If there is any one sign that the US Leftist politics is being hijacked by a foreign entity, it is the convenient timing of Caravan migrants coming just as the mid-term elections are happening.
This is classic Machiavellian politics: exploit the poor as pawns in a game of chess — or as stones in a game of Go. This is manipulation and exploitation of the worst sort, and if you truly want to publicly virtue-signal and be sincere about it — particularly you, Hollywood — open your homes to the homeless people, and take them in.
Those homeless people have families — and most likely your own first-degree relatives you kicked out because they had mental problems or had drug addictions, and those people marching on over are homeless, too.
Do not parade the homeless or migrants for some spectacle, and this is mere spectacle.
It is far better to keep the dispossessed in their own home countries where they have relationships with others, speak the language, and are well-versed in customs, but then give an economic or other kind of push to improve their financial situation instead of keeping them desperate and destitute as you are promising these people the moon, trick them into coming with unrealistic expectations, and then just push them aside after the show is over.
But greedy control freaks love to meddle. They live for it because they are all about the One: themselves.
Yet the US is a roller coaster of hypocritical contradictions: remember November 2016 when the Democrats accused President Donald Trump of being too hard on Arabs?
They don’t anymore, because now he is just too soft.
Which is it? Too hard? Too soft?
Which One is the One?
Well, there is One thing Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on — Hillary Clinton is an annoying One.
The Daily Beast is telling her to just go away, as in:
Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.
I mean, just like that, blaring in the headline.
And so is the New York Times, who is apparently the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party:
Hillary Clinton’s Master Class in Distraction
Democrats need to be focused on the midterms.
How much is the Dems paying for this advertorial, anyway? They are getting ripped off big time.
Remember when Hillary was the Chosen One? The best One? The obvious One? The One who had it in the bag?
Now, the same people who drooled over her two years ago don’t want her around.
Flighty and fickle.
And shallow in their disloyalty. If you are that quick to dump her, then the electorate was right in picking her rival as president.
But the US is in a better position than Canada — a country without one clue. In Ontario, there was an itty bitty provincial election where the Conservatives won a majority because people on the Left here do not know how to vote strategically — greedily, yes — but not strategically.
People who had the most to lose by the loss of the then-reigning Liberals voted for the NDP who made bigger promises; so they abandoned the premier who took risks to go for someone else. That profound lack of loyalty and morals cost the Left in Ontario dearly for years to come.
Now that Doug Ford is premier and is repealing just about everything Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals did, people on the Left are howling.
Oh, just shut the fuck up.
You earned this government, Ontario Lefties. Kathleen Wynne was the first premier in Ontario’s history to put in real laws and policy that catered to people who were always marginalized and ignored.
A bird in the hand. You had the One bird, but let it go for two in the bush. Now deal with the consequences as adults, not whiny children who are owed something regardless of your knuckle-dragging actions.
And just what did those said marginalized people do? Be grateful? Use a brain cell? Stick with the one who listened?
Nah, they got uppity and greedy, now believing they were owed, entitled, critical, and special, and hedged their bets on a loud-mouth wannabe who was promising them the moon.
Do not gripe about Doug Ford. You all owe Wynne an apology. Shame on all of you.
But that is what happens when you have blinders and are blind to not just time, but space. You do not see the lay of the land and the battleground, just whatever mirage you want to see.
You saw the One, but it was the wrong One, missing the obvious reality.
But blindness is a part of the Western ideological fabric. Here is a story from the CBC that is three-way blindness: that of the journalist writing the dreck, the person who they interviewed, and the subject of the article, Chrystia Freeland. Let’s call them the three blind mice:
A prominent Canadian steel executive told MPs this week that Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland's "ego" is getting in the way of ending American tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum.
Barry Zekelman, the chairman and CEO of Zekelman Industries, delivered a scathing assessment Thursday of how the Liberal government is handling the tariff fight with the United States, accusing the government of squandering opportunities to resolve the issue months ago.
Zekelman, a Windsor, Ont. native who heads a steel empire that has operations in both Canada and the U.S, was asked by MPs about the impact of tariffs on his Canadian operations.
"They have stalled and blown this big time, and our consumers and our industry in Canada is suffering because of it," Zekelman told MPs on the standing committee on international trade.
"We're waiting for someone's ego. They need to get into a room and get the deal done ... whether Freeland picks up the phone and calls (U.S. Trade Representative) Robert Lighthizer and says here it is ... the deal is available this afternoon."
Where do we begin?
The journalist isn’t thinking, but that is nothing new. The executive is half-thinking, wondering what the hell is Freeland doing, and the answer is simple: typical Canadian foot-dragging until the calvary come in.
The federal Liberals are banking on both pot tax and some trade deal with China to save them so they can, like small-town yokels, brag and tweak the noses of their enemies to show the little people back home that they were the most cunning ones in their village.
No, just conniving — and blind.
Pot will not generate the money the Grits are banking on because if it starts to be profitable, bigger players will come in and take over the profits. Do not kid yourselves.
But if Canada is banking on China, they are screwed. China has no love or brotherhood with Canada. They have been buying up natural resources from small potatoes countries in Africa and Europe for bargain basement prices, and those countries are feeling the pain of doing business in a vastly unequal partnership.
While the subject of the piece is having conniptions, he is right, but for the wrong reasons:
He also took a personal shot at Freeland over her difficult relationship with Lighthizer.
"He can't stand negotiating with her because she's just not a businessperson. She's way out of her league."
Yes, she is out of her league, but because the Grits are now a party of sheltered petty and small minds who are swaggering because they think they have a sure thing in the popper. If they were as worldly as their delusions, they wouldn’t be playing this game. Now that pot is legal, it will be the Tories who will be seen as superior in policing than the Grits. They have a middle class mindset of not just living in the Now, but have no ability to see past their egos. They have no understanding of the battlefield and think their shallow feints and schemes will be enough. They are outclassed, but do not actually know it.
They are a party of small-town hick teens who honestly think they are popular and smarter than the grown-ups who are biding their time until they can kick them out of the house.
No one can see the Infinite: not the one relaying information, the one confounded by the strategy, and certainly not the one executing it.
Here is a very simple equation to ponder:
One plus one equals a bigger one.
And all equations equal infinity.
If you have ever read the classic novel Watership Down, you may remember the word hrair: to the rabbits, it meant a “thousand”, or anything more than four.
Gestalt psychologists had their own revelation:
The whole does not equal the sum of its parts.
We have three quantities to consider: Void, One, and the Infinite.
Void does not mean nothing per se: it means we perceive nothing. It is, what I call, a working zero. Void is the perception of nothing, or zero. Zero can be infinite or one, but it is a nil hypothesis (not to be confused with the null hypothesis: the intent of that phrase is that there is no relationship between two entities being studied) where we assume there is nothing there.
For example, I come looking for a house and there is just a forest. I see nothing, and I leave.
The next person comes in, sees the trees, brings tools to chop the wood, and makes a home with it.
Even nothing has something going for it. Dead silence can bring fear or serenity, but the lack of perceived noise may be interpreted as a Void.
There may be a Void for some groups, but a bounty for others.
Void is a quantity that must always be measured and explored.
Then there is the One. This is a strict Patriarchal concept, but just because there is One, does not mean there aren’t many ones behind it.
Nepotism is a classic case. We see someone come into power and he is the One: never mind, there may be parents and grandparents pushing that One and hiring an army of cleaners, fixers, and crutches to prop up that One behind the scenes.
Just like Void, One is a quantity that must always be tested and verified.
Then there is the Infinite. This is a strict Matriarchal concept.
The Infinite are made of many ones that come together to form a bigger one.
A common cause or thread brings those ones together. One plus one equals a bigger one.
We have Ones that are infinitely big, or can be divided to be infinitely small.
Like our planet. It is One, but inside of it is the Infinite.
And like Void and One, it is an entity that must be explored in order compare in order to find the common ones as well as the contrasting ones that create it.
With the operative words being compare and contrast.
It is not done in a vacuum. You do not take the say-so of popular opinion or an authority figure. You do not ignore parts you do not like, and then commit the confirmation bias.
Because the whole doesn’t equal the sum of its parts. You have to look at the finer grains, and the whole picture. It takes strategy, a focus of the past, present, and future — but also an understanding of void, one, and infinity.
Journalism needed to be both a compass and a watch to measure both time and space: the ortgeist and the zeitgeist, but empirically so.
And the unit of measure is the question as the answers are the raw data that must be verified and refined to become facts.
We need to ask why a group of migrants have all suddenly decided to up and go to a certain place at a certain time. We need to ask why voters who had everything to lose tossing a certain regime out did it anyway. We need to ask what is a regime banking on to get themselves out of a scrape of their own making. We need to ask why a star candidate that was pushed so relentlessly one year is being condemned in another all while doing the same things he or she did before.
We have a middle class do nothing but pass judgment and make decrees — all with distorted narratives, and no information.
We need to ask why they do this act that serves no good in the long-term.
F.R.E.E.D. is the system to devise maps of questions that get to the core of the matter to measure a entity’s ratio of void, one, and infinity. If a law benefits the rich but gives nothing to anyone under that socioeconomic status, then we see an imbalance of infinity and void.
One plus one may equal a bigger one, but we cannot assume that bigger one is a quantity where the grains are equally distributed.
We question timing. We question spacing.
F.R.E.E.D. liberates those who ask questions by teaching them the science of doing it.
They are the navigators through the past, present, and future. They are the explorers of void, one, and infinity.
It is both an epic journey and a mundane one.
Because one plus one does not mean both ones are of the same size, come at the same time, or have the same essence.
These are the questions journalism never thought about. Not once.
I think about it, and often.
It is the reason why I ask all sorts of peculiar questions.
Sometimes they offend. That is the sign of a good question: it probes at a weak spot, and means it is a place to explore.
F.R.E.E.D. is intellectual boxing that takes games of combat, such as chess and go, into the equations. It is applied psychology, and it is Method Research.
It creates a deep understanding and a nuanced one. It is not about blindly going into a void, and then pretending you know something when you know nothing.
The void is often not in the entity being examined — but in the perceptions of the one perceiving it.
One plus one equals a bigger one is one of the most important equation to grasp in both intellectual and emotional matters.
Because all equations equal infinity.
But we haven’t even begun to explore it…