Last months article was dedicated to the Freedom Convoy and my experiences at it. Though I classify it as one of the most heart warming experiences of my life it appears the media is determined to paint the event in a very different framework. There are two primary themes the media has been hired to portray the convoy as: first it was a violent (terrorist) event, secondly it had nothing to do with mandates being lifted. I trust my article last month provides an alternative to the violent narrative. The second impression takes a little more involvement to counter.
I have several friends who are deeply involved in politics (current or prior MP’s and MLA’s). From their perspectives it was shared to me that when politicians stated “follow the science” it referred mostly to following the “poles”. In other words politicians eventually only did what the poles reflected and not what the medical science presented. The politicians enforced what the people felt was appropriate, not what the science said it was. When I first was told this I was skeptical and held the view as mostly “unsupported”. However, in the first week of February provinces began dropping mandates like dominoes as the accompanying poles showed a 19/20 point swing in opinion. Early January showed that 35% of the people wanted the mandates dropped and then 54% wanted them dropped 3 ½ weeks later. Now that is a gigantic swing of opinion. What happened at the end of January that changed 19/20% of Canadians to want the mandates dropped? Well, only one thing happened… the Freedom Convoy.
So when the legacy media now states that the Freedom convoy had nothing to do with dropping the mandates (or that opinion poles did not influence them either) the assumption is that “science” was the determining factor? The only evidence I can see from press releases at the time was the fact that Israel lifted all COVID travel bans January 6, 2022 due to Omicron being “unstoppable”. Is that the “science” they are referring to? I hope not because Quebec ANNOUNCED a fine for the unvaccinated Jan 11, 2022 five days AFTER Israel’s LIFTING of travel bans. On February 1, 2022 only four days into the Ottawa protest, Quebec then announced they would be DROPPING the unvax tax, the same day Premier Scott Moe announced all restrictions would end Feb 28… and then… the Provincial dominoes began falling fast and furiously.
Trying to keep up with the logic string of legacy media’s “political science” I think is futile, an exercise of a rabbit hole mentality (Alice in Wonderland had a more scientific experience). This rabid narrative only enforces a distrust and disassociation with legacy “information” providers. I remember an article I wrote a while back which stated “…in a war, the first casualty is always the truth”.
There comes a point in time when reputation must be considered when listening or reading. Over my life I have tried to minimize or eliminate things that are a waist of time such as: washing my vehicle at 30 below zero, taking to heart political promises, trying to piece together conspiracy theories, or listening to a fool go on and on about his wisdom. My list may be very different than yours but I think you know what I mean.
Lately I’ve been shown more and more that legacy media pieces make less and less sense. However, if this was the only problem we could all just learn to filter out these institutions. But, alas, the problem is more complex.
The perplexing part of the poling is the 19/20% swing to dropping the mandates. How can there be such a HUGE swing in such a short period of time? What was going through the participants mind in early January verses early February? Sound logic associates the convoy as the source of change but there was much more “requesting” than “scientific-ating” (I enjoy inventing new words). I pose that it was more of an emotional attachment to HOPE OVER FEAR than it was the winning of any scientific argument. Though this may sound encouraging to some people, it also has an ominous shadow. Minds that are quickly changed due to emotional association or possibilities alone can generally be quickly changed again through similar non-scientific methods. Thus, in my opinion, the battle for our country’s future is not over when all the mandates are lifted. Our freedom is secured by mature logical and scientific dialog, not through emotional association of hope over fear or fear over hope. 20% of our population needs to learn to navigate by principles and not by following some crowd whipped up by the media or convoys. 20% of our population needs to learn the path of wisdom and understanding rather than the path of simple mass narratives.
I place the scope of our nations vulnerability square at the feet of our educational system, which has failed to educate the importance of critical thinking and logic in the setting of fare debate. It’s just too simple for people to follow the crowd than to develop their own independent thinking forums. It appears our society needs to grow up (mature) faster, something that is not a necessity in many lives. We simply have it too easy, we have grown too lazy in our affluence. Do we have to go through a major national crisis before we fully engage our cognition? But then again, maybe my natural cynical nature is peeking out in word form.