worry about. They were doing it so openly that you could hardly keep up with the headlines.”

When Stockwell Day was named treasurer, it was a clear signal from Harper that our own 'Armageddon' was about to take place. And when the media touted this as a good thing, I knew we were in very serious trouble because it meant that no one was going to speak up for us.

Instead, they were going to allow the worst of the Old Testament to demolish the core of Canadian identity, and not because they had grown weary from sounding the alarm, but because they had chosen to look the other way from the beginning.

And one of the things they should have sounded the alarm over was the fact that these religious extremists, also known as the government of Canada and their supporters, believe that we are Narnia from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and that Canada is the place where the End Times will occur.

“Canada seems to be the only country to have its geography described in the Bible,’’ notes McDonald, not entirely joking. “Canada must fulfill its Biblical destiny. That’s why evangelicals want to see Canada declared a Christian nation.’’

Don’t think it can’t happen. There is, officially, no separation between church and state in Canada, despite what many assume. “I think we should be vigilant,” says McDonald. “We have to decide what kind of a country we want to live in. We have to stay on top of these issues because this is a government wedded to secrecy. (My emphasis)

So be sure to buy this book, borrow this book, or steal this book (don't steal this book). But above all read this book and share it with everyone you know. The media has chosen to ignore this for four years, but we can no longer afford to.

I'm a Radical! How Cool is That?

Apparently the Reformers have sent out a fundraising letter after uncovering some nefarious plot by someone who has contributed money to the Liberal Party, and is in cahoots with the CBC. I think she also knows where Jimmy Hoffa is buried and who really killed JFK.

But this is the funny part:

It has now come to our attention that Mrs. Pynenburg is the Vice-President of the National Women's Liberal Commission, and a proud member of Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper (CRUSH), a radical anti-Stephen Harper group.

Not the National Women's Liberal Commission! Oh no, say it ain't so. Lynch her now.

Mary Pynenburg is a Facebook friend and she is wonderful. And like me she is not only "a proud member of Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper", but also Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament.

I don't know the story of the poll, but it can't be much different than the ones that have been flooding the media, conducted by the Manning Centre (Manning as in Reform Party/Stephen Harper Manning)

And CRUSH is hardly radical. I write for them on Unseat Harper (we're also on Twitter) and I donate $25.00 a month to the Liberal Party. If that makes me a radical, then so be it.

I've always wanted to be a "radical" and if the Reformers want to put that in a fundraising letter they can go ahead. I might even throw in a few bucks if they're that hard up.

Now where's my Abbie Hoffman T-shirt and go-go boots. There's gonna' be a revolution! But first I need a nap.

Stephen Harper, Leo Strauss and Reductio ad Hitlerum

What do close advisers to Stephen Harper and George W. Bush have in common? They reflect the disturbing teachings of Leo Strauss, the German-Jewish émigré who spawned the neoconservative movement." Donald Gutstein (1)

Those words are certainly true but I would also ask another question. What does Leo Strauss and the advisers to Stephen Harper and George W. Bush have in common? They reflect the disturbing philosophy of Joseph Goebbels. And most of Joseph Goebbels brilliance as a propagandist came from reading Gustave Le Bon, and exploiting his study of mass mentality.

Gustave points out that individuals in a crowd may range in intellect, but when presented as a mass to a common cause they become homogenized: In the collective mind the intellectual aptitudes of the individuals, and in consequence their individuality, are weakened. The heterogeneous is swamped by the homogeneous, and the unconscious qualities obtain the upper hand ... This very fact that crowds possess in common ordinary qualities explains why they can never accomplish acts demanding a high degree of intelligence ... In crowds it is stupidity and not mother-wit that is accumulated. (2)

Hence the notion of not just the "masses" but the "ignorant masses", reduced to ignorance by a common agitator.

Leo Strauss would develop a philosophical argument which he called Reductio ad Hitlerum which included playing the Hitler card. But Strauss also contends that not everything Adolf Hitler did was bad, so it would be wrong to conclude that something is bad just because Hitler did it. Actions can become "darkened by the shadow of Hitler" he warned.

So when neoconservative philosophy is attributed to Strauss, it's OK. He taught at American universities, and no matter what he taught it is legitimized. But as soon as you compare neoconservative principles to Joesph Goebbels, they cry foul, despite the fact that much of what Strauss taught is pure Nazi propaganda, that has been "darkened by the shadow of Hitler". And of course also darkened by the shadow of the Holocaust.

I'm not going to deny that Leo Strauss was a brilliant man, but I believe that in many ways he was simply the conduit for Goebbels, which is why so many legitimate followers of Strauss will question much of what has been attributed to him, especially when it comes to the actions of the Bush administration.

So I'm going to remove the shadow of Hitler and the Holocaust and outline the techniques used by the ultimate propagandist, Joseph Paul Goebbels. The similarities between him and the advisers of most neoconservative politicians are simply too vast to ignore.

This will be the first of a series.

Phenomena of a Hypnotic Order

The difference between Leo Strauss and Joseph Goebbels, is that Strauss's theories were philosophic, while Goebbels were scientific. Strauss was inspired by other philosophers, while Goebbels was inspired by a scientist, Gustave Le Bons.

As Le Bons himself states: I have endeavoured to examine the difficult problem presented by crowds in a purely scientific manner—that is, by making an effort to proceed with method, and without being influenced by opinions, theories, and doctrines. (2)

So scientifically speaking, when discussing crowd mentality, he suggests that individuals in the crowd are rendered unconscious, and it is this unconsciousness that becomes their collective strength. They are now devoid of reason and this is the best state for a skillful orator to do their work. Le Bons refers to this as the 'phenomena of hypnotic order'.

So ideally when trying to stir up the masses, you need to get them into an hypnotic state, and one way of doing this is with hand gestures. In the "mesmerizing trade" it's referred to as Covert Hypnotism. Goebbels mastered it. Look at his rhythmic hand gestures in the following video. Very unusual.

Of course Goebbels would say that the power comes from the "harmony of word, facial expressions and gestures", but at this particular rally he speaks of the mass as being in a state of "total spiritual mobilization". Aka: hypnotized.



Now watch Adolf Hitler, doing the same thing. He starts out in a humble stance and then builds up the momentum. But again watch his hands (Not too closely though. I wouldn't want you to start clucking like a chicken or anything)



The gravelly voice was the result of mustard gas during the war and Hitler's first handler, Dietrich Eckart taught him how to use it to his advantage. But every now and then he has to stop to cough. Eckart was a playwright and stage director, so gave him a flair for the dramatic.

Now just as kind of a funny aside, following is a video of Stephen Harper. I don't really know what his oratory style is because he rarely speaks to us, and certainly would not speak to us in this manner if he thought we were listening. This video was shot on the QT. But watch his hands and yes I am LMAO.



Sources:

1. Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy. The Tyee, Donald Gutstein, November 29, 2009

2. A Study of the Popular Mind, By: Gustave Le Bon, Book One: The Mind of Crowds