A New Consensus


The administrative class delights in imposing its views on the rest of us, especially when it involves our private lives. Small businesses are made to prepare wedding cakes for gays; young children are forced to study sexual practices from which they ought to be shielded; workers are made to attend DIE classes in which, if they are white, they are accused of racism and exploitation—even as they are the ones being victimized by prejudice. We live in a world turned upside-down, and unless we can reach a new consensus on truth, it can only end in chaos.

For the Woke class that now governs us, it is not enough that gays and transvestites—now treated as privileged minorities—are granted complete equality and full human rights. What they seem to want, and what the administrative class imposes upon the rest of us, is tyranny over heterosexuals. All LGBTQ mob demands are granted by administrators, judges, CEOs, and politicians, who are afraid to refuse them and then be labelled “anti”-minority. Even when it imposes harm upon the rest of us, it is the wishes of gays and transvestites Uber Alles.

The faux trans ‘right’ to use the bathrooms and locker rooms of their choosing is a case in point. Time and again, administrators impose this woke idea upon us. In so doing, they cause irreparable harm to young men and women when they are both innocent and vulnerable. University of Kentucky female swimmer Riley Gaines was denied multiple titles during her final season of NCAA women’s competition—only because she was forced to compete against a 6’5” man named Liam Thomas—who changed his name to Lia. ESPN recently celebrated Women’s History Month by promoting a special about Thomas, the man who destroyed women in the pool. Gaines, who has nearly 1M Twitter followers, responded:

“Lia Thomas is not a brave, courageous woman who EARNED a national title. He is an arrogant, cheat who STOLE a national title from hardworking, deserving woman. The NCAA is responsible. If I was a woman working at ESPN, I would walk out. You’re spineless ESPN.”

In a real sense, Gaines and other young women like her have lost their innocence. An important part of that innocence is the need to perceive the opposite sex in idealized terms. For young women, worthy male suitors are seen as confident, selfless, and romantic. Such feelings are the basis for a huge array of practices within our civilization; everything from subtle expressions of warmth and support to grand gestures of protection and even self- sacrifice. Think of Leonardo DiCaprio’s final scene in the iconic movie Titanic, when he chooses certain death in frigid North Atlantic waters to save the woman he loves. Absent such innocent faith in the goodness and beauty of the opposite sex, life would be rather bitter and pointless.

It is difficult to maintain the illusion of chivalry and romance while constantly exposed to the coarser elements of anatomical function that are an unavoidable part of being in a school locker room. This is tough enough in the presence of members of our own sex—but to strip naked, shower, and use the toilet before the opposite sex is truly intolerable. Yet that is what school administrators and politicians are forcing on young people so that LGBTQ students feel ‘equal’ and ‘safe’. This is a bizarrely mistaken and evil idea.

The central fact is that privacy is a basic human need. Privacy and the sense of dignity that goes with it are innate, inviolable moral goods. The left and its legion of enforcers cannot understand this or any other human need because they serve a secular cult derived from Marxism that is abstract and inhuman. The left attacks whatever is genuinely human in its lust to destroy all obstacles to power. Over the past several decades, this has included the Christian church, capitalism, the family, and patriotism, but now extends even to the modesty of young people. Marxists must turn them and the rest of us into inhuman cogs in the vast state-run machinery it envisions.

Many U.S. states and Canadian provinces have passed laws ensuring transgender bathroom access. Such laws allow people to choose locker rooms based upon a personal sense of whether they are male or female, instead of the longstanding practice of designating locker rooms for use by men or women based upon obvious ontological truths. This ignores that our society has long recognized biological realities preventing males and females from being forced together while bathing, changing clothes, using the restroom, or engaging in other activities where privacy is compromised. This common sense belief in modesty and privacy —not animosity toward any demographic—impels our societal insistence upon separate locker rooms and restrooms. Failure to protect privacy results in serious embarrassment and even trauma; and in certain damage to the emotional development of young people.

Privacy at all ages—especially during childhood and adolescence—is one of mankind’s most important values. It is key to preserving idealism and faith, innocent values that are fundamental to human survival. It is hardly difficult to imagine the converse; a world in which the charm and joy of innocent love is replaced by raw sexuality and materialism. That sort of sexuality is core to countless genres of vulgar and degrading music depicting young men as “players” and women as “whores”. Western youth are indoctrinated into coarse sexual materialism not only in rap but also through most of TV, movies, advertising, and social media.

Romantic love cannot exist while human beauty is compromised by observing a man or woman urinating, defecating, or engaged in other degrading acts. This damage goes far beyond mere humiliation; and then there is the real risk of sexual assault, which has occurred in girl’s bathrooms and locker rooms open to men.

Unisex and transgender facilities are not just something to which we all must become accustomed. They are an attack upon the life-sustaining contract of courtliness providing meaning and purpose to humanity. This may sound like mere prudishness or arcane chivalry; but let me assure you otherwise. It is the very basis of Western civilization, and those who seek to damage this contract are ignorant, evil, or both.

Pew Research recently stated that North American society sums up the genders as “strong men; caring women.” Here is a composite of research studies addressing not just perceptions, but psychologically profiling thousands of people in statistically valid samples and what they say are masculine vs feminine traits. Masculine ones include strength, courage, independence, leadership, and assertiveness. Feminine ones include gracefulness, gentleness, empathy, humility, and sensitivity.

Let that settle in for a moment. You can see how our national personas have morphed from the character profile of strong men to the hypersensitivity of caring women; this coincides with the escalated role of women in Western society, supported by the polite, cooperative submission of former male dominance. Such is Marxism. Their utopia includes no competitive striving, no meritocratic jockeying for position: just come to accept quite a bit less spiritually, emotionally, intellectually, and abandon the pursuit of success or self- improvement. Rest obediently in the knowledge that you are not leaving anyone behind through your lazy sacrifice. That is your new duty: not independence, free will, love of country, or other beliefs. In the new West, they call this Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE).

Western men have accepted their diminished role without a fight—indeed with complicity if not outright enthusiasm. The initiatives, cooperation, support, and votes of male citizens were necessary for every civil rights and equality cause. Men did not resist; they proposed these causes through law and government enforcement. These male protagonists, supporters and victors were not in fact racist or misogynistic; they were just those who gave their lives and proposed all these legislative acts and passed them into law to further the ideal of sexual equality.

Our English founders and their subsequent generations of European descent forged North America. They invented and created the machines of industry and commerce and the means of production to foster the world’s greatest economy under unprecedented liberty. Saddening is the media portrayal of PM Trudeau that male nationalists are sinister purveyors of old systemic problems in Canada. Now those male European descendants commit 70% of all suicides as supposedly the entrenched, privileged patriarchy that must be further diminished.

Where did they go wrong? Did they let their country down? What more should they be doing?

They seem not to be holding any others back but have little left to give. We desperately need them to not give up on freedom, despite constant disparagement. We are witnessing a new rise of authoritarianism in opposition to freedom. Men do not want to be ruled. Look at the submission to Covid mandates: this was a purely feminine reaction favouring security. Today, we are on the very brink of total submission to authority.

“Please keep me safe! That is all I ask!”

Men meekly subjected themselves to loss of freedom imposed by a vastly overreaching government. We consented to be so governed. We forgot the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin:

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”

The despair of men who have lost their role and identity as independent and strong seems to be cheered on in the guilt-ridden media who see masculinity as sickness. Their concern is that men are not adapting as anticipated—some of us dare to resist the exhortation to become “feminists” like our Prime Minister, who famously quipped:

“I’ll keep saying I’m a feminist until there’s no reaction.”

Next, we focus upon a great distinction between genders: the noble concept of honour is archetypically male. This is a basic spiritual aspect of masculinity; not the disgrace that the scientific press would have honour reduced to as “aggressive behaviour” or “toxic masculinity”.

Honour is a voluntary constraint upon behaviour that is in the unspoken creed of being a decent man, entailing sacrifice to achieve something close to virtue. When one has honour, decisions are not as complicated because all the wrong actions are removed from consideration. Even if it takes a moment to remember it, you still have honour, and so are duty bound and glad for its grounding and binding effect.

Honour can be lost, even through a decision not to act when honour dictated decisive action. It is the most serious offence to have dishonoured ourselves, where a man’s sense of worth is impugned. For honourable men, external justice for actions is accepted but secondary to our own personal disgrace.

Honour is an instrumental part of an understood creed for men in our culture. It is fast disappearing under steady attack in the feminine West today, where honour is considered archaic, limiting, and again—too masculine. Go along, embrace weakness and compliance. It is so much easier to just obey. Huxley’s Brave New World, conceived a century ago, is now come fully to fruition.

Honour, like religion, can disappear from a society when its believers perish. When we look for strong young men to defend Western values, it matters not to honourable men that they lose favour with those who do not hold honour in high esteem. No male demographic wants to be cast as victims or lacking honour, but the nonsense thrown about to diminish most groups is meant to oppress them, as is the welfare state which ruins and then discards them.

Despite constant efforts to divide us, all men who share Western values will join with a return to masculinity and honour in society; indeed, studies show that virtually all women want strong men as mates rather than weak supplicants. It is a minority leftist position that views masculinity as toxic and thus deserving of eradication.

Where would we be today without those incredible generations of brave, masculine, honourable men who forged our society? Look at there they took us. Now it is in our hands to preserve it despite the ever-intrusive grasp of government tentacles.

Honourable men must not take another step backwards. We need a resurgence of original Western values whereby government does not rule, but instead serves; and it is going to take masculine virtues to make that happen by taking a firm stand to restore the Canada we remember prior to 2015: liberty, individualism, limited governance, and honour.

So how then do we set about building a new consensus that both takes us into the future and expresses these traditional cultural values in a modern free and democratic society?

We must first recognize that governments do not at all mind when citizens quarrel. In fact, that ‘old divide and conquer scheme’ is Ottawa’s favourite tactic for keeping us too busy fighting one another to notice the corruption rife within their ranks. They prefer that we not speak about ‘freedom’ or ‘liberty’ because such ideas are antithetical to bureaucratic mandates, institutional power-grabs, and rhetorical appeals to authority. So long as the Orwellian news media establishment and our Machiavellian political class conspire to paint liberty as selfish or hateful, then the powers that be largely succeed in twisting the meaning of freedom into a love for Big Government policies or submission to the state. However, when everyday people begin to set aside their petty differences and instead turn their fury upon those in power, real political change is inexorable.

There is an understandable tendency to view the growth of government-directed censorship, warrantless surveillance, and political persecution as proof that we will soon be under the yoke of full-fledged totalitarianism. That is a real and threatening possibility. However, petulant and steel-booted policies meant to terrorize and dishearten citizens also reflect a growing fear among the ‘ruling elite’.

Rapid technological advancements have given government authorities unsavoury tools for pursuing unconstitutional, illegal, and immoral policies against their citizens; but those authorities would not be so openly hostile to the public or flagrantly dismissive of their constitutional obligations if they were not already terrified.

They should be.

The single greatest social transformation in several centuries is occurring right now. A transnational consensus is growing among ordinary citizens that coercive power is dangerous—wherever it exists.

No longer does a Cold War mentality corral national populations into an “East v. West” or “Us v. Them” cognitive prison. Western governments that conveniently partition the world into ‘democracies’ and ‘autocracies’ betrayed their own distinction when they imposed COVID policies as brutally stringent as those of any communist dictatorship.

No longer do our puppeteers successfully divide us into two opposing camps—one fighting unrestrained government power and the other battling unbridled corporate might. The illusion of self-government has been shattered, and a broader public appreciation has taken hold. It recognizes the convergence of financial and political interests at the expense of democratic principles and God given human rights.

No longer are those most eager to profit from the death and destruction of war capable of flipping a switch to turn patriotic citizens into willing sacrifices for a “ruling class” that never has our shared best interests in mind.

Western governments know this to be true. It is why the U.K’s new Online Safety Act criminalizes publication of ‘false information’, unless it derives from mainstream media corporations.

It is why the EU’s Digital Services Act seeks to stifle public debate on social media platforms.

It is why the U.S. Senate is pushing through legislation to ostensibly shield children from online threats and protect adults from the dangers of Chinese propaganda, but is actually meant to censor ‘politically incorrect’ points of view from the public square that is the internet.

It is why the Trudeau government spends billions of taxpayer dollars annually to weaponize the CBC and private media as its own propaganda engine. Meanwhile, it passed laws heavily censoring what news and information Canadians get to see on line and via social media. Next will be criminal prosecution of those who dare to spread “misinformation” , “disinformation” , and “hate speech”, all of which are of course to be exclusively defined by government.

It is why governments are funding AI research programs to seek and destroy state-defined misinformation.

It is why the White House successfully pressured Amazon to suppress sale of disfavoured books.

Finally, it is why political figures across the West became apoplectic when Tucker Carlson visited Alberta after Woke busy bodies tried to prevent him from even entering Canada. The American left then tried to have Carlson’s citizenship revoked just for conducting a journalistic interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Such is the state of free speech in the West that a panoply of petty tyrants representing the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and continental Europe all called for Carlson to face severe punishment for having the temerity to engage in unsanctioned journalism. The blurry line between “democracies” and “autocracies” has all but vanished.

It should not need to be said that no society can be described as “free” unless it protects speech. Similarly, there can be no free speech unless the unlicensed are free to criticize and disagree with the state. Any government claiming a monopoly on truth—as most did during Covid—is hostile to dissent, debate, and democratic self-rule.

Through a large measure of needless pain and discomfort, national populations have begun to discover this hard truth for themselves.

“Green energy” induced inflation has cut a hole in every struggling citizen’s pocket. Green energy inspired regulations have devastated the livelihood of every worker.

Green energy zealots have targeted Western farmers, miners, labourers, oil riggers, pipe- liners, and machinists for cancelation.

The World Economic Forum’s ‘green new world order’ seeks to eradicate private property, private communications, private transportation, and private transactions.

That is why we in North America must join our European brethren on our green tractors in protest. The heart of human freedom is at stake; and increasingly, Western populations are in agreement that their governments, corporations, and media are the very source of the problem—and that a new consensus can provide the ultimate solution to global tyranny.

Share this article