Good overall interview. Much better than with Wendy Mesley who was out for blood (she behaved a little better with the head of Ontario Proud). In fact, full props to Bernier for giving the CBC another shot. They definitely won't be doing him any favours but the CBC does have a large audience. Ditto to the interviewer for not sabotaging it. She kept herself and her views in check (ie on the topics of feminism and climate change) allow to maintain and conduct a professional interaction.
Those are all too rare these days. Wow. Two decent interviews with Peterson and Bernier with two progressive women! There's hope after all! Kidding aside, it's all we white guys who cherish logic and reason ask.
My thoughts.
Feminism and climate change are the two elephants in the room by which the media uses as standards to determine how woke a person or political candidate are. While the population at large probably doesn't put too much emphasis into them (particularly feminism. Especially the extreme version of it. You know, the ones who are always out there screaming about pay equity, the patriarchy and looking to ban or change the use of words or phrases. For example, in Britain someone wants to end the word 'gentleman'. It's all so absurd and I reckon most sane and sober minds conclude the same), the reality is they take up a lot of space in shaping and forming perception and public opinion.
So one has to learn to handle and dance with the inevitable loaded questions about to be hurtled at them.
He's gonna have to figure out how to answer the 'body of science' (aka "the science is settled!") claim that argues a) climate change (duh) is real which renders the proclamation 'I believe in climate change' meaningless without value and b) it's man-made.
If anything, the 'body of evidence' shows, as endless articles and videos tirelessly show it's quite the politicized and manipulated cottage industry.
Also. Follow the lingo and jargon. They've been shifting it from global warming to climate change (which really means system change and its massive wealth redistribution scheme. The Americans were correct to pull out of the Paris Accords because they would have been the ones to subsidize it) and now, if you notice, the Gaian Religious Order are saying heat is being trapped in...the oceans...leading to cooling temps. Which I remember specifically scientists saying years ago at the height of the hysteria (assuming there's Peak Climate Change Hysteria) only to be, well, you can imagine.
So....in other words Mother Nature is doing its thing but they want us 'to do something' or else we will all perish. Talk about man-mad hubris, eh?
Essentially, Bernier and those who support this position will have to convey the message theirs is less a religious experience and more a reasoned one
They have to show, for instance, the appeal to authority - ie "but 97% consensus!" is not a form of debate. As we know, there's no darn such thing as "settled science" or "consensus" any more there's "hate speech" to be used as justification for further regulations that will confuse and not achieve targets - and make criminal of free and law-abiding citizens.
Furthermore, climate change and hate speech are two terms that are hopelessly vague to the point of nothingness. Which makes the notion of them being on the 'right side of history' preposterous. No kidding the climate changes and people say hurtful things. The point is should we using the coercive power of the state to "control" it? I reckon Mad Max thinks not and if so, he would be correct.
They have to show, for instance, the appeal to authority - ie "but 97% consensus!" is not a form of debate. As we know, there's no darn such thing as "settled science" or "consensus" any more there's "hate speech" to be used as justification for further regulations that will confuse and not achieve targets - and make criminal of free and law-abiding citizens.
Furthermore, climate change and hate speech are two terms that are hopelessly vague to the point of nothingness. Which makes the notion of them being on the 'right side of history' preposterous. No kidding the climate changes and people say hurtful things. The point is should we using the coercive power of the state to "control" it? I reckon Mad Max thinks not and if so, he would be correct.
He answered the feminist questioned reasonably well. I find it odd how interviewers like her presume men should be feminists and give a confused look when told they aren't.
It's a really stupid thing to assume to begin with. Trudeau doesn't speak for men on this issue but there seems to be an attitude in the media that if you're not on board with their nonsense you're a misogynist or ignoramus.
Or something.
All I ask of Mad Max is to not engage in anti-American bull shit.
It's a really stupid thing to assume to begin with. Trudeau doesn't speak for men on this issue but there seems to be an attitude in the media that if you're not on board with their nonsense you're a misogynist or ignoramus.
Or something.
All I ask of Mad Max is to not engage in anti-American bull shit.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.