LavScam, Continued Coverage

We now have it from the Clerk of the Privy Council, the highest public servant in the land, that Canada's former Attorney General, Jodie Wilson-Raybould was, indeed "pressured,"  though without avail, to abort the prosecution of Québec-based engineering giant, SNC Lavalin, for bribery and corruption. As Andrew Coyne notes in the National Post, this fact raises some interesting questions as to what was supposed to happen next, had the soon to be demoted Attorney General caved to the pressure:

... As we have been discovering in recent days, in fact all sorts of pressure was applied to the former attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould — by the prime minister, by his officials, by the clerk — to politicize the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. They just didn’t call it that, at least until now. Leave aside the legal and ethical considerations. I’m just interested in how they thought this would work. Suppose she had bowed to the “appropriate pressure” of the prime minister and his people and ordered the director of public prosecutions to drop all charges against SNC-Lavalin and negotiate a remediation agreement in their place. What would she, and they, have done when the DPP informed her this was not lawful, as the company had not met the conditions the law requires for her to enter such negotiations, having neither voluntarily disclosed its alleged wrongdoing, nor admitted corporate responsibility for it, nor made reparations to the people it had allegedly defrauded? Or when the DPP pointed out that the professed reason for SNC-Lavalin to be granted such leniency, the jobs that would allegedly be lost in Quebec, is expressly precluded by the same law? Or when she resigned rather than carry out an order she considered unlawful? Did they not think this would cause something of, I don’t know, a stir? Did anyone think this through? Suppose the DPP had not resigned, accepting instead this unprecedented assault on her prosecutorial independence, not to say her professional judgement. How was she supposed to negotiate a remediation agreement, if the endpoint – that SNC-Lavalin was to be let off on all charges — had already been decided? What bargaining leverage would she have? And how would anyone in government have explained all this when, as the attorney general is legally obliged to do whenever she gives instructions to the DPP regarding the “initiation or conduct” of a prosecution (assuming this even applies to the present situation), she made the order public? What reasons was she supposed to give? “I am overturning the prosecutor’s decision to proceed with charges of fraud and corruption against SNC-Lavalin because it will cost jobs in a province where we need to win seats, in an election year?” Did they not think this would cause something of, I don’t know, a stir? Did anyone think this through? Or never mind the public, or the prosecutor: how did they think they were going to explain it to a judge, whose consent is also legally required for any remediation agreement? But then it hit me. The answer, surely, is for the attorney general to talk to the judge. Or maybe the prime minister should, or one of his people. Not to direct him, of course: that would be wrong. But just to explain the context, if you will. The policy objective, after all, is to spare SNC-Lavalin from being convicted of a crime, owing to the serious disruption to its business model that would result if, merely because it had a history of bribing people to win public contracts, it were to be prevented from bidding on public contracts. Does it really matter, in pursuit of that overriding objective, whose independence has to take a hit: prosecutorial or judicial? I realize this suggestion will shock some people. Probably the same people were shocked when the allegation first surfaced that the prime minister’s people had tried to get the attorney general to interfere in the prosecution of a company that had given hundreds of thousands of dollars, legally and illegally, to the Liberal Party. But over time, the mind adjusts. Subtler voices came to the fore, explaining why the pressure the prime minister’s officials were at that time still denying was in fact entirely proper, an elegant and sophisticated solution to a difficult problem. ...

Under the Westminster model of government, civil servants, are generally assumed to be non-partisan, working with whichever party happens to be elected government to fulfill the government's program. As David Akin of GlobalNews reports, however, the present head of the Public Service of Canada, David Wernick appeared, during his testimony before the House Justice Committee, to be distinctly biased in a pro-government way and even somewhat wacky in his comments about the pressures that were brought to bear on former Canadian Attorney General Jodie Wilson-Raybould with the aim of causing her to abort the SNC Lavalin prosecution for bribery and corruption.

“I’ve worked very, very closely, for three years, on almost a daily basis with the current government, the current cabinet and the current Prime Minister’s Office,” Wernick said. “In my observation, in my experience, they have always, always conducted themselves to the highest standards of integrity.” Whoa, sunshine, back up just a bit there. Justin Trudeau is the first and only prime minister in our history to have been found to have broken a federal law while in office and that law was an ethics law. How’s that for “highest standards of integrity”? Moreover, the current ethics investigation into this whole Wilson-Raybould matter is the fifth ethics investigation of a Trudeau cabinet member since 2015. Now this fifth investigation may come to nothing, but, so far, the office of the ethics commissioner is four-for-four in finding ethics violations.

Related:

Toronto Sun: MARIN: SNC-Lavalin affair goes to the core of our democracy

Macleans: Welcome to Canada’s House of Cards

Meantime: CBC: Mark Norman's defence team targets Trudeau, Butts with subpoenas

The Greatest American Constitutional Crisis Since the Civil War

By Conrad Black

American Greatness, February 21, 2019: The most immense and dangerous public scandal in American history is finally cracking open like a ripe pomegranate. The broad swath of the Trump-hating media that has participated in what has amounted to an unconstitutional attempt to overthrow the government are reduced to reporting the events and revelations of the scandal in which they have been complicit, in a po-faced ho-hum manner to impart to the misinformed public that this is as routine as stock market fluctuations or the burning of an American flag in Tehran.

For more than two years, the United States and the world have had two competing narratives: that an elected president of the United States was a Russian agent whom the Kremlin helped elect; and its rival narrative that senior officials of the Justice Department, FBI, CIA, and other national intelligence organizations had repeatedly lied under oath, misinformed federal officials, and meddled in partisan political matters illegally and unconstitutionally and had effectively tried to influence the outcome of a presidential election, and then undo its result by falsely propagating the first narrative. It is now obvious and indisputable that the second narrative is the correct one.

Read more

Evil Russians: Won't Just Die Off Like White People Are Supposed To

Putin Spells Out Numerous Incentives to Raise Russia's Depressed Birth Rate

Meantime:

Self-Hating Swedish ambassador condemns Hungary for seeking to reverse suicidal collapse in birth-rate.

In a tweet, Annika Strandhall, the Swedish minister for social affairs, said that Hungary’s “alarming” policies were “reeking with the 1930’s”. She suggested the Hungarian prime minister, who seeks to promote the birth of “more true Hungarian” babies was a “right-wing populist trying to obscure the consequences of those policies to the independence women have earned”.

Wow, those Swedes are real Europhobes. Their policies of national self-destruction are "reeking with early 21st century neo-bolshevism".

Free Press? In Canada? Trudeau Government Will "Hold Media to Account" LOL

Meantime, here's how the Trudeau Government responds to the efforts of the parliamentary opposition to "hold the government to account:"

Posts From the Past: A Scientific Perspective (43)

When Pop Sci Turns Toxic

Ancient Greek Science: Or How Not to Report an Experiment

Turtles All The Way Down: Deep Fractal Zoom

TTT: TED Talk Twaddle

Would You Like Lithium in Your Drinking Water?

Medically Induced Mental Illness

Minerals and Madness: Magnesium Deficiency and the Western Epidemic of Mental Illness

Misunderstanding Evolution, Or Evolutionary Theorists May Be Wrong, But Fred Reed Is Wronger

Brilliant Billionaires, No 49: Mark Zuckerberg:"Crazy brain research" will let users [sic] send thoughts telepathically — That'll Be Great For Those Who Can't Speak, Read or Write

Brilliant Billioniaires No. 17: Elon Musk's Pipedream, Shooting People Down Tubes

Dumb Ideas From Academia, No. 23: How Computer Technology Will Enable Brain to Brain Communication

Is Pop Psychology Mostly Bunk?

Dumb Intelligence Tests: Or Why IQ Testers Need to Improve Their Understanding of Intelligence

Why Are We So Smart? Or Perhaps We're Not


The Mis-Measure of Human Rationality

Of Men, Apes and Civilization

Homo sapiens: the Ape With Nukes. Or Are We Really the Smartest Animals Alive?

Human Intelligence Versus AI

Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part II: Ecosystem Disruption

Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part III: Induced Stupidity and the Decline of the West

Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part IV: Reversing the Trend

Some Climate Warming Skeptics Ready to Ditch the Second Law of Thermodynamics

More Climate Skeptic Physics Nonsense

The Nature of Physical Reality, Part I: Time

The Nature of Physical Reality, Part II: Space

Time Is Neither Absolute Nor Does It Flow Equably, But It Does Flow

Free Will Versus Determinism

Why Electric Cars Will Replace Gas-powered Cars — And Improve the Environment

Why the All-Electric Family Car Is Something the Average Family Will Likely Never Own

Charles Darwin and the Demise of the European Peoples

Per ardua ad astra: Why not?

Liberal Racial Science

The Causes of War

Birth Control, Canadian Style: Or how one Western nation is committing suicide

How the West destroys its own

In Praise of Diversity

Should We “Bring Back” the Tasmanian Tiger, or the Tasmanian Aborigines

Population: Explosion and Implosion

Liberalism, Realpolitik and How It Is That People Murder One Another By the Million, But Feel Badly About Doing So

What Jews Got Right

Is "Bad Science" an Oxymoron?

The Trashing of Tim Hunt, FRS, Nobel Laureate: a Breach of the Social Contract, the Death of a Civilization

Tim Hunt, the Kind, Unworldly Nobel-Prize-Winner, Brought Down By a Report of Disputed Veracity By a Twittering, Anglophobic, Black-Privileged, Resumé-padding, Lecturer in Journalism and the Lies of Professor Michael Arthur, Provost of University College London, a Man Unable to Acknowledge an Error of Judgment, and Under the Sway of the Odious Morality of a Stuffed Corpse

We Discover that PressTV Lies Like the New York Times

LavScam and the Trudeau Doctrine

Better dirty hands than empty bellies

"Better dirty hands than empty bellies" is the Trudeau doctrine as enunciated, not by Justin Trudeau, but by Pierre Elliot Trudeau, speaking about the delivery of lethal military equipment to the US during the Vietnam war.

It now appears that, during the fall, Justin Trudeau acted in accordance with the Trudeau doctrine by bringing pressure to bear on his now ex Justice Minister and Attorney General, Jodie Wilson-Raybould, urging her to scotch the prosecution of Quebec-based global engineering firm SNC Lavalin on charges of bribery and corruption. In so doing, he presumably resorted to the argument he has made repeatedly in public that prosecution of SNC Lavelin would put many Canadian jobs at risk.

The trouble for Trudeau with this line of action and logic is two-fold.

First, under the law, a company guilty of corruption cannot be granted a "remediation agreement" instead of prosecution on the grounds of "national economic interest," , as Trudeau may have urged.

Second, when Trudeau discussed the prosecution of SNC Lavalin with the Attorney General on September 17, a prosecution had already been launched, which gives the Prime Minister's intervention the appearance of an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

To an adherent of the Trudeau doctrine, obstruction of justice for the sake national economic interest might well be considered a reasonable trade-off. But if so, it proved to be a mistake to demote the  Attorney General to the lowly cabinet portfolio of Veterans Affairs so soon after she apparently refused to join the Prime Minister in a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in the Lavalin case.

As a consequence of her demotion, Ms. Wilson-Raybould seems not to have been chastened, but rather embittered, giving rise to vilification by some cabinet colleagues and senior officials who reported her behavior in Cabinet to be self-centered and confrontational.

In response, it seems, to that further humiliation, the former Attorney General resigned her new cabinet post, while giving no reason since, so she claimed, as the former Attorney General, what she had to say was subject to solicitor-client privilege that only the Prime Minister can waive.

It is now reported that Ms. Wilson-Raybould will appear next week to testify before a Parliamentary committee. Whether she will speak freely remains to be seen. In the meantime, young Justin may be wishing he'd kept his hands clean.

Trump: Fake Nationalist?

There's no doubt that Trump's nationalistic, Make-America-Great-Again rhetoric and  his insistence on border security gave him the election-winning edge with traditionally Democrat-voting, blue-collar Americans. But in politics it has been said, "believe nothing until it has been denied" or conversely, therefore, disbelieve nothing until it has been warmly embraced: Remember FDR in 1939:

Boston on October 30, 1939: "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." The same thought was expressed in a speech at Brooklyn on November 1: "I am fighting to keep our people out of foreign wars. And I will keep on fighting." The President told his audience at Rochester, New York, on November 2: "Your national government ... is equally a government of peace -- a government that intends to retain peace for the American people." On the same day the voters of Buffalo were assured: "Your President says this country is not going to war." And he declared at Cleveland on November 3: "The first purpose of our foreign policy is to keep our country out of war."

So is Trump truly a nationalist, or merely an opportunists ready to say anything to get elected. Despite the greatly reduced unemployment numbers, not everyone is convinced he's the former. Ann Coulter, for example, formerly a staunch Trump supporter. And from the Irish Savant this:

If the analysis (by Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan among others) of the latest Bill that Trump signed is accurate then indeed we can finally put the last nail in the coffin of the Trump Revolution. Because that Bill appears to expressly forbid the building of The Wall, contains a de facto amnesty and opens the door to massive future immigration abuse through 'family reunion', 'legal immigration' and other such loopholes. Nothing has been done about the H1B visa scam which is devastating the employment prospects of American STEM graduates and changing forever the demographic profile of the country. Read more

Digital Gangsters, No. 79: Don't be evil — LOL

Google says the built-in microphone it never told Nest users about was "never supposed to be a secret." In early February, Google announced that Assistant would work with its home security and alarm system, Nest Secure. The problem: Users didn't know a microphone existed on their Nest security devices to begin with. On Tuesday, a Google representative told Business Insider the company had made an "error." "The on-device microphone was never intended to be a secret ...  Source: Business Insider Further details: BBC

Stupid Lies About White Genocide from Paul Craig Roberts Brought to You by Ron Unz

In a post entitled "Self-Hating Whites", reproduced by the Unz Review with comment "closed," i.e., not permitted, Paul Craig Roberts, asserts:

White people are on the point of extinction. ... Whites are on the road to extinction ... because of their own tax, social, and immigration policies. ... In Western countries where the white birthrate is collapsing and borders are open to nonwhite immigration, it is only a question of time before whites become a minority in their own country. As the nonwhite immigrants are not being assimilated, Western civilization itself is on the road to extinction.

Roberts then asks:

How did something this topsy-turvy come about? Identity Politics plays a major role. Identity Politics, now institutionalized in Western universities and school systems as black studies and women studies, teaches whites to be guilty for victimizing nonwhites and teaches nonwhites to hate whites for victimizing them.

"Topsy-turvy"? Topsy-fucking-turvy!

Well, OK. So much for the Jewish Holocaust all white people are supposed to feel endlessly guilty about. It was nothing really. It was simply the result of German policy on ethnic minorities being "topsy-turvy."

Whether Paul Craig Roberts has gone senile, or is an agent of disinformation, I don't know. But in any case, his assessment of the genocide of the Europeans is undoubtedly pathetic if it is not deliberate misdirection. Does he, for instance, really think that identity politics spontaneously reared its ugly, white-hating head in Europe and North America? Obviously, identity politics is being foisted on the European people by the leadership, the corporate media, and the state-controlled educational system. To the extent that white people are taken in by the hate-whitey rhetoric, they are merely pathetic dupes of a campaign to make them responsible for their own demise.

Far from being the result of their own actions and beliefs, Europeans peoples are being destroyed as racial and cultural entities because they constitute the most powerful sovereign, democratic, nation states, and hence the greatest obstruction in the way of global governance by the Money Power, which is to say the global banks, and other mega-corporations, and the billionaire entrepreneur class.

Blaming the European peoples of both the New World and the Old for their own destruction is a neat trick if you can get away with it, and is firmly supported by Ron Unz's Silicon Valley Friends, the likes of the"digital gangsters" at Facebook, and Google who demand a constant influx of cheap Asian brains to develop software, rather than incur the expense of promoting good education for all Americans. That Trump is an American-Firster, at least in theory, is of course, why the elite class in America and the World hate him with such virulence.

British Muslims Oppose School Indoctrination on Equality

Daily Mail, February 14, 2019: More than 300 parents and children gathered outside Parkfield Community School, Birmingham, to protest against lessons on equality at the school including issues of homosexuality and gender. Some Muslim demonstrators said they would rather leave the UK than allow their children to continue attending the school.

Obviously, these people should be given every encouragement to leave the UK.

Problem is, given the elite determination to grant everyone in the world the same rights to everything in Britain as the native born, there'll be more misguided Muslims pouring into Britain as the disillusioned leave.

Instead, of course, the thing to do is restore democracy in Britain and run the place in the interests of the Brits, not the globalist Money Power that seeks to destroy every European nation through suppressed native reproduction and mass replacement immigration as a prerequisite to global governance.

The Muslims, incidentally, are fools if they think they will succeed in taking over Europe and establishing there a Muslim caliphate. The last thing the globalist elite will tolerate is a theocratic state. What they intend is a global system of servitude subject to the dictates of political correctness, i.e., the strictures imposed for the convenience of the Eloi ruling class upon the enslaved Morlocks.

Blog Post of the Day: Vox Day

Invaders in London, by Vox Popoli:

That map shows very clearly how invaders have taken over London. Interestingly enough, it appears the media thinks the British are supposed to be deeply concerned about Japanese knotweed replacing the native plants, but celebrate Asians and Africans replacing the native people.

Justin Trudeau's Final Blunder?

Among journalists, Andrew Coyne is a very much smarter than most, and in the matter of SNC-Lavelin and the resignation of Trudeau's Justice Minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould, he appears to have left the rest of the commentariat in the dust.

In a weekend article in the National Post, he makes five points that seem to leave little more to be said, other than Justin Trudeau's resignation speech. 

First:

The director of public prosecutions, Kathleen Roussel, it has been widely reported, decided not to offer SNC-Lavalin the remediation agreement it had so feverishly, and successfully, lobbied for. But in fact she may have had no choice. The relevant provision (sect. 715.3) of the Criminal Code sets out a long list of “conditions” that must be present and “factors” prosecutors must consider before they can even enter negotiations on such an agreement; another list sets out the “mandatory contents” of the agreement itself. First, prosecutors “must” consider “the circumstances in which the act or omission that forms the basis of the offence was brought to the attention of investigative authorities,” in the service of one of the legislation’s key objectives, “to encourage voluntary disclosure of the wrongdoing.” But SNC-Lavalin didn’t voluntarily disclose that it allegedly paid bribes of $48 million to Libyan government officials and defrauded various organizations in the country of $130 million. The matter only came to light after a lengthy police investigation.

Second:

... the agreement must include “the organization’s admission of responsibility” for the alleged offence. Has SNC-Lavalin explicitly admitted corporate responsibility in the Libyan affair? A lawyer friend who has closely followed the case can find no example of it, in any public statement. It has dismissed the charges against it as “without merit,” insisting any alleged crimes were the work of a few rogue executives “who left the company long ago.” Perhaps that weighed heavily in the director’s deliberations.

Third:

Finally, there is sect. 715.32 (3) of the Code, under the heading “Factors not to consider.” For offences under section 3 or 4 of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, it reads — SNC-Lavalin was charged with one count of corruption under sect. 3(1)(b) of the act, along with one count of fraud — “the prosecutor must not consider,” inter alia, “the national economic interest.” (This is not only a matter of domestic law. It is a virtual word-for-word transposition of our obligations under the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials.) So its defenders’ stated rationale for sparing SNC-Lavalin from prosecution — the dire consequences for jobs and the economy should the company be convicted, and presumably collapse — is not only economically suspect (SNC-Lavalin is not the only employer in the construction industry, nor would the work for which it has contracted disappear just because the company did) and morally dubious. It’s expressly precluded in law.

Fourth:

The DPP was not only within her rights, then, to refuse to negotiate a remediation agreement, she would arguably be breaking the law if she did. Suppose that were not true. Could the attorney general order her to? That, too, is far from clear. Under the law the attorney general is required to sign off on a prosecutor’s decision to negotiate a remediation agreement. But the prosecutor needs no such consent to decline to negotiate; neither is there anything in the law that says the attorney general can order her to.

Fifth:

This is not contradicted, as another lawyer friend points out, by that much-quoted provision in the Director of Public Prosecutions Act — the one obliging the attorney general to make public any order “with respect to the initiation or conduct” of “any specific prosecution.” Whatever limits that places on the AG’s ability to influence the “conduct” of a prosecution, it would seem to grant no power to stop one after it has started, still less to order a remediation agreement be pursued in its place.

Understandably, therefore,Trudeau keeps Wilson-Raybould firmly gagged by the solicitor-client privilege that only he can waive. After all, who better than the former Justice Minister to draw the attention to the circumstances that make Trudeau's action in firing Wilson-Raybould indefensible.

Source 

Related:
CanSpeccy: Justin Trudeau: The Worst Canadian Prime Minister Since Pierrre Elliot Trudeau?

Race: Why Liberal Globalists and Communist Revolutionaries Agree There Is No Such Thing

CanSpeccy, October 6, 2014: Liberals and other agents of the New World Order, like hard-line Communists, are revolutionaries who seek to establish a system of global governance. The difference between the two is that the globalization aimed at by liberals will subordinate all humanity to the moneyed elite, the bankers, the billionaires and the chiefs of the giant corporations, whereas the Communist revolution will serve the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is to say the Nomenclatura for whom tyranny means thousands of comfy bureaucratic jobs with lots of power and privilege.

To both classes of revolutionary, the great obstacle to their dream is the nation state that declares the right of the people in any geographic area with the means to defend themselves to rule themselves as they see fit, which means maintaining control of the borders to prevent occupation of the territory by invaders or an uncontrolled flow of immigrants, and the preservation of the religious and cultural tradition of the people.

To the revolutionaries, there is a simple solution to the problem of the nation state and the desire of the vast majority of the people of the world to live among their own kind in accordance with their traditional manners, morals and forms of governance. It is to insist that there is no such thing as the nation, that all humanity is one race, and that it is simply bunk to claim that the English, say, have a privileged status in England, or that the Amerindians of Canada have legal and moral rights to control over their traditional lands and the freedom to live on those lands according to their own beliefs and traditions.

Liberals and Communists are thus in agreement on the need for universal genocide, which is to say the destruction of the nation state and its underlying human biological and cultural diversity. As a cover for this project, which is to be fulfilled through mass migrations, multi-culturalism and the suppression of the fertility of indigenous peoples, both liberals and Communists deny the reality of human racial diversity, for in the absence of such diversity, both the the nation state and the crime of genocide become meaningless concepts.

The war on the concept of race appears now to be heating up with the publication of multiple books on the subject the consequence of which is the creation of ever greater confusion and misunderstanding.

Among the more recent contributions to this great obfuscation is A Troublesome Inheritance, by Nicholas Wade. As a former deputy editor of Nature magazine and a one-time writer for Science magazine and the New York Times, Wade has pretty good credentials as an obfuscator of basic science for political purposes as anyone with long experience of those publications with which Wade has been associated would know, and obfuscation is what Wade provides in this book.

Race, Wade acknowledges, is real, but then proceeds to lay it down as a matter of fact that there are only five human races: black, white, red, and yellow, plus Australian aboriginal. Thus he either deliberately muddies the water or demonstrates that he doesn't know what he is talking about. Making it impossible to know whether Wade is merely confused or is acting as a globalist shill, he never defines the term "race," thus his more or less arbitrary five-fold division of mankind serves to reinforce the popular misconception that race is largely a matter of skin color, whereas in fact skin color is by no means definitive of race. For example, sub-Saharan Africans, Dravidians of the Indian sub-continent, the Australian aborigines, and some Amerindians are all more or less the same color, but they are by no means closely related. Conversely, there are thousands of white Africans (albinos) who are definitely not Caucasians.

Race is a matter of kinship. To define the term formally, a race is an interbreeding population (human, for the purpose of this discussion) more or less completely isolated genetically from other populations by barriers of geography, politics, class, caste, or religion.

Defined thus, we can see that the tribalized people of black Africa are far from being a homogeneous group, but rather, are among the most diverse people on earth and may encompass greater population-level genetic variation than all other human groups combined.

Thus, as Wade notes, since 1980, all Olympic 100 m finalists have been of West African origin. But that does not make all black people fast runners. An East African on the Barak Obama model will never outrun a Jesse Owens over 100 meters, although an African of the latter type will never outrun the fastest East African over ten thousand meters.

But it is not just black Africans who display great diversity. Traveling over any significant area of the populated world one sees regional differences in the physical traits of the indigenous peoples: scull shapes for example, brachycephalics predominantly in North West Spain versus dolicocephalics in Southern Spain, or hair and eye color, to take another example, from dark-haired, brown-eyed Celts over most of the Scottish Highlands, to blond, blue-eyed people of Viking descent in Caithness in the remote North East of Scotland, and other coastal areas of settlement of the British Isles.

So racial differences can be seen at multiple levels. Between a Chinese and and Englishman, or a Glaswegian and an Edinburghian, and indeed between any two places where migration has not obliterated the pattern of genetic variation established during many generations of past reproductive isolation during which genetic drift, selection and random mutation have wrought differences among gene pools.

What these differences really mean, no one knows. Certainly Wade's presumptions about racial differences in psychology and their impact on the historical development of the world seem speculative to the point of absurdity. Yet such differences may indeed be important. Sadly, the globalist revolutionaries are intent on creating a global melting pot that will make all indigenous peoples a disappearing minority in their own homelands and wipe out in a generation or two potentially important racial aggregations of genes created over 100,000 years of human evolution.

Related:

CanSpeccy:
Universal Genocide and the New World Order

CanSpeccy:
Why and How Western Elites Turned Against Their Own People

CanSpeccy:
In Praise of Diversity

Taxing the One Percent

Make the rich pay: that's a good populist slogan, and very dangerous — to the rich.

How do the rich fight back? Currently, two ways. First, they have some dupe or colluding leftie to advocate for higher income tax. Currently, for example, newly elected US Congress woman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is calling for a 70% top tax rate, while Bernie Sanders, an old-line Commie, calls for a more moderate 15% increase in the top tax rate to a mere 52%, or about what Canada's 1% pay, already.

But what does that mean for the rich. Well here's Bill Gates, one time richest man in the world, on how income tax impacts the rich:

In terms of revenue collection, you wouldn’t want to just focus on the ordinary income rate, because people who are wealthy have a rounding error of ordinary income.

Get it? For rich people the income tax rate is essentially irrelevant because they pay it on only a trivial amount of their actual annual increment in wealth. How come. Because, as Bill Gates goes on to explain:

(The rich) have income that just is the value of their stock, which if they don't sell it, it doesn't show up as income at all, or if it shows up, it shows up over in the capital gains side. So the ability of hedge fund people, various people — they aren't paying that ordinary income rate.

OK, and the second way to fight making the rich pay?

Why, like Canada's young and handsome Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, you point out that the poor don't pay any tax at all! 

This is, of course a preposterous lie, since in Canada, income tax kicks in on any earned income in excess of $12,069 per year: or approximately $750 US per month.

How do Trudeauvians justify such a preposterous claim? Why, easy sleazy: from your tax payment we deduct the cost of the government services you receive, for example, brain-washing your kid with compulsory sex "education, " you know, indoctrinating the youth of the nation with the idea that the only sexual vice is reproduction. Then there's the cost of all those wonderful bureacratic services you receive from Ottawa, like that of Revenue Canada, for example.

The argument is absurd: like saying that when you buy a new car you don't pay for it because, well hey, you received a car of value equal to the money you handed the car dealer. But what else could a rather dim-bulb trust-fund kid like our Justin say?

But in any case, who really benefits most from government? The rich, obviously, who are absolutely dependent on the military and the forces of internal law and order to secure their property from the depradations of both fellow citizens and foreign enemies. Thus, the chief form of taxation should be on wealth, not earned income.

How should wealth be taxed? By a simple yearly percentage.

How much should be the tax on capital? Enough to pay for the maintenance of the state, which is to say the cost of the military, the police, the physical infrastructure upon which the functioning of the state and the value of most property depends — for example, a house without road access, water supply, or sewer connection is of little or no value.

In addition, the tax on wealth should cover the cost of basic social services that contribute to the education and health of the people upon whom the owners of capital depend for the operation of the corporations in which they are invested, and the provision of the infrastructure and services such as roads, airports, sewage works, etc.

So how much should this tax on wealth be? For Canada, we can work that out from the fact that the average net worth of a Canadian currently stands at $808,000 or thereabouts.* That means the total wealth of Canadians amounts to around $29 trillion, of which 80% is owned by the wealthiest 20%. So let's exempt the poorest 80% from the wealth tax, and impose a tax of 1% a year on the nearly $24 trillion, or $3.4 million each, owned by the top 20%.

Such a tax would yield $240 billion a year, which is more than the current combined Federal Government revenue from income tax and the job killing corporation tax, both of which could be abolished. Then the poor really would pay no tax, but the rich would still be rich.

According to the French economist Thomas Picketty, financial assets yield around 7% annually over the long-term.  Thus, even if inflation eats 3 or 4% of that return annually, the rich could still expect a positive, after-tax unearned income of 2 or 3% on their investments. What more do they expect? Well, any amount obviously. But if the alternative is a bloody revolution, they should be well content with a real after tax unearned return of 2 or 3%.

Meantime, the really hardworking entrepreneurs and corporate employees, the people who are not rich, by the standards of the rich, but who earn big money, would have maximal incentive to be productive by working like crazy, without the distraction of attempting to minimize their tax obligation through off-shore structures, and the use of trusts and foundations.

____

* Different sources give widely different estimates of Canadians' net worth. The actual number makes no difference to the argument presented, only to the extent to which a capital tax reduces the need for other taxes.

AOC Got One Thing Right

Giving billions in public funds to the richest man in the world, makes no sense.


Related:
Zero Hedge: Amazon Subsidies Were Uneconomical, Un-American, & Unconstitutional

Snakelike Thereason May Secretly Turned Down Free Trade Deal With EU

James Delingpole: 

Breitbart, February 12, 2019: Theresa May and her Remainer civil servants secretly sabotaged an offer made by the EU Council President Donald Tusk of a free trade deal exit from the EU because all they ever really wanted was Brexit In Name Only. ...

Read more

Goddam Hungarians: Why Won't they Commit Suicide By Mass Immigration Like Other Europeans?

Meantime:

French fire-fighters join the yellow vests and foam the police:
LOL. The police played their part well. Standing to attention as they were buried in foam. Looks like it was staged and that, in their hearts, the police are with the YellowVests too.

10 Reasons The Gilets-Jeunes Are The Real Deal

A Quarter of French Believe ‘Elites’ Using Mass Migration to ‘Replace’ Native Europeans

Look out! The people are waking up. Quick: supply more porn, more crap TV, more rubbish entertainment of every kind, more sex "ed.", more junk food, more welfare, legalized drugs, whatever they want, free money even, anything at all to keep them moving quietly along the path toward the gas chambers, or racial extinction, anyhow, by a combination of suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration.

What Is a Politician?

Saw this on the Internets the other day:

While stitching a cut on the hand of a 75-year-old farmer whose hand was caught in the squeeze gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually, the topic got around to politicians and their role as our leaders. The old farmer said: Well, as I see it, most politicians are post turtles. Being unfamiliar with the term "post turtle," the doctor asked what a post turtle was. To which the old rancher replied: When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle. The old farmer saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face so he continued: You know he didn't get up there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, he's elevated beyond his ability to function, and you just wonder what kind of dumb arse put him up there to begin with.

But it's not quite right.

In fact the post turtle has been elevated beyond his station for a purpose, which is the purpose of the person who elevated him, or her, and who rewards him, or her, as long as he, or she, performs his or her intended purpose. Sort of like Justin Trudeau, some have suggested, and the powerful and deeply corrupt corporation, SNC Lavelin, headquartered not a million miles from Turtle Justin's Montreal riding office.

Related: 

NaPo: Andrew Coyne: We are still waiting for a clear denial over SNC-Lavalin allegations

NaPo: Rex Murphy: Trudeau sure doesn't sound like he has nothing to hide about SNC-Lavalin

NaPo: Andrew Coyne: Hard to overstate seriousness of SNC-Lavalin allegations

NaPo: John Ivison: The government needs to let Jody Wilson-Raybould speak

And here is US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez explaining some of the mechanics that underlie the usefulness of the post turtle.

Er, well no. It's been flushed down the U-tube memory hole.

Related:

Zero Hedge: "Progressive" Attacks On Capitalism Were Key To Hitler's Success

Single tax form in Quebec a no-go for Trudeau — It would mean fewer bureaucrats

Here's a story to give Canadians a warm fuzzy feeling as they slave over the details of their 2018 tax return — or returns, if they live in Québec.

The Trudeau Liberals are committed to the existing requirement that residents of the Province of Québec complete two tax returns, one for the Feds and one for the Province of Québec.

Chronicle Herald, February 6, 2019: OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau threw cold water on any idea his government would give in to the demand for a single tax form in Quebec.

Why? 

Solely, according to Trudeau, because two forms instead of one costs the public an extra $600 million a year and thus keeps on the public payroll hundreds, if not thousands, of Revue Agency workers who might otherwise be doing something of actual value in the private sector.

Chronicle Herald, February 6, 2019: OTTAWA —The federal Liberals argue that implementing the idea would put in peril the jobs of hundreds, if not thousands, of Quebec-based Canada Revenue Agency workers. "We recognize that it is jobs that Mr. Legault's and Mr. Scheer's statements put in jeopardy," Trudeau said. Ottawa announced Monday the construction of a new building for the tax centre in Shawinigan, Que., where 1,500 people are employed.

No wonder that Justin's Canada has become the butt of ridicule from China to Peru. 

Jordan Peterson Has One Thing Right: Academic Psychology's War on Masculinity Is Political Not Scientific

University of Toronto psychology professor, Jordan Peterson, talks too much. We have that from Peterson himself, quoting his father, who must know. But whatever he says, whether it be complete rubbish, as in the case we noted here, or a well-reasoned argument, Peterson demonstrates an oratorical force and a disdain for consequences rarely to be seen in the political, let alone the academic, arena.

To this combination of forceful outspokenness Peterson adds a thoroughgoing contempt for the ideology of political correctness, which he perceives to be a threat not only to the integrity of the academic enterprise but to the continued existence of Western civilization. It is in his critique of the present-day manifestation of feminism, anti-white racism, and indeed white self-abnegation, together with every other form of Marxist-inspired group identity politics that Peterson has achieved international recognition. His scathing critique of the American Psychological Association's denigration of masculinity, a critique published in today's National Post, will only enhance Peterson's standing as a champion of rationality opposed to the toxic leftist dogma that has permeated the Western academic world.

It’s ideology vs. science in psychology’s war on boys and men By Jordan Peterson National Post, February 1, 2019: The American Psychological Association (APA) recently released its Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men. It manages to be simultaneously predictable, reprehensible, infuriating and disheartening — no mean feat for a single document. Make no mistake about it: this document constitutes an all-out assault on masculinity — or, to put it even more bluntly, on men. The coup of the APA undertaken by the ideologues is now complete. The field has been compromised, perhaps fatally. And the damnable guidelines provide sufficient, but by no means exhaustive, evidence of that. Why should we care? For that, I defer to Robert W. Levenson, when he was president of the Association for Psychological Science, an organization formed in an attempt to retain integrity in the field: “We all will come into close contact with mental illness during our lives. The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental illness must reflect the very best science possible. Good intentions are not enough. History is replete with well-intentioned practitioners offering treatments of no proven scientific value, that were enthusiastically embraced by patients and their families but ultimately did absolutely no good and kept people from seeking truly effective treatments.” We cannot allow ideology and political correctness to prevail over science. The Boys and Men document is propagandistic to a degree that is almost incomprehensible. Read more

Despite the plausibility of Peterson's argument, it is far from certain that the absence of a male parent is the reason that fatherless boys are prone to antisocial behavior. Equally plausible, it would seem, is that fatherless boys are more liable to engage in antisocial behavior because they have a greater than normal chance of inheriting paternal genes that predispose to irresponsibility. Peterson is correct, however, in condemning the American Psychological Association for asserting a mere hypothesis of low credibility as a scientific fact and as a basis, quite outrageously, to encourage mothers to dispense with a male partner in raising their sons.

Related:

Telegraph: Boys left to fail at school because attempts to help them earn wrath of feminists, says ex-Ucas chief
Voice of Europe: The Islamisation of Britain intensifies: Muslim school will not allow girls to eat lunch until after boys have finished