and granted it would lead to an actual vioence

when all you have left is to fight, or to flee then maybe we're just being subject to the wrong game altogether at that point. Psyops everywhere.

If someone does hate you but they’re not allowed to say so, how can anyone possibly overcome their differences? Perhaps that’s the point

@@je__. : Why would it "lead to actual violence" ???

Completely true!!

It is indeed nightmarish.

Christ is king

But all countries will have this law, so where do we go then.

I had a very rough childhood.I don't stay quiet anymore.I challenge their thinking.

Do not accept this . Get rid of the current socialist government.

I absolutely concur.

F that! We had struggled sessions against us since 2015 with women rising against us to blame us for all the illnesses on this planet. ...and then other races and sex orientations and religions. We have been taken out... May those who have been lifted above make a just world... And if not ...the woman can enjoy the dystonia ...we will be dead soon ...by poverty or war

Men need to take back control from women. Women and the way they skirt responsibility and take no accountability is the reason we are all in this mess.

Women need to stop mothering adults instead of having a family.

Easier said than done.

Cultural revolution and long March through the institutions.

the head of the Kamloops RCMP is retiring and went on the news telling Canadians the judges are mandated essentially to not lock up people. they want the least amount of time for the crimes because they are not repeat offenders they are victims of addiction or society. the stats are crazy so few offenders doing 99.9% of the crimes they get caught and are our by lunch. but like firearms the Liberal NDP do not listen. and ad to that Jagmeet forced the police to stop the one thing that worked in gang areas stopping drugs n guns "carding" since its not jagmeets neighborhood he called it racist and forced bill blair to stop it

Woke is a mental illness. In a group it is a cult.

As a juror I would have filed a complaint

As a group, judges are the worst and NOT that bright. Only book smart in a very narrow way

Well said!

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern: every class is unfit to govern." ~ Lord Acton "The ideal Government of all reflective men, from Aristotle onward, is one which lets the individual alone - one which barely escapes being no government at all." ~H. L. Mencken

Fecking spot-on 😮

Unfortunately, many in the younger generations do not want limited government. They want a government that will take care of them, feed them, pay off their student loans and punish anyone who hurts their feelings.

@@dionbram I believe Acton's adage could be slightly expanded on: the only class potentially fit to govern is that of parents, and their fiefdom extends no further than their own family and property. Many different types of government can work at that scale, even communism.

Unfortunately he never got to talk... Very poorly done on Jordan's part.

@@thesybeagree, I saw it all waiting for his intervention

​@@thesybe It seems Jordan had invited him to take part much more than just this conversation, considering the teasers I've seen of Konstantin being asked to play devils advocate on Jordans book tour. I think this is amazing and very healthy for Jordan behind (and in front of) the scenes.

Fighting for your rights requires firepower, not words. I pity the fool who thinks freedom and rights comes from words and legislation.

@@devilsoffspring5519 what century do you live in, can I join you there? Here in the year of our Lord 2024 they've got drones that can snipe you before you even pull out your peashooter.

human rights: In most cases, it seems that this term refers to certain (often vague) moral or legal entitlements that humans possess in relation to having or obtaining something, or to act in a certain way. This phrase has been used increasing more ubiquitously over the past century or so, with the implication that every human being, without exception, has identical and inalienable entitlements. However, this is a very obvious fallacy, as it invariably ignores the hierarchy of society. For example, very few persons would doubt that parents have the right to discipline their children. However, their children OBVIOUSLY do not have the converse right, to chastize or instruct their parents. Therefore, it is nonsensical to speak of human rights in general, when each and every individual person has unique rights, depending on his or her place in the hierarchy of society. The notion of rights is intimately intertwined with morality (or to be more accurate, the concept of dharma). So, in the above example, it is in accordance with morality/dharma for a parent to disciple his or her children, and if required, administer some form of punishment. However, it would be objectively immoral for a child of any age (even a geriatric) to admonish his or her parents, except, perhaps, if a parent was afflicted with a disease or disability that inhibited the parent’s cognitive capabilities, such as dementia. Cf. “dharma”. According to a criminal organisation called the “United Nations”, there are thirty so-called “human rights”, listed in a document entitled “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, but objectively speaking, only a couple of the listed articles of “rights” are predicated on the only ONE and ONLY human right, and that is the right for any person (that is any human being or non-human animal) to not be harmed unjustifiably. As is to be expected of a declaration by a bunch of deluded, ignorant fools, there is nowhere in the preamble any semblance of a stated definition of “human rights”. This is practically a universal occurrence in the fields of sociology, law, philosophy, ethics, and even in the so-called hard sciences. Just see the dramatic contrast between almost every academic essay paper and thesis/book ever published, compared with this Book of All Books! In order to be charitable to that evil body, the United Nations, it is probably fortuitous that they failed to proffer a definition of “rights”, since the “definition” that they are likely to have conjured-up in their feeble intellects would be incompetent, if not truly laughable.

@@devilsoffspring5519 Agreed, I've been saying this for a while. Unfortunately, the people here are only good at turning the cheek so they can get slapped twice.

As an alumni of Queens University (professor Pardy’s employer), I can say that he shines brightly as a beacon representing diversity of thought. While my alma mater is far from perfect, their decision to work with professor Pardy has always been a pride point of mine.

deserve neither and will lose both

and will usually lose both.

Also Slava Ukraine 😏

@@taraosborne4559 Canada has multiple viable parties unlike the US. The "Uniparty" charge is tired... 🙄

This is terrifying 😮

@@fahimp3 in UK we have only the illusion of democratic choice, the powerful play both sides, the supranational top-down imposition of The Uniparty happens no matter who is elected. Our leaders prefer WEF to Westminster. The Uniparty always wins. Yeah, it is tired. We need Revolution.

@@fahimp3 Because you have more flavors of ice cream doesn't mean that someone didn't milk the bull.. Fancy a milkshake?

2+2=5

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Gold comment haha!!!

Great line, I hope I can remember it if the opportunity arises. Along the same lines, I am frequently reminded of this quote: "Ah, this is obviously some strange usage of the word 'safe' that I wasn't previously aware of." -Douglas Adams Cults use your vocabulary, but they don't use your dictionary.

@@dionbram oh, you’re gonna quote Arthur Dent at me? Well for that, you can feel free to use the line whenever you want!

Crazy how true that has become

@Investing-qg7xo We spent some time on "Animal Farm" in school. Our teacher focused on the representation of Communism. Have you read anything by Dr. Thomas Sowell? He goes on about the "intelligencia."

@@TheMrTEA-dc2eb yes, his basic economics should be required reading for all high school students

@Investing-qg7xo I picked up, "Ever Wonder Why?" and I love how humorous Dr. Sowell's explanations are. Thank you for the civil exchange.

@@TheMrTEA-dc2eb all the best friend!

Well, it's wonderful in my home country of AUSTRALIA - the people are all very humble, religious and respectful folk. Oh, and incidentally, pigs can fly.🤪

Feelings should never count as a reason. I think all parents should read "the gulag archipelago". Family turning on family!!

Remember people called the police on their neighbors for having people over during 2020-2021 and were happy with themselves...

@@waynotraffo9221 Shameful to rat out a neighbor for minor things!! Drug sales, making explosives, assaulting someone or hurting children, I understand!!

​@@grammadrm4974 Yes indeed! The Gulag Archipelago should be required reading for every student to graduate from high school. But Solzhenitsyn brings up ideas like God, and good and evil, and right and wrong and totalitarian regimes, so, like the comment up above, I suppose that would happen only when the proverbial pigs fly (or become 'more equal than others' - you know, to mix metaphors, haha! 🤷🏽‍♀️)

Canadian government is a mockery of governments. It's time for a new government that SERVES the people, and not corporate agendas.

I don't think that's being hidden.

'government never creates a law to not ABUSE it soon'

​@thyme2gogh But the conversation often goes like this: Us: this can be misused to target good people doing nothing wrong. Them: no, no one's going to use it That way. Us: let's rewrite it then so that can't happen. Them: no, what are you, evil? Do you hate children so much you Want to see them harmed?

The government has created so many complex and convoluted laws that every man constantly breaks some sort of law. The government can then use selective enforcement to target its enemies while allowing its friends to slip through. This allows the government to appear to have some legitimacy while having the power of a totalitarian regime.

Like the pandemic preparedness ruse

I read about the insanity of the Soviet Union and Mao's China and it's so cruelly bizarre that you almost break out laughing. The utter stupidity and viciousness of those governments and of the common people were unfathomable. I thought it could never happen here. But I was wrong, and I am even seeing it in people who I know and love. There is this darkness that is settling on the West.

@@johnsmithers8913Well said & I totally agree

@@johnsmithers8913 At least in America (USA) there are people who will be taking up arms when SHTF. In Canada people are just rolling over. They have been for some times. The ones with a spine and sense leave.

Which "draconian and dystopian laws that are being implemented all over the world" are you referring to?

Yes, Dr Peterson please take care of yourself and enjoy time with your wife and family. We are living in crazy times.

⁠@@hughmac13 From this side of the pond, there are Orwellian “Hate Speech” laws being rolled out in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland and which have a very one-sided definition of hate, “Low Emissions Zones” are being rolled out that impede on the personal autonomy of the working classes, Germany just passed the “Self-Determination Act” that fines people €10,000 for “dead-naming” trans-identifying people, meanwhile we’ve had six months of Islamists being allowed to shut down entire blocks of major cities while Jews get told by police to go away because their presence is a provocation. We’re living in 1930s Berlin.

I agree, I think Jordan is looking I’ll again. Let’s pray for him and his family. Amen.

@@mariaguzman1552 His spring tour looks grueling. How lovely and kind of you folks to be caring so much. I fear too he's driven to do what he can, while he can.

Plato called it!

Exactly 💥

What are they?

@@hintonoriginal if you either intimately know and understand the use of the relevant knowledge OR have a buddy/employee who does; the power you can have over other people is scary once you understand the implications of that @angelafraser1603 @hintonoriginal

@@hintonoriginal profit and power

In the public/regulatory sector, it is primarily power and prestige instead of profit, as bureaucrats are paid a salary based on position level (no distributed profits to be had in the public sector). The more funds, staff, responsibility and scope of work managed or directed by a regulator the higher the salary and prestige in the role. Most public sector employees loathe to downsize their department even when staff are under-utilised. Instead, under utilised staff will be encouraged to work toward increasing the frequency or amount of oversight, or increase the requirements or complexity to the regulation. This will bring interest, depth, breadth (etc) to their work, which feels good to them, but it definitely increases the regulatory burden without improving the outcomes or matching the purpose of the initial regulation.

🐟 22. ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNANCES: SOCIALISM (and its more extreme form, communism) is intrinsically evil, because it is based on the ideology of social and economic egalitarianism, which is both a theoretical and a practical impossibility. Equality exists solely in abstract concepts such as mathematics and arguably in the sub-atomic realm. Many proponents of socialism argue that it is purely an economic system and therefore independent of any particular form of governance. However, it is inconceivable that socialism/communism could be implemented on a nationwide scale without any form of government intervention. If a relatively small number of persons wish to unite in order to form a commune or worker-cooperative, that is their prerogative, but it could never work in a country with a large population, because there will always exist entrepreneurs desirous of engaging in wealth-building enterprises. Even a musician who composes a hit tune wants his song to succeed and earn him inordinate wealth. Socialism reduces individual citizens to utilities, who, in practice, are used to support the ruling elite, who are invariably despotic scoundrels, and very far from ideal leaders (i.e. compassionate and righteous monarchs). Those citizens who display talent in business or the arts are either oppressed, or their gifts are coercively utilized by the corrupt state. Despite purporting to be a fair and equitable system of wealth distribution, those in leadership positions seem to live a far more luxurious lifestyle than the mass of menial workers. Wealth is effectively stolen from the rich. Most destructively, virtuous and holy teachings (“dharma”, in Sanskrit) are repressed by the irreligious and ILLEGITIMATE “government”. The argument that some form of government WELFARE programme is essential to aid those who are unable to financially-support themselves for reasons beyond their control, is fallacious. A righteous ruler (i.e. a saintly monarch) will ensure the welfare of each and every citizen by encouraging private welfare. There is no need for a king to extort money from his subjects in order to feed and clothe the impoverished. Of course, in the highly-unlikely event that civilians are unwilling to help a person in dire straits, the king would step-in to assist that person, as one would expect from a patriarch (father of his people). The head of any nation ought to be the penultimate patriarch, not a selfish buffoon. DEMOCRACY is almost as evil, because, just as the rabble favoured the murderous Barabbas over the good King Jesus, the ignorant masses will overwhelmingly vote for the candidate which promises to fulfil their inane desires, rather than one which will enforce the law, and promote a wholesome and just society. Read Chapter 12 for the most authoritative and concise exegesis of law, morality, and ethics, currently available. Even in the miraculous scenario where the vast majority of the population are holy and righteous citizens, it is still immoral for them to vote for a seemingly-righteous leader. This is because that leader will not be, by definition, a king. As clearly and logically explicated in the previous chapter of this Holy Scripture, MONARCHY is the only lawful form of governance. If an elected ruler is truly righteous, he will not be able to condone the fact that the citizens are paying him to perform a job (which is a working-class role), and that an inordinate amount of time, money and resources are being wasted on political campaigning. Furthermore, an actual ruler does not wimpishly pander to voters - he takes power by (divinely-mandated) force, as one would expect from the penultimate alpha-male in society (the ultimate alpha-male being a priest). The thought of children voting for who will be their parents or teachers, would seem utterly RIDICULOUS to the average person, yet most believe that they are qualified to choose their own ruler - they are most assuredly not. Just as a typical child fails to understand that a piece of sweet, juicy, healthy, delicious fruit is more beneficial for them than a cone of pus-infested, fattening, diabetes-inducing ice-cream, so too can the uneducated proletariat not understand that they are unqualified to choose their own leader, even after it is logically explained to them (as it is in this chapter, as well as in the previous chapter). And by “uneducated”, it is simply meant that they are misguided in the realities of life and in righteous living (“dharma”, in Sanskrit), not in facts and figures or in technical training. Intelligence doesn't necessarily correlate to wisdom. No socialist or democratic government will educate its citizens sufficiently well that the citizens have the knowledge of how to usurp their rule. To put it frankly, democracy is rule by the “lowest common denominator”. It should be obvious that ANARCHY can never ever succeed, because even the smallest possible social unit (the nuclear family) requires a dominator. Any family will fall-apart without a strict male household head. In fact, without the husband/father, there is no family, by definition. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”. The same paradigm applies to the extended family, which depends on a strong patriarchal figure (customarily, the eldest or most senior male). Likewise with clans, tribes, villages, towns, cities, and nations or countries. Unfortunately, there are many otherwise-intelligent persons who honestly believe that an ENTIRE country can smoothly run without a leader in place. Any sane person can easily understand that even a nuclear family is unable to function properly without a head of the house, what to speak of a populous nation. The reason for anarchists' distrust of any kind of government is due to the corrupt nature of democratic governments, and the adulteration of the monarchy in recent centuries. However, if anarchists were to understand that most all so-called “kings/queens” in recent centuries were not even close to being true monarchs, they may change their stance on that inane “system”. Most of the problems in human society are directly or indirectly attributable to this relatively modern phenomenon (non-monarchies), since it is the government’s role and sacred DUTY to enforce the law (see Chapter 12), and non-monarchical governments are themselves unlawful. One of the many sinister characteristics of democracy, socialism, and other evil forms of governance, is the desire for their so-called “leaders” to control, or at least influence, the private lives of every single citizen (hence the term “Nanny State”). For example, in the wicked, decadent nations in which this holy scripture was composed, The Philippine Islands and The Southland (or “Australia”, as it is known in the Latin tongue), the DEMONIC governments try, and largely succeed, in controlling the rights of parents to properly raise, discipline and punish their children according to their own morals, compulsory vaccination of infants, enforcing feminist ideology, limiting legitimate powers an employer has over his servants, subsidizing animal agriculture, persecuting religious leaders (even to imprisonment and death, believe it or not. Personally, I have been jailed thrice for executing God’s perfect and pure will), and even trying to negatively influence what people eat and wear. Not that a government shouldn’t control what its citizens wear in public, but it should ensure that they are MODESTLY dressed, according to the guidelines outlined in Chapter 28, which is hardly the case in Australia, the Philippines, and similar nations. At least ninety-nine per cent of Filipinas, for instance, are transvestinal, despite Philippines pretending to be a religious nation. Cont...

Yup once I heard them use the word person with a vagina. I felt the court ls no longer are able to maintain their autonomy and authority

Nice to know they're working hard at innovating

Ha! I can't tell if you're Canadian, American, Brit, Aussie, Scot, Irish, ........

Which ways?

Yes. Kissen is 10x better than the other

We’ve reached the “age of irrelevance” and it becomes more apparent every day. We don’t matter once we’re older. And now the government is helping the current generation relieve the aged of the fruits of their lifetimes of labour as well.

You matter to me. Your wisdom that you’ve gained in your life time matters. Our elders are so needed and valuable in our communities. Spread your knowledge to the younger generations ?

freedom of speech: the ability to speak one’s mind without fear of RETRIBUTION. Normally, freedom of speech is dependent on the prevailing governmental rules, at least at the public level. In private, freedom to speak one’s mind, is entirely contingent on the rules of the particular house or institution in question. Freedom of speech does not negate the CONSEQUENCES of one’s speech. In order to give one example, if a child berates his father, obviously, he ought to be punished for that sinful deed. In order to propose another example, a genuine king will permit his subjects to criticize his actions in a constructive manner, as long as they refrain from deliberate insults, which is a criminal offence (see Chapter 12 of "A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity"). A large proportion of humanity seems to agree that one should refrain from speaking words that incite violent acts, and that one ought not yell the word “Fire!!” in a crowded room or auditorium, purely as a practical joke. Those who believe that free speech should be totally unconditional, will not be able to sustain that opinion if his or her children spout insubordinate speech, as in the first example. So, to put it very succinctly, just as it is possible to execute immoral acts (that is to say, bodily acts such as theft, fornication, public obscenities, and murder), it is possible for a human to make verbal enunciations that are objectively immoral, far more than just those actions normally recognized by most jurisdictions, such as libel and slander. Any speech that is contrary to the principles of dharma, is unethical, and must be punished by a superior - again, few parents would excuse a child of theirs who belittled, insulted or even instruct them! Read Chapter 12 to learn the most authoritative interpretation of law/morality/ethics [“dharma”, in Sanskrit]).

Dont

Our country is also in big trouble. The WEF seems to actually calling the shots! Our e safety Comrad is a WEF puppet

It doesn't.

You have not understood any of the points made here.

Exactly

Yep, the power to define is the power to abuse. It is a license for bad faith mind reading by the justice system to abuse their ideological enemies.

Yeah, but anybody with half a brain can figure out that occupational health and safety are things that actually matter :)

@@devilsoffspring5519 When we joked about 'health and safety fascism' we were referring to the new trends like safety helmets and more importantly giving kids in school 'medications' to get them under control. Now we suffer from pathological empathy.

Tell us you satire jokes please I like to revive them lol

@@FranklinFleming-lm1yu It was less a set of jokes and more an attitude. Simply by using the phrase health and safety fascism we were already being completely satirical. We didn't actually mean it then. That is, we looked at these things more like stupid 2nd grade teachers making rules than actual authoritarianism. But today....

@@TheAnadromist lol I feel it's the same right now with the robot dogs. We joke about it now but

The effectiveness of the outcome depends on the fervour of the one in receipt of it.

@@uk2k007 sounds like class action is required rather than individual voices.

That would be hateful - and because you smelt it, you dealt it - and go to prison for life. How dare you!

​@@bradleymcgivney5305This much is true. There is likely a checkmate scenario however. Refusing or accepting to fight in a 3rd world war in return for social order?

This UKposts video is the logical approach, but the alternative is to just convince everyone that the government is more hateful than the individual

I was thinking the same thing. And even if they aren't exactly illegal, everyone will be hesitant to write anything in fear of being 'found out' or reported.

Yes,...and retroactively. What is going to change is that the internet companies have to make available to the government a year's worth of everything you said. So they can go back and find something you said a year ago if it might have been illegal then.

None of mine stay up. Seriously. I see the comment, I refresh the page or the comment thread and it’s gone. I know so many other people are having the same experience.

@@ohwellwhateverrlook at that. Your comment is right here!

Umm, they already are.

That was also my observation.

Konstantin is MI6, his father was a Yeltsin era oligarch

I love that kk sat quietly and listened to these great minds. Don't really know why he was there but appreciate his humility after he got his his hit at Putin. Lol

​@@MrRozburnglad you discovered another thing to add to the childish "everyone I don't like is a nayze/ Russian/ bot/ white supremacist/ grifter"

🤣@@MrRozburn

Kissen 10x better. You never hear him. Look him up on triggerometry

Same. I wasn't a fan of how the discussion was conducted.

Yeah. If they are willing to disregard Freedoms, that would be the way.

​@chickenmonger123 Despite his libertarian stance, Dr Pardy mentioned that his arguments for personal sovereignty and autonomy can realistically only apply to adults.

@@chickenmonger123 Children aren't allowed in bars, strip clubs, casinos, etc., is that disregarding freedom? 🤔

Smartphones and social media should be banned for young children. I say that as a libertarian.

This much more difficult and potentially problematic than you may realize. Here's an initial couple questions for you to think about. How do determine the users actual age? Next who determines what is and isn't age appropriate? We have enough controversy over just trying to label books with an reading age.

THe EU is already pushing back. puberty blockers are now banned.

Quebec has been a criminal state for decades.

When Scotland becomes woke, you KNOW the world is fucked beyond repair.

It is happening, Bidens changes to title 9 make misgendering sexual harassment.

What? No. It can’t happen here. I mean, I’ve *heard* it can’t happen here. This is the land of the free, home of the brave. Of course it can’t happen here. In the time it took me to type these sarcastic remarks… it happened here.

Already is lmfao

It already is

It’s happening seriously 🤷🏻‍♀️

😅

Depending on which side is in power.

@@chriswhite2151 The person in power at the moment. If the all obeyed laws there would be no problems!

Is sold out

It's not the conservatives you need to be listening to this. They're already on board. It's the few remaining supporters of Trudeau. That said, I don't know anyone who supports him anymore. He will lose in a landslide to Pollierve. The NDP will come in second place.

Sticks and stones break my bones, but names will never hurt me.😊

One important aspect often missed is that these laws are not created in ignorance of how they might be missed. The creators know perfectly well that these will be used to silence people who have objections to the next stages of totalitarianism on path to One World government.

Don’t be so scared.

Drug users always used drugs. Safe use sites merely gave them somewhere to do it safely. It doesn’t increase drug use, in fact the evidence shows that it is more effective than any other intervention in getting people into recovery services. But it does give them somewhere to congregate, which makes the issue appear more widespread in that concentrated area. No one is using more drugs than they would -they are just doing it in one place. And that cannot equate to an increase in homelessness for the same reason. The answer is to prohibit users from congregating in the area of the site. This used to work really well with needle exchanges. No one hung around them because they would be denied entry if they did so. They got their needles and went home.

Many of those people should be in old-fashioned asylum institutions. They should never have been closed. Their lives on the streets is not my idea of freedom, and also they cause distress to everyone else.

Yeah, but at least you guys make money at war. Canada's gonna go poor doing it. Can't you guys down there figure out how to build something cheaper than the F-35?!

Ya it's in Isreal. money laundering rebranded.

Found the Helldiver.

@@carptarts Honestly, we're not hard to find these days

Didn't they turbo it though?

I agree that while people should strive to not hurt others, if they do end up doing so, that is their right. This is why we need a return to traditional stoic values, in addition to freedom of speech, so that you actually lower the hate.

Well that is not a problem with pardys arguement then, it's a problem with gov response

BECAUSE they're ALL IN ON IT.

"Real power is unelected. Politicians change, but the power structure does not. The Network (a global Anglophile financial elite power structure) operates behind the scenes, for its own benefit, without ever consulting those who are affected by its decisions. The Network is composed of individuals who prefer anonymity. They are "satisfied to possess the reality rather than the appearance of power." This approach of secretly exercising power is common throughout history because it protects the conspirators from the consequences of their actions. A primary tactic for directing public opinion and "government" policy is to place willing servants in leadership positions of trusted institutions (media, universities, government, foundations, etc.). If there is ever a major backlash against a given policy, the servant can be replaced. This leaves both the institution and the individuals who actually direct its power unharmed. Historically, those who establish sophisticated systems of domination are not only highly intelligent; they are supremely deceptive and ruthless. They completely ignore the ethical barriers that govern a normal human being's behavior. They do not believe that the moral and legislative laws, which others are expected to abide by, apply to them." (Joseph Plummer in his book Tragedy and Hope 101)

He wanted to pass C-16 before previous elections but they did not had time to. Now a new face to it

​@@mumbai3899this one is very bad. Also the pandemic laws are showing up now. And other new laws like private members bill from Charlie Angus. All paint a very clear picture if anyone is piecing it all together

Being the first....Triumph...remember whoever you are fighting against is convinced they also are fighting the good fight.

Just identify as first comment! Then join us fellow trans-firsters and fight the oppressive cis-firsters! Too long have we been under their boot, just because we commented after 50 other people why should that stop us from being first? Next up we're gonna have to talk to the Olympic Committee about my trans-first position and demand my gold medals!

@@Wintermute909 Thanks for the satire, we need more.