Is Canada Shifting To Totalitarianism?

[BelieveNothing]

Totalitarianism, aligned as it is with “rule by corporations”, is something that happens in incremental steps over time. Nobody actually chooses it, it just happens, and it’s happening to Canada right now.


What are the conditions that foster these top-down, undemocratic trends? Public conformity in matters of importance plays a large part.

Corporate “governance”, with its anti-social, anti-public orientation, is adept at manufacturing and perpetuating public conformity by employing subtle but effective tools that secretly subvert the populace. These tools are employed to create what Sheldon Wolin would describe as “inverted totalitarianism”. The tactics persuade a population that what the government/corporation wants is also good for people, even when the opposite is the case.

For example, legislation that endorses catastrophic global warming, for the perceived benefit of a handful of transnational corporations, is not to the benefit of the people. Many Canadians, however, remain deluded, even as they witness Canada’s descent into the scientific and diplomatic Dark Ages.

We are, after all, the only country to have abandoned its membership in the Kyoto Protocol, and more recently, we are the only country to withdraw from the United Nations Convention on Desertification. We have also abandoned the Canadian International Development Agency, as well as other international organizations.

Additionally, we are also refusing entry to Canada of the UN Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Each of these snubs to the international community besmirchs our international reputation, and our ability to positively impact world affairs.

Subtle tactics of control are used to delude the public into thinking that these are the right choices. Not only have scientific research centers been shuttered, and scientists muzzled, but now, even federal librarians and archivists have been muzzled

Muzzling federal librarians and archivists is more subtle than book burning, and also more effective. This tactic is widening the net of suppression and further inhibiting the public’s access to reliable information (as if being ranked 51st on the Freedom Of Information Index, below Angola, Colombia, and Nigeria, isn’t bad enough). Librarians must now be vetted by the government before speaking to the public. If, for example, a federal librarian, or archivist (including their volunteers and students), is asked to speak at a high school, he/she must first contact the appropriate government agency and secure approval. The government rationale is that public employees have a “duty of loyalty” to the “duly elected government”.

Add to this the muzzling of the Parliamentary Budget Office, and the appointment of an unqualified person to replace Kevin Page, (as well as the failure to commission a Public Inquiry into electoral fraud), and we have the suppression of a great deal of “source” information that is crucial to a functioning democracy.

Once the source information is suppressed, it is easier for the government to create its own narrative through fiction-based messaging, which reinforces public forgetfulness (enabled by the 24 hour news cycle), confusion, and falsehoods.

When subtle subversion proves ineffective, more overtly fascistic tools are being used, and with ever increasing frequency. It happened at Toronto’s G-20 demonstrations in June, 2010, and it is happening with more regularity in Quebec.

Municipal By-law P-6, like its (now repealed) predecessor, Bill 78, though condemned by the Quebec Bar Association, has been used extensively in Montreal to thwart peaceful protests.

An important component of the by-law is the seemingly innocuous requirement that protestors secure a permit and file notice of a demonstration before it takes place. The danger of the by-law is that demonstrations can be stifled, and police can be used, to suit the political requirements of politicians. Police are not meant to be an arm of any particular government, unless, of course, it is a “police-state” government.

The most recent impact of the by-law is that riot police charged peaceful protestors in the streets of Montreal, illegally kettled them, and fined them $637.00 each. (Evidently, poor people are precluded from exercising their democratic rights.)

The Service De Police De La Ville De Montréal, later held a press conference, and Sergeant Jean-Bruno Latour declared that “the Charter (Of Rights And Freedoms) protects the right to freedom of expression, but (that) there is no right to protest.”

Peaceful protesting may not be allowed in North Korea, but in Canada, peaceful protesting is still legal. The police should not be used to intimidate peaceful protestors, and the permit issue should not be used to arbitrarily quash demonstrations. The right to peaceful protesting should trump any requirement for a permit. Similarly, kettling and mass arrests of peaceful protestors are overtly fascist police strategies that should be condemned. Such tactics are used to dissuade the public from exercising its democratic rights to protest.

Demonizing those who overtly oppose government policies is nothing new for this government. People and groups with dissenting views have been labeled “radicals” or “extremists”, or even “traitors”. These polarizing tactics are now being ramped up, and the government is now conflating protest with terrorism. The ever-expanding (and expensive) security apparatus is increasingly being used to surveil peaceful activists.

Earlier, I wrote a piece called Canada’s Totalitarian Shift, in which I enumerated government policies and tactics (as described by author Naomi Wolf), that are consistent with totalitarian rule. The steps include these:
◾invoke an external and internal threat
◾cast criticism as espionage and dissent as treason
◾surveil ordinary citizens
◾arbitrarily detain and release citizens
◾infiltrate civilian groups
◾subvert the rule of law
◾restrict the press

Each of these steps is becoming more entrenched in Canada.

There is no clear boundary which delineates a country’s transition from weak democracy to full blown totalitarianism, but Harper’s Canada has all of the symptoms of totalitarianism, in varying degrees. Equally disconcerting though, is that much of the mass media is still apologizing for this rogue government, and the increasingly entrenched symptoms are being subverted, or ignored.
http://niagaraatlarge.com/2013/04/05/canada-is-slowly-but-surely-shifting-to-totalitarianism/

[BelieveNothing]

[peaceseeker]

Most do not pay enough attention to what's happening all around them - 'boiling frogs' comes to mind.

[FreeRights]

It's interesting that you bring this up. A friend and I discussed this exact topic over a morning cappuccino.

We both concluded that Canada is, in fact, not shifting to totalitarianism.

I don't even believe that Canada is any less democratic than during whatever time frame conspiracy theorists believe that we were more so.

Maybe I have the distinct advantage of having made an entire career in the security operations management industry, but many of the security-related changes that have occurred over the last ten years actually make perfect sense, and do not infringe upon peoples Charter Rights any more than they should, given the circumstance.

I also know that new bills that may touch on Charter Rights go before the Supreme Court and are ruled on there. If totalitarianism occurred, it wouldn't just be Harper's face on the bill.

Unless, of course, there's a military takeover - which I doubt will happen in Canada, because of the regulations and Acts already into effect around our police and military forces, and past history.

Maybe we have an extraordinarily charismatic, capable leader that can coerce us into giving up our freedoms. Stephen Harper. So, no we don't.

Is it becoming more corporate, pertaining to elections? Of course it is. They are the ones that fund parties with such revenues that a regular individual cannot match, but there are people who step out of the status quo, and often rise regardless of having less cashflow. Oddly enough, those are often the types of people that have the charisma and the coercion that has turned a nation to totalitarianism. It still comes down to votes, though, and an educated population, and especially after what we've seen in Kelowna this campaign, an educated group of politicians.

Our problem isn't actually that the companies are funding elections, or that we are having our rights infringed on. The actual problem is our politicians. And we cannot blame the politicians, as they appear to be the best of a very crappy bunch. If actually capable people, who are educated, who understand the issues, and can relate to the people, actually stepped out and ran for office, I think that we'd be quite pleasantly surprised at how the reaction would effect the election. What we need, as a city, a province, or a nation, is those people who think they can do a better job to step up and do a better job. Lord, now that there's a Kickstarter.com craze, there's almost no reason not to.

[hobbyguy]

I suggest you consider this quote if you think Canada is not shifting toward totalitarianism:

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
― Benito Mussolini

Then consider that the Harper government has granted Kinder Morgan, an American corporation, the right to trample all over the laws of the City of Burnaby....

[Atomoa]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/joe-oli ... -1.2837772

Finance Minister Joe Oliver's decision to deliver his fall economic update in front of an $800-per-table Canadian Club crowd has raised the ire of the opposition New Democrats, who say the move could constitute contempt of Parliament.

"As legislators, MPs must have access to this information to be able to do their job," Cullen told the House of Commons Monday. "We must be able to analyze the state of the finances of this country."

By sharing the details of those finances at a private lunch, Cullen said, the minister not only "impeded our access" to the information, but also "flouted the democratic principle stating that elected officials should have access to this information before bankers and other financiers."

Among the revelations aired before the blue-chip crowd, according to Cullen, were the potential risk of falling oil prices to the treasury, as well as the projected rise in personal income tax as a percentage of the GDP.

That, Cullen said, is information that should have been shared in the Commons and not at an "exclusive" Bay Street event.

We know who the government works for. They fear their own citizens and work for business interests - which historically have always been anti-human.

"Works for" is a loose term. As we saw with Lockheed Martin and the F-35 - business dictates how public money will be spent and the degree of deception used on the public to make it happen.

[FreeRights]

So at the absolute worst, you can suggest that many Western leaders right now, like Harper, are just terrible leaders and good businessmen.

Fact: Corporate participation in politics is not what makes fascism fascism.

[maryjane48]

Maybe I have the distinct advantage of having made an entire career in the security operations management industry, but many of the security-related changes that have occurred over the last ten years actually make perfect sense, and do not infringe upon peoples Charter Rights any more than they should, given the circumstance.

beg to differ, snooping on law abiding people with out warrants is most definitely against charter rights.its good thing most internet companies are now encrypting everything , money talks , nsa walks lol

[FreeRights]

beg to differ, snooping on law abiding people with out warrants is most definitely against charter rights.its good thing most internet companies are now encrypting everything , money talks , nsa walks lol

Just out of curiosity, which Charter Right specifically are they breaching?

[maryjane48]

isn't everyone afforded due process?

[Atomoa]

What we need, as a city, a province, or a nation, is those people who think they can do a better job to step up and do a better job. Lord, now that there's a Kickstarter.com craze, there's almost no reason not to.

The highlighted quote made me chuckle.

These people who are in power and the people that own them - they will give up that power when "someone better" comes along like a gentleman giving up a seat on a bus for a elderly woman?

They wont fight tooth and nail by "lets say" trying to write a law that allows their rich, business friends to contribute unlimited amounts of money to their campaign coffers while at the same time tieing the hands of the government departments that can monitor these transactions to ensure legality?

These "better ideas and the people that stand with them" - how will they fare when faced with a 30 million dollar attack ad campaign against them - no matter if its a good idea or not? Single transferable vote ring a bell - and only the political groups representing the people not entrenched in power were supporting it? Business political groups fighting for the "first past the post" system of pre-internet? Preventing electronic voting? Grey hair voting strategies.

...banking, supporting and participating in furthering voter apathy as a way of keeping power?

Meanwhile "Pierre Poutine" goes to jail when he had no access to the passwords that allowed 80% of the ridings in Canada to recieve misdirecting phonecalls last election. He didn't act alone. But - oh well.

Press fences. Scripted questions. No press scrums. Controlled media. Government statements made to bankers before the electorate.

Canada is still promoting the Asbestos industry, is it not?

And we cannot blame the politicians, as they appear to be the best of a very crappy bunch.

Yeah, it's just that there's nobody better that Stevie. Lol.

Stephen Harper™ and crew are just owned window dressing. Their marionette strings are controlled by the real "leaders" of this country - and our governments mandate is dictated in a unaccountable, undemocratic boardroom. Their wants are priority one for our government.

[FreeRights]

The highlighted quote made me chuckle.

These people who are in power and the people that own them - they will give up that power when "someone better" comes along like a gentleman giving up a seat on a bus for a elderly woman?

They wont fight tooth and nail by "lets say" trying to write a law that allows their rich, business friends to contribute unlimited amounts of money to their campaign coffers while at the same time tieing the hands of the government departments that can monitor these transactions to ensure legality?

These "better ideas and the people that stand with them" - how will they fare when faced with a 30 million dollar attack ad campaign against them - no matter if its a good idea or not? Single transferable vote ring a bell - and only the political groups representing the people not entrenched in power were supporting it? Business political groups fighting for the "first past the post" system of pre-internet? Preventing electronic voting? Grey hair voting strategies.

...banking, supporting and participating in furthering voter apathy as a way of keeping power?

Meanwhile "Pierre Poutine" goes to jail when he had no access to the passwords that allowed 80% of the ridings in Canada to recieve misdirecting phonecalls last election. He didn't act alone. But - oh well.

Press fences. Scripted questions. No press scrums. Controlled media. Government statements made to bankers before the electorate.

Canada is still promoting the Asbestos industry, is it not?

Yeah, it's just that there's nobody better that Stevie. Lol.

Stephen Harper™ and crew are just owned window dressing. Their marionette strings are controlled by the real "leaders" of this country - and our governments mandate is dictated in a unaccountable, undemocratic boardroom. Their wants are priority one for our government.

My point exactly. Of course that works - but it works because people couldn't care less with following or understanding politics, let alone voting.

With all of the avenues that a politician could get information and ideas out (social media and the internet, for one), the reason why better politicians fail is because the majority of could-be voters simply don't care. So who's fault is it? Quite clearly, the people who vote.

So instead of blaming the politicians for this claim of shifting toward totalitarianism, blame the could-be voters and the actual voters themselves. We're no less democratic than we have been for a very long time. It's our disinterest and apparent inability to vote that has brought us to where we are.

[maryjane48]

My point exactly. Of course that works - but it works because people couldn't care less with following or understanding politics, let alone voting.

With all of the avenues that a politician could get information and ideas out (social media and the internet, for one), the reason why better politicians fail is because the majority of could-be voters simply don't care. So who's fault is it? Quite clearly, the people who vote.

So instead of blaming the politicians for this claim of shifting toward totalitarianism, blame the could-be voters and the actual voters themselves. We're no less democratic than we have been for a very long time. It's our disinterest and apparent inability to vote that has brought us to where we are.

when govt meaning our money gets wasted its the voters fault? lol thats what people like harper want to push im afraid

[FreeRights]

when govt meaning our money gets wasted its the voters fault? lol thats what people like harper want to push im afraid

In our country, voting those people in government out of office is always a solution and one that we fail to take.

[Atomoa]

So instead of blaming the politicians for this claim of shifting toward totalitarianism, blame the could-be voters and the actual voters themselves. We're no less democratic than we have been for a very long time. It's our disinterest and apparent inability to vote that has brought us to where we are.

Campaign strategists are versed and bathed in voter suppression tactics. You don't win by who votes, you vote by who doesn't vote. Ask any US Republican - where our leaders go shopping for their employement campaign talent.

Robocalls were not a "small joke". 80% of ridings across Canada got misdirecting phonecalls if you were a known CPC "enemy" - telling you to go to the wrong polling station - voters fault?

Writing laws that prevent mostly left leaning poor people from voting under the guise of preventing "voter fraud" - is that voters fault?

Making government inefficient, unaccountable and purposely grinding the public's patience down year after year to the point of apathy - that isn't on purpose? Look at the backlog for freedom of information requests! There is no sentiment in Ottawa where they know the worse they behave the more amount of people will not want to participate in such a sham of a system? If they had their way they'd alienate everyone from politics in Canada except the 10-20% of their voter base that will vote for them no matter what they do.

Right now they sit on a 30% popular vote spread out over "first past the post" tricky rules and region population lines and proclaim proudly that "the country has spoken!". Worst voter participation in history - and not even a peep from the winning party about it. What does that say? They'll take the power any way they can get it.

Fighting against mandatory voting - tooth and nail? Proportional representation?

We're trained not to vote. Business leaders of this country are scared stiff of our single vote.

Now - yes the public has a responsibility to vote. However how many times throughout history have the "citizens" of a country gone along with their governments sway - only to be referred later as "victims" of the governments sway? Got any German relatives that lived through the second world war? Can we hold every German responsible and call them out "for being so stupid to believe..." - or was there some "pressure and influence" placed on the German public? Very extreme example - but many others exist.

Voter apathy is encouraged.

It's also spoken about in the infamous leaked "Citibank" document that was written for their richest clients. Plutocracy. The paper warned that "the only threat to the rich becoming richer and richer and our plutocracy" was the fact that people still had "one man, one vote". The paper warned that a Plutocracy cannot be maintained for long because eventually the 99% of the population will rise up and grab pitchforks. The biggest threat was our single vote.

https://app.box.com/shared/9if6v2hr9h

So of course, they are going to do everything they can to counter that threat. Pretending that the "effort and infrastructure" doesn't exist, and instead chalking up voter apathy and non-participation to a bunch of lazy people is silly. Would you leave a pile of jewels unguarded in your backyard? How much money would you spend to keep your place as king?

What do you think all these fabricated "distraction" issues are that are played up by privately owned media organizations? Divide and conquer.

I like the "history" of mandatory voting.

Athenian democracy held that it was every citizen's duty to participate in decision making, but attendance at the assembly was voluntary. Sometimes there was some form of social opprobrium to those not participating. For example, Aristophanes's comedy Acharnians 17–22, in the 5th century BC, shows public slaves herding citizens from the agora into the assembly meeting place (pnyx) with a red-stained rope. Those with red on their clothes were fined.

Drag your *bleep* to public meetings - get fined. I love it.