A Sunday Reply to a Saturday Debate
The Toronto Star’s new “Saturday Debate” is getting to be a thing. It usually gives us a ‘moderate left’ versus ‘moderate right’ square off. This is according to the liberal idea that this is somehow going to give us the truth about the issues or perhaps some notion of a solution for an issue.
Of course debates never lead to understanding or any solution to problems. But Saturday debates interest me because they are a gauge of what the distorted thinking is in different factions of the oligarchy. I find they often give me something to blog about, usually not by taking one ‘side’ or the other, but by showing that both sides are right and wrong and have nothing to do with the facts.
This time the topic is whether Canada should leave NATO. You can find the text of both sides here. If you want to give money to The Scar or have a way past their paywall, go and read it.
I cannot leave my response to this ‘debate’ in the ‘comments’ box. It seems the paywall does not allow it. I will under no circumstances encourage The Scar by giving it Money. If I paid for everything I read on the net I would be broke. My limited donations to the blogger/journalist profession are to those very few with some real merit.
But here is why the God of the Internet gave us blogs. We even have some really usable platforms these days. So there is where my comment on the Saturday Debate goes. With some artful hashtagging and keywording, some readers of the Saturday Debate might read this. It would give The Star some promotion it does not really deserve.
Now that I have cleared my throat, here is the main theme of my response to both sides of this debate. Canada is not going to be allowed to leave NATO. Leuprecht and Sokolsky the NATO fans stated that “countries want to join but none have ever left”. Welcome to the Hotel California; programmed to receive.
Leuprecht and Sokolsky pretty much run the Atlanticist empire propaganda line on which enemies are to be destroyed and why. We need to be in with all the cool countries or we will be seen as one of the uncool countries. We need to be right in there imposing costs and sanctions against all the bad countries doing bad behaviour.
We need to be with the Atlanticist hegemony as it ‘mitigates’ the instability it mostly creates. We need to be ‘in’ in order to help mitigate the humanitarian disasters mostly created by Atlanticist aggression and the economic policies it imposes on weak countries. We could not possibly deal with domestic problems like forest fires or the rollout of vaccines without calling in the army, which could not do it without support from NATO.
It would be really stupid to go on picking at Leuprecht and Sokolsky point by point. The need is to get above it. The worst riff they run is of the “Biden administration returning the U.S. to a multilateral approach…” In other words, after being restrained somewhat for a few years, the U.S. oligarchy, who run NATO, are going to try to resume attempts to rule the earth.
There is nothing here but stock Atlanticist propaganda tropes and emotional triggers. No one can take it seriously except someone whose head has been marinaded for decades in the Liberal Globalist/Atlanticist media silos. But as with the inmates of a cult, there is little point arguing directly with them; the only answer is to implode the fake reality built around their heads.
Reality is always very short and simple. There is a global conflict going on. There is an Atlanticist hegemony, sometimes Called Globalism, based in North America and Europe. Opposing this is a Eurasian alliance, based around Russia, China, and Iran, alternately called multipolarism.
Atlanticism is the final development of the European colonial empires and later the American empire, which caused so much devastation in the world of the past two centuries. Eurasia are the powers which have arisen independently of the dominance of these older powers. They are not ideal but they will be a great improvement for most of the world’s people.
The Eurasia will win this conflict in the next few years. The Altanticist empire, whose military arm is NATO, is in a terminal state of panic. Unless they end life on earth with a nuclear war, or just throw civilization back a few centuries if we are lucky, they are done.
Leuprecht and Sokolsky’s biggest joke is about “Canadian Foreign Policy.” Canada has no foreign policy; we are a colony full of people with a colonial mindset. We can only be swept along by the forces of history.
This brings me to what a halfway competent and responsible Canadian government could reasonably to. That is, to plan to protect the Canadian population to the greatest degree possible from the consequences of the collapse of the Atlantic empire. That subject is worth a blog by itself. Or ten.
This in turn brings me back to the basic flaws in Tamara Lorincz’s side of this ‘debate’. She has a weak understanding of geography and an unrealistic faith in United Nations institutions. Canada is surrounded by NATO. We are not going anywhere.
As for the UN, some paranoid individuals point out that it was also founded as an instrument of Globalist hegemony. However, like many of these International organizations, it is being gradually bent toward the multipolar, Eurasian world. Presently it has little real power, though that could change.
The UN still has a tendency toward bombastic declarations and resolutions which have no force and effect. It is the same with its treaty on the prohibition of Nuclear weapons, which Lorincz thinks Canada would sign if it was not stuck in NATO. The US and NATO are famous for ignoring treaties like these. They will not even abide treaties they signed as soon as it no longer suits them.
I will not get into an explanation here on what needs to be done to end NATO and the nuclear threat to the world. I will do that elsewhere. I confidently predict that Canada will never leave NATO; but rather NATO will in the end just disappear.
I expect to see NATO disappear by the end of the decade. This idea will no doubt fill Lorincz with joy, and the L&S team with consternation. However, I expect that the end of NATO will go with the end of the Atlantic empire, which will go with the economic collapse of most of the western nations, which will go with interesting times for residents of these lands, including us Canadians.
Thus, I suggest an end to pointless debates about whether Canada should get out of NATO. We need dialogue on how to protect the Canadian people from the consequences of its fall. We need to start asking what the post NATO/Atlanticist world will look like, and how Canada will fit into it. tr