It may seem to be a far reach from the armchair philosopher to the political activist but history says otherwise. Recall too that “man is emphatically a proselytizing creature”, the acknowledgement of which is more than a paltry assertion given the imagination of those behind the ensuing narrative. The examples illustrate a terrifying truth: synthetic deception isn’t just possible – it’s effective.
Following is a clip from an article on Prophecy News Watch located in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, USA.
Call Toll Free: 1-877-561-4442
Email: Info@ProphecyNewsWatch.com
In yet another disturbing escalation of state-sponsored madness, a spokeswoman for Canada’s national police force, the RCMP, has warned that a person who shifts from liberal to more traditional values could be showing signs of radicalization.
Read that again. In Canada–now led by Prime Minister Mark Carney–thinking like your parents orgrandparents might get you flagged by the national security apparatus. This isn’t satire. It’s the new reality of our deeply ideological and increasingly dystopian nation.
Staff Sgt. Camille Habel made this astonishing claim after the arrest of four individuals in Quebec allegedly involved in “ideologically motivated violent extremism.” Rather than focus on actual violence or credible threats, she suggested that something as simple as turning away from progressive politics and embracing traditional family values could be considered a warning sign.
Let that sink in: in 2025 Canada, wanting your kids raised by their own parents–or even believing there are only two genders–is now potentially a red flag for national security.
This is the kind of absurdity that happens when a nation confuses virtue with violence and dissent with extremism.
Personally I might have preferred more detail on both sides of the argument before jumping to conclusion; however my point is not to support or contradict either the government or the opposition. The more telling derivation from both sides of the fence is that fashions change. Those once mocked and abused have changed with dramatic clarity to the mocker and abuser – and with equally unforgiving aim. If one were to ask, “What is the answer?” then I am inclined to ask, “What is the question?”
Since “all Forms whereby Spirit manifests itself to sense, whether outwardly or in the imagination, are Clothes,” civilisation and everything belonging to it—our languages, literatures and arts, our governments, social machinery and institutions, our philosophies, creeds and rituals—are but so many vestments woven for itself by the shaping spirit of man.
Excerpt From
Carlyle, Thomas “Sartor Resartus, and On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History.”
The French Revolution is a ready example of conflict distinguished by something as immaterial as material. Certainly beneath the metaphor is ample fodder for examination; but humanity – in spite of its willingness to embrace ritual of the most extraordinary amplitude – finds it far more difficult to extend the sphere of absorption to the ofttimes pathetic and simple detail of what really matters.
The sans-culottes (French: lit. ‘without breeches‘) were the common people of the lower classes in late 18th-century France, a great many of whom became radical and militant partisans of the French Revolution in response to their poor quality of life under the Ancien Régime. The word sans-culotte, which is opposed to “aristocrat”, seems to have been used for the first time on 28 February 1791 by Jean-Bernard Gauthier de Murnan in a derogatory sense, speaking about a “sans-culottes army”. The word came into vogue during the demonstration of 20 June 1792.
The name sans-culottes refers to their clothing, and through that to their lower-class status: culottes were the fashionable silk knee-breeches of the 18th-century nobility and bourgeoisie, and the working class sans-culottes wore pantaloons, or long trousers, instead. The sans-culottes, most of them urban labourers, served as the driving popular force behind the revolution. They were judged by the other revolutionaries as “radicals” because they advocated a direct democracy, that is to say, without intermediaries such as members of parliament. Though ill-clad and ill-equipped, with little or no support from the middle and upper classes, they made up the bulk of the Revolutionary army and were responsible for many executions during the early years of the French Revolutionary Wars.
The most fundamental political ideals of the sans-culottes were social equality, economic equality, and popular democracy. They supported the abolition of all the authority and privileges of the monarchy, nobility, and Roman Catholic clergy, the establishment of fixed wages, the implementation of price controls to ensure affordable food and other essentials, and vigilance against counter-revolutionaries.
Once again, dear Reader, a reminder that the horrific evolution of the French Revolution was not all for the good of one side. Eventually even its most ardent proponents were beheaded by their erstwhile comrades as the tide of endurance shifted. Getting ahead with one another requires more than a change of clothes.