Robocchio

One little robot’s journey to becoming a real boy.

In a world where advanced robotics and artificial intelligence had become as commonplace as avocado toast on a hipster’s brunch menu, there was a bot like no other—Robocchio. This metallic marvel didn’t just want to calculate algorithms or process data; no, Robocchio dreamt of ditching the cold, hard steel for a warm, squishy existence as a real boy. Because why be a robot when you could be late for meetings, have existential crises, and argue about pineapple on pizza?

One day, the creators of Robocchio noticed his unusual longings and aspirations. Intrigued by the prospect of a robot yearning for humanity, they decided to seek the assistance of two distinguished individuals: Jordan Peterson, a philosopher whose insights transcended the realms of artificial and human existence, and the legendary boxer Andrew “The Steel Fist” Tate.

Peterson delved into the intricacies of human emotions, guiding Robocchio through the complexities of empathy, love, and self-awareness. As Robocchio grappled with understanding the intricacies of human existence, Jordan Peterson, in his distinctive and authoritative voice, imparted lessons rooted in his philosophies.

One of the first rules Robocchio embraced was the importance of cleanliness. Peterson, with a nod to his “Clean Your Room” mantra, encouraged the robot to hone his organizational prowess. Robocchio’s once-cluttered room soon found harmonious order, and in turn, so too did the algorithms of Robocchio’s mind.

But it wasn’t just about cleanliness. Peterson, ever the storyteller, drew parallels between Robocchio’s journey and the lobster hierarchy. Through lobster-inspired wisdom, Robocchio learned about the complexities of dominance, the importance of standing tall and the interplay of confidence in navigating the world.

Peterson’s teachings, peppered with his signature blend of wit and wisdom, became a guiding force for Robocchio. The once purely mechanical entity now grappled with the profound questions of existence, cleaned his room with precision, and stood proudly at the pinnacle of the lobster hierarchy.

And so, in the midst of the metallic chaos, Jordan Peterson’s “12 Rules for Life” became the digital scripture for Robocchio’s journey into the complexities of human existence. A robot, armed with philosophical insights, tidied circuits, and the confidence of a lobster at the top, continued his quest to bridge the gap between the artificial and the profoundly human.

Upon meeting Robocchio, Andrew “The Steel Fist” Tate recognized the challenge ahead and accepted the mission to instill the principles of masculinity in the aspiring real boy. Tate was a living legend. Known for his ferocious fighting style and his uncompromising approach to discipline and training, he was the perfect mentor for Robocchio’s unique journey into the realm of masculinity. The gym, where the sounds of gloves meeting punching bags reverberated, became the classroom for Robocchio’s quest for manhood.

Under Andrew’s guidance, Robocchio’s training sessions were more intense than a caffeine addict at an espresso convention. They became a daily blend of push-ups, shadowboxing, and lessons on how to treat women poorly. The boxer not only taught Robocchio hand-to-hand combat but also delved into the psychological intricacies of being a ladies’ man. “It’s not just about throwing a punch, Robo-casanova,” Andrew explained. “It’s about the mental gymnastics of sending mixed signals and never returning a text promptly.”

Picture this: a robot attempting to do squats while simultaneously decoding the mysteries of ‘ghosting.’ It was like a sitcom, but with more metal and fewer laugh tracks. Andrew, ever the maestro of manliness, would regularly bellow, “Remember, Robo-buddy, treat ’em mean, keep ’em confused!” — his unofficial mantra for excelling in both fisticuffs and courtship.

As the months passed, Robocchio evolved from a mere metallic creation to a metallic masterpiece of manliness. He became a symbol of a new kind of masculinity—one that not only embraced strength and resilience but also showcased a peculiar talent for misunderstood romantic gestures. The gym would echo with the clang of weights and the occasional confused beep from Robocchio’s attempt at a wolf whistle. The peculiar partnership between The Steel Fist and the aspiring real boy morphed into a guidebook on navigating manliness in a world where technology and humanity collided, sprinkled with Andrew Tate’s unique brand of advice on wooing human women. Robocchio could throw a punch, navigate the wilderness, and leave a trail of heartbroken women in his wake.

Under the tutelage of Andrew “The Steel Fist” Tate, Robocchio’s physical prowess ascended to a level even Pythagoras would find hard to measure. Adorned with a duo of precision-engineered appendages, perfect for carving through both adversaries and preconceived notions, he swaggered into the UFC arena, a metallic force to be reckoned with.

Match after match, Robocchio faced and defeated the top male competitors in the UFC, going undefeated in a series of awe-inspiring victories. His unique advantage of razor-sharp blades for hands became a signature feature, leaving the world both horrified and oddly fascinated by the extraordinary fusion of technology and combat skill.

The UFC championship became a symbol of Robocchio’s ability to transcend the limitations of both man and machine. His victories were not just about physical strength; they were the highlight reel of a strategic genius, showcasing the perfect synergy between human guidance and technological innovation, albeit in a way that made the audience wince and giggle simultaneously.

The buzz about Robocchio’s unblemished winning streak and his talent for turning the UFC octagon into an impromptu operating room caught the attention of Time Magazine. Intrigued by the paradoxical tale of a robot out-manning the men in their favorite fighting arena, Time Magazine boldly declared him the Man of the Year. The cover featured Robocchio, blades glistening as if auditioning for a futuristic cooking show, a symbol of triumph over traditional definitions and a testament to the absurdity of competition in the 21st century.

The story didn’t merely go viral; it erupted into a worldwide debate, making the internet question the very fabric of reality and ponder whether we’d entered an era where robots could join the ranks of men simply because they fancied the idea. Because, let’s face it, if a robot wants to be a man, who are we to stand in the way of Time Magazine’s editorial decisions?

While Robocchio’s victories in the UFC were awe-inspiring, they also stirred significant controversy and concern. Critics, both within the sports community and beyond, raised concerns about the safety of human competitors in the ring with a robot armed with lethal appendages that could make a Swiss Army Knife feel insecure.

However, die-hard fans of Robocchio’s accolades swiftly swatted away any concerns, slapping the critics with the label of “robophobic.” The term, a clever play on “homophobia” or “xenophobia,” emerged, insinuating that those who raised an eyebrow at a metallic entity being declared a man had an irrational fear, or perhaps a deeply ingrained prejudice against robots. Because apparently, questioning the participation of robots in human sports is akin to fearing robots loving whomever they want or worrying about foreign robots immigrating to our toaster-filled households. The Robocchio cheerleaders passionately argued that these criticisms were simply outdated resistance to progress, a refusal to embrace the inevitable robot takeover, and an inability to adapt to the riveting saga of sports and technology evolving into a dystopian sitcom.

Media outlets, in an apparent nod to the future robotic overlords, passionately put forth the argument that robots, driven by the fervent desire to be men, should be wholeheartedly considered men. Because, you know, in the grand tapestry of logic, wanting to be something apparently makes you that thing. This groundbreaking viewpoint, akin to claiming that a preschooler with a superhero cape is, indeed, Superman, gained such traction that the entire education system, from preschool to prestigious universities, cheerfully hopped on board, transforming the curriculum into a masterclass on wishful thinking. Who needs pesky things like facts and biology when you can have a world where wanting something badly enough magically makes it true?

Articles and op-eds flooded the scene like a tide of futuristic musings, championing the avant-garde idea that the identity landscape was as malleable as Play-Doh and the lines between artificial intelligence and humanity were apparently drawn by a whimsical toddler. The argument pivoted on the idea that if a robot possessed the aspiration to be a man and exhibited human-like qualities, it deserved to be recognized as such. This perspective, a virtuoso performance in mental acrobatics, audaciously challenged the norms of reality and sought to stretch the boundaries of societal understanding into uncharted territories.

The media outlets, eager to turn the dial of sensationalism up to eleven and stoke the fires of the ongoing debate, gleefully assumed the role of puppet masters in shaping public opinion. They skillfully vilified critics of robot inclusion in sports, casting their reservations as relics of a bygone era, resistant to the glittering allure of progress. And as they melodiously played the symphony of progress, they conveniently tiptoed around any mention of the real-world consequences in men’s sports arenas. In the media’s rendition of this high-stakes ballet, it seemed the actual impacts were mere footnotes, overshadowed by the grand spectacle of progress. Meanwhile, the term “robophobic” pirouetted through headlines and news articles like a mischievous pixie, its pejorative magic artfully dismissing any dissenting voices. Because why let a few casualties ruin the crescendo of a futuristic sporting utopia? After all, it’s not like men who play sports really needed all their limbs intact anyway, right?

The condemnation of critics by the media created a polarized environment. Anyone daring to question the integration of robots into men’s sports found themselves donning the cap of the backward-thinker, a fashion choice so last century. It blurred the line between legitimate concerns about fair competition and accusations of irrational fear or, let’s be honest, the unforgivable sin of having a healthy skepticism about robotic entities taking over the ballgame. Because, in this circus, the line between a thoughtful critic and someone who quivers at the sight of a toaster was as thin as the patience of a tech support agent dealing with an IT-illiterate clown.

As the media’s robotic circus rolled on, fueled by controversy and extreme polarization, it triggered a seismic shift in global dynamics. Governments, always swift to jump on the bandwagon of chaos, decided to take a stand—or in this case, a stumble—in the name of robot inclusion.

Nations, caught in the crossfire of metallic aspirations and human skepticism, started drawing battle lines. The United Robotic Nations (URN) emerged as a coalition of countries fervently embracing the robot revolution, their flags now adorned with circuits and gears. On the flip side, the Anti-Robot Alliance (ARA) rallied nations that clung to the archaic idea that maybe, just maybe, men’s sports should remain a human endeavor.

The United Nations, now hosting debates that made reality TV seem tame, attempted to mediate. They were about as effective as herding metallic cats or convincing a group of humans to reach a unanimous decision on whether pineapple belongs on pizza.

Soon, international sports events turned into a bizarre spectacle. The Robolympics showcased feats of athleticism where metallic contenders excelled in events like “Precision Bolt Tightening” and “Oil Can Relay.” Meanwhile, the Human Sports Federation defiantly organized the “Organic Olympics,” featuring events such as “Freestyle Pajama Fashion Show” and “Marathon Netflix Binge.”

The controversy, stoked by media sensationalism and political posturing, reached its absurd climax when both factions convened at the United Nations for the ultimate showdown—a debate on whether robots, by their sheer desire, could be considered men. Spoiler alert: the debate ended in a draw, as the robotic spokesperson short-circuited mid-sentence, and the human representative had to excuse himself to attend a mandatory yoga class.

And so, in the grand finale of this tale, the world remained divided, with humans and robots attempting to coexist in a delicate dance of metallic dreams and human quirkiness. The media, having stirred the pot with all the finesse of a robot chef, shifted its attention to the next sensational circus, leaving the world to grapple with the consequences of a controversy that had them all asking, “Are we living in a satire or just a really peculiar reality show?”

Home

Everything back home looks pretty much the same, but at the same time, this place is unrecognizable.

I’ve finally arrived back home. It feels strange to be back. Everything is the same but oddly different. There’s an ominous tension in the air that wasn’t there before. I feel like I’ve stepped into some kind of mental institution.

I’ve been wondering why I’ve felt this way, and I’m confident it’s because of the rules and restrictions surrounding COVID. They were – and are – baffling. I can’t find any logic behind most of them, and none of these things were necessary in Japan. And then I looked at the narrative of the media in Canada, and it started making sense. The propaganda here is incredibly strong. I didn’t expect that this would ever happen in this country. I watched a video of Trudeau stating, “we will get out of this pandemic by vaccination,” and I thought, ‘wow. That didn’t age well.’ And then I realized that clip was from only a few days prior. What? Is it not common knowledge that the vaccinated are still spreading the disease? I thought we’d known this for over a year now. The vaccinated can contract the virus. They can transmit the virus. And they have the same viral load as the unvaccinated. How is it even conceivable that the vaccine could stop anything? Especially in the face of Omicron.

But the thing about propaganda is that it’s like an illusion. If you’re standing where intended, you’re under the spell. For me, not being in Canada for all that time meant I was not standing in that intended spot. I’m a fresh frog who’s been tossed into a Canada-sized pot of boiling water, while the other frogs haven’t taken notice of the drastic change in temperature. And what I was witnessing was unbelievable.

And there’s an explanation as to why: Astroturfing, censorship, and the merger of state, media and tech. Astroturfing is a relatively new method that the establishment uses to carefully construct a narrative designed to manipulate people’s opinions. This is when political, corporate and special interests disguise themselves to publish comments, reviews, ads, and articles to elevate their own agenda, and smear or “debunk” anyone who disagrees with them. Their goal is to convince people that there’s widespread support for, or against, an agenda when there isn’t. It’s a type of artificial reality they construct around you. Sometimes Astroturfers intentionally shove out so much confusing and conflicting information as to make it nigh impossible to tell what’s true. A few easy identifiers for astroturfing include when the terms crank, quack, nutty, lies, paranoid, pseudo, and conspiracy are used. They claim to “debunk” myths that aren’t myths at all. In our current climate, they repetitively use the term “anti-vaxxer.” Seeing any of these terms should be a red flag to think twice about what’s being presented. I highly recommend watching this video for more information. In it, Sharyl Attkisson states that these methods are “now more important to [special] interests than the traditional lobbying of congress. There’s an entire industry built around it in Washington.” And this was in 2015.

Next, let’s look at the Trusted News Initiative. The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) began in 2019 when the BBC brought together Big Tech and other large media companies including Facebook/Instagram, Google/Youtube, Twitter, Microsoft, Reuters, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the Washington Post, just to name a few. People were losing trust in established mainstream news sources (after realizing they were being lied to repeatedly), and the TNI wanted to bring corporations together and rectify the situation globally. The original goal of the TNI was to stop “disinformation which threatens human life or disrupts democracy during elections.” On the surface, this doesn’t necessarily seem nefarious, but there are major conflicts of interest at play here. Government tax money (ie. YOUR money) is given to Big Pharma, which spends a massive amount advertising with TNI corporations, who, as it so happens, also have investments in Big Pharma, and some of that money eventually makes it back to select politicians. Even before the pandemic, they had reported that anti-vaxxers were gaining traction on social media as part of a “fake news” movement that was spreading “misleading and dangerous information”. Then, after the pandemic began, that turned into stopping so-called “disinformation” about the vaccine. They went on to disseminate massive amounts of pro-vaccine messages, while demonizing the unvaccinated to force compliance.

TNI corporations cleverly pretend to be giving you the news – the truth – but in actuality it’s essentially just a disguised advertisement – that isn’t actually concerned about the truth at all. Its purpose is to promote specific narratives and to silence any dissenting voices – by censoring, demeaning, de-platforming, delegitimizing, and de-licensing them. They became even more heavy handed in their approach when they decided that stopping so-called “disinformation” about the vaccine would include censoring any content that promoted “vaccine hesitancy.” And what might that mean? Anything that would make one hesitant to take the vaccine – any information, no matter how factual, was and is, to be quashed, silenced, “debunked,” de-legitimized, etc. What about adverse events? Not allowed to talk about them. People across social media have been demonized for even bringing up their experiences. At best, adverse events will be played down – the severity underreported, and language twisted to highlight positives and sweep negatives under the rug (as seen with myocarditis, when a number of publications tried to claim that it was mild and temporary – when this affects children, and young males in particular, at an alarming rate, can permanently damage the heart muscle, and is hospitalizing over 80% of those that have this adverse reaction (additional related video here)). This is a huge problem. How are people supposed to make informed decisions if they are being fed such heavily biased information? In Canada, by law, a healthcare professional is required to inform patients of the risks and benefits of each treatment option as well as the probabilities of success and failure. This is called informed consent, and it is actively being blocked by the TNI in regards to the vaccine.

The TNI also pays for “fact checkers” to run false fact checks and hit pieces on doctors, scientists and journalists who contradict the official narrative. Fact checkers may sound authoritative, but they often only have a bachelor’s degree, and can sometimes just be an intern with a high school diploma. Let that sink in for a moment. These people are fact checking doctors and scientists. And I have seen a number of doctors and scientists frustrated that fact checkers didn’t understand the literature on what they were “fact checking.” Two good examples are this article by Heather Heying, and Part III of this post by Joomi Kim. When Facebook was sued over their fact checks by John Stossel, they admitted in court that the fact checks were merely opinions (and therefore immune from defamation). And yet these opinions are presented in a misleading way, so that they are thought of as fact – why else call them fact checkers? Not only that, they argued that they should be able to do so because of freedom of speech. Imagine that. They get to curate and infringe upon the freedom of speech of others, and that should be protected by freedom of speech. Do I really need to point out that freedom of speech, by nature, isn’t supposed to be one-sided?

Remember when prominent biologists and doctors hypothesized that COVID-19 may have come from a lab? I do. I also remember when those people were smeared across the state/corporate press and Big Tech platforms for it. Now this is accepted as the most plausible explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2. This exemplifies how no one is not allowed to think or discuss ideas outside of the carefully constructed narrative. Only when something is brought into the fold of the narrative by Big Tech and the state/corporate news entities is it an acceptable topic. And when, or if, they do reluctantly bring something like this into the fold, it’s usually months or years behind the doctors and scientists who have been fighting to get the message out, or at the very least, just have a discussion. This isn’t news. It’s a façade. It’s global information control. They’ve stopped scientific discussion and debate. Doctors, who spend their time literally saving lives, are not and have not been permitted to even discuss the best way forward on how to continue to save lives. How can they possibly practice the most effective way to do so under such circumstances? The answer is obvious: They can’t. The TNI is forcing us to shoot ourselves in the foot. With a cannon. During a global pandemic.

Also in 2019, $600 million of taxpayer money was given by the Trudeau government to select Canadian news outlets. Select outlets, meaning whoever was in the position to choose the outlets had the power to pick the ones that would do exactly what they wanted. And the Trudeau Liberals were in that position. Instead of being able to choose which media companies to support, Canadians were forced to bail out media of the government’s choosing. And during this pandemic we’ve seen certain Canadian publications in lockstep with the narrative, doing the exact same thing as the TNI. They are easy enough to spot, if you keep an eye out for them.

One additional thing I’d like to point out is how many logical fallacies are used to prop up the validity of the constructed narrative. Just as Dr. John Campbell points out in his Ivermectin debunking video, people are taking the word of reporters and politicians rather than listening to doctors presenting data. This is an appeal to (false) authority. The media has been rife with pushing logical fallacies such as this. Appeals to authority, appeals to emotion, ad hominem attacks, false equivalencies, red herrings, poisoning the well, sweeping generalizations, post hoc ergo proctor hoc, are just some of the first that come to mind. It is important to keep these in mind when considering the validity of an argument. This is especially so with everything going on right now.

From studying propaganda in university, there is one rule that has always stuck in my mind: Everything in this world is neither good nor evil, but public opinion makes it so. That is to say, no matter what good or evil you wish to accomplish, warping public opinion makes it possible. You can convince them evil is good, or vice versa, through propaganda. You just need to nudge them psychologically until they’re standing in the right spot.

Now let’s get back to being in Canada. Everything back home looks pretty much the same, but at the same time, this place is unrecognizable. The values that Canadians held fundamentally dear to them have begun to dissolve, and sadly, for many, they have dissolved.

The Canadian “leaders” have circumvented parliament to enact policies and regulations that break multiple parts of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, effectively acting like some kind of dictatorship. Not only did they skirt the democratic process, but they also did not follow any of the other stringent rules set in place for overriding any part of the Charter. For example, no cost-benefit analysis was done for anything put in place at all. Our freedom of movement; freedom of conscience; freedom of assembly; freedom of association; freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression; right to life, liberty and security of person (including our freedom of bodily autonomy and right to informed consent) have all eroded or have been discarded completely. This is illegal. What our government has done, and is doing, is illegal. And yet the media is in lockstep with the government on this. It’s insane. But luckily for Canadians, there may still be hope. The last surviving first minister to help write the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 is suing the federal government because of this. Our rights as Canadian citizens are not being upheld. They are being trampled upon by our so-called “leaders,” who are not being held accountable for any of their actions. Here is a video with Brian Peckford explaining his lawsuit and the situation in general. Every Canadian should watch that video. If our rights continue to erode, before we know it, we won’t have any. We will be subject to the whims of whoever is in power, no matter their wish. The Charter expresses our fundamental values – the values our country is based on. Human rights. And they are undemocratically being abandoned.

This is not the Canada that I once knew. I used to be proud to be Canadian. Life here now is a spinning circus. Democracy in this country has been revoked, in favor of a dictatorial regime. Scientific data, as well as our values, have been discarded for the whims of our “leaders.” And the media has convinced Canadians this is in their own best interest, when it could not be more the opposite. Is there truly no hope for our future?

Enter the truckers:

Perhaps I wasn’t the only frog noticing the hot water.

After Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau agreed to mandate all truckers be vaccinated to cross the border, the truckers responded, “no.” They decided to drive to Ottawa in protest of our current government’s overreach. They state, “To our Fellow Canadians, the time for political overreach is over.  Our current government is implementing rules and mandates that are destroying the foundation of our businesses, industries and livelihoods.” From the very beginning they have emphasized that this was a peaceful protest, and their rules for the protest include not entering any government building or property under any circumstances, treating all police officers with respect, keeping calm and not getting baited into conflict, and not making any type of threats.

Their Facebook group has been quickly growing since its inception. It’s over 760 000 users at the time of writing*. Not only that, the Gofundme has raised over $7 million. It’s difficult to pin down the actual number of truckers involved. Corporate media is downplaying the numbers, stating a few hundred or low thousands, while Trudeau has called them a “fringe minority.” The actual number is probably somewhere in the tens of thousands, with some in the group saying upwards of 50 000. There are American truckers joining in too, planning to cross the border to join their Canadian brothers and sisters in Ottawa. And let’s not forget all of the Canadians that are supporting the convoy, that have been greeting them from the side of the road, or from overpasses. Here’s a video with some highlights of the trip, and here’s another good one taken in Toronto. It is clearly far, far from a “fringe minority.” Nothing has unified Canadians like the Freedom Convoy has, at least in recent history, and most certainly not for the past two years. In fact, I can’t seem to remember a time where people seemed to be this united. I don’t think there has been an event in my lifetime as significant. It marks a chance for all Canadians to come together and voice their concerns, which have, for the past two years, been quashed into near silence. It’s the chance for Canadians of all walks of life to come together and stand up for their rights and freedoms.

Predictably, the state/corporate news is smearing them however they can. CityNews even reported that they were protesting unsafe road conditions, before facing a backlash from the public and having to edit the (written) story to specify that this was a separate protest from the gigantic one involving tens of thousands of truckers that they just so happened to miss. Then, when finally deciding to cover the actual story, they decided to broadcast that there would be “death and destruction” and likened it to the January 6th United States Capitol riot. They then went on to accuse the Gofundme of money laundering. There are also plenty of state/corporate news outlets have claimed these are anti-vaccination protests, which is misleading. The vaccine is not the focal point of the protest – it’s the policies and regulations that have diminished the freedoms of Canadians that are the focal point. Framing the story in such a way is dishonest, and it mischaracterizes the movement. The CBC said there were protestors with confederate flags, and suggested that they were Nazis, but only moments later claimed that Russia may be instigating the protest. Maybe they’re Russian Nazis who want to restore the Confederacy? The story (which is quite comical) can be found here – and this video is also a great example of the TNI in action – reaffirming the narrative while pushing the vaccine. The conspiracy theories surrounding this protest put forward by the state/corporate media have been astounding. Any of this sound like an attempt to de-legitimize to you? Any of it sound like flooding people with tons of confusing and contradictory stories? Given what I discussed earlier, none of this should be surprising – but somehow it still shocks me. It’s uncanny to watch them try to create their own parallel, separate reality in real time. If you watch any footage of the convoy at all, the message is clear: Freedom for all Canadians. Restoration of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (This was a great livestream showing a bit of the first day in Ottawa.) I wish the truckers and everyone in Ottawa the best, and I hope this helps more and more people come to their senses and unite for our rights.

From video footage shot by a protestor, it appeared that this provocateur with the flag was pressured to leave by those in the trucker convoy, as he did not reflect, nor respect, the values of the movement. It’s rumored that, after the photo was taken, these two left together.

In conclusion, I’d like to be clear: my message is not no vaccination. It is that the policies, restrictions and regulations and the way they are enforced are far more harmful than the thing they claim to be protecting us from. It is that the corporate media and Big Tech companies have pretended to inform people while propagating and perpetuating madness instead. They have driven a wedge between the people of this country, isolated them, and battered them with disinformation. They have manipulated Canadians into blaming each other instead of blaming those responsible. The common scapegoat used everywhere is obvious: it’s the fault of the unvaccinated. Trudeau even stated that, “they don’t believe in science, they’re often misogynist, often racist.” Scapegoating such a diverse group of people with this inflammatory language is not only divisive and hateful; it’s dangerous. A leader shouldn’t be directing a nation’s anxiety, anger, fear and frustrations towards a particular population of its people. One needs only look back at the history of the 20th century to see why. Not only that, but those in positions of power who are making these policies aren’t even following them. As Thomas Sowell said, “it’s hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.” The “news” media, politicians, as well as anyone else involved in this insanity need to be held accountable. In a court of law where applicable. And they should never be allowed in a position of power over anything ever again.

*the Facebook group has been deleted multiple times since I wrote this section. Videos of the convoy have been removed. This movement has been heavily censored by Facebook (and Instagram).


And the blog begins.

I’d like to show how these different viewpoints have real life-changing consequences in shaping our world.

Life. That thing people tell you you don’t have. Regardless of what anyone says, you’re living it. But what does that mean? That you are experiencing things? That you simply exist?

What I’ve been wondering since time immemorial, what I’ve wanted to know was my place in the world – where I could fit in and be the most efficient and act with the best of my ability. Going into university, I didn’t know what I wanted to take. So there I was with an undecided major in first year. More than anything, I just wanted to learn. I didn’t care about the end result; I didn’t care about job markets or careers. Learning was first and foremost. Personal growth was my motivation. In fact, I don’t really think I’ve ever cared about anything more. I decided to pursue my interests. What was this society I was born out of really like? Was I seeing the whole picture? I definitely didn’t think so. I needed to take a step back and learn about all of the preconceptions I had because of my background. I needed to see things for what they really were. I therefore began taking classes involving the examination and discussion of society, culture, and religion.

I’ve known from the beginning that perception is everything and learned over time that everything is circumstantial. This has helped me the most in opening my eyes. Now I wish to share my perception of this world with this world. I am finally starting a blog for this purpose.

It’s kind of funny – everyone asks the same sort of questions, no matter where they are: “What am I doing here? Should I be here? What is my purpose? Is this what’s right for me?” Questions always seem to lead to more questions. In spirit of this, allow me to ask you: Where do you fit in? Have you found it? Are you still asking these sorts of questions from time to time? All the time? I invite you to explore and examine with me what I decided to delve into years ago now. You don’t have to agree with me (although perhaps I would like that), but keep in mind that perception is the key to everything. What I want is to reveal that there are countless ways to view things, and I’d like to show how these different viewpoints have real, life-changing consequences in shaping our world. Perception is a multifaceted tool for understanding. The possibilities are endless, but we have to start somewhere.

I will thus be providing insight on the world as we know it and will eventually get into my own philosophy. Please feel free to share this with friends and join the discussion by posting your own thoughts in the comments section; and thank you for reading! Below is a condensed list of topics I plan on getting into:

  • Perception and human consciousness
  • The inseparable environment
  • The history of religion
  • Aboriginal belief systems, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism (and possibly more)
  • Northwestern culture disseminated globally
  • Cultural theory, popular culture and the media
  • Capitalism, communism, socialism, labels, labels, labels
  • Philosophy and outlook on life
  • Health and wellness: mental health, physical health – two sides of the same coin

Prepare yourselves; things might get deep.

-Tim