The player is loading ...
Sept. 5, 2024
20 - And in The Darkness, Bind Them!
In this episode, Jason and Dimitri dive into Bill-C63, a Canadian bill that seeks to protect people online from everything from child exploitation to offensive language.
The duo examine the potential repercussions of what this law could mean for the average citizen, and put it into context of an overall wider expanse of government power.
This episode was recorded on August 11, 2024, in Toronto, Canada.
Transcript
it basically the language covers any possible offense and the fact that you just have sheer quantity of laws that at
any given moment you're breaking some sort of law you could never possibly be prevy to right all right and so everyone
just goes quiet because well I probably did something wrong on the way to work today and I don't want to get in trouble so I don't know if what he's doing is
right but I'm not going to say anything because if he turns back on me I might get you know that kind of sort of thing and everybody goes silent and then you
get a situation where the laws have largely become irrelevant what's actually written in the has become
irrelevant it just matters whether the state has its eyes on you
[Music]
hello everyone welcome to the show I'm Jason here with Dimitri hello lots to
talk about I think we're we're going to focus primarily on uh some new
laws the scope of what this means for Canada and for society in general in the
west um there seems to be a ever expanding encroachment on freedoms um I
I think the governments of the world are getting better and better at um gas slighting the population I the phrase is
a little bit overused but um sneaking in language into bills and into society
that is becoming increasingly nebulous so that you have people not really knowing 100% what we're talking about
anymore and there's a problem with language now being so almost um so
ambiguous that people are just sort of using their imaginations and and it kind
of becomes a case where um words can mean whatever you want them to mean and
especially in the case of laws this can become dangerous well doesn't postmodernism come out of
Communism uh I think there was sort of a Natural Evolution there so now we have the whole yeah word solid yeah
definition sort of thing what was what was the USSR what it Union even the term postmodernism is is is sort of open
enough to interpretation as to be kind of a um uh it's like word solid right it's like I'm super modern right what
are you oldfashioned you don't want to be modern you're only modern post my God yeah Post
Punk um but but aside from that I think we should take a moment just I mean we what was our last show I remember it
almost seems like a different time when we went down to Windsor and just like we had a bit of a summer break as as people
should you know get your vitamin D get outside back refreshed yeah yeah it just seems like so much has happened in the
world in just a few months um but uh so so I think we should touch a little bit on some of this like do you have any we
haven't talked about for example like assassination attempt on Trump whoa we're going there well we could go there
there's also I just think that it's almost like we need a little bit of housekeeping with some of this stuff like it's just to come straight out and
I don't know just okay not address it yeah you're right there's been a chunk of time and it's there's so much that uh
my joke with clients usually in my business is that an hour is not enough time to get through everything that's happened in the world by the time you
talk about Trump what else would be going on um the Olympic Games well Biden dropping Biden oh my goodness yeah best
Biden ever so yeah I agree with you sure start
from wherever you want uh I I guess just the the attempted assassination on Trump
do you do you have any idea so there's ongoing kind of um theories about
whether that was a inside job or whether it was um you know as it as as it
appeared whether it was just simply as it was appeared sure so do you believe in a de do you believe in the concept of
a deep State yes I do do you think the Deep States um motives and goals are always
aligned with candidates well I'm not sure that the Deep State's goals are always homogeneous within the Deep state
right sure but inevitably some sort of thing has to form a general direction you're right I mean let's not make
assassination great again right you yeah but but uh do you think why so do you
think that that's something that was um like do you think this is an incompetence what's that quote like don't attribute to malice that that
which can be uh explained by incompetence sure said every dictator ever um I listen um either the Secret
Service that day had a catastrophic and unprecedented you know Communications
breakdown or it was deliberate and you're really in one of the two camps I don't
like either option if you go the route of incompetence then you have to Circle back to Dei and CRT and all these like
what who are they hiring you know if Trump is standing somewhere around 6'5 his bodyguards should not be around 5
fo8 right that's just incompetence right uh how I don't know because it's been a
while since we've caught up were you did you watch any of the footage the people that were uh you know there's a guy on a roof and the cops all kind of looking at
each other and why on Earth um well here's here's a an actual statistical detail the man that did the
shooting uh got shot himself 0.87 seconds after shooting for that to
happen it means the snipers were trained on him because they killed him within a second of him shooting the bullets right
so if they were trained on him what were they waiting for for him to shoot the gun that's what your cue is to shoot
somebody where are they getting 0.87 um there's been there's a there is a podcast I listen to um Peak Prosperity
with Chris Martinson but there's a lot of people out there that have just literally taken the footage and broken it down second by second by second see
and there's even like a second shooter Theory and all this sort of stuff and how many bullets and which how many guns
were involved and that sort of thing but generally speaking that was the number so they were looking at him they just
chose not to shoot him until he shot first why I can't explain why but that's
either incompetence or deliberate is one of the two camps yeah I I I I would say
that it's I mean it seem it seems suspicious in this day and age that
where you really the technology is to the point where these kinds of things shouldn't happen like you should be able
to have drones up you should be able to see you should have coverage of that whole area and like it it should never
be a thing especially when it's a presidential candidate and a fairly controversial one at that like you would think there would almost be added
protection um it it's hard to imagine that something like this can happen I say the same thing with the um
the um Hamas people coming over the Israeli borders like how the hell does that happen you know like in this day
and age um yeah I I don't want to conflate the two but you know there's drones that can have like heat signatures floating around you find a
heat signature on top of a roof MH like stop everything for a moment go check that out and it's not like oh like well
it's not in the the exclusion zone or whatever they call the different zones like literally it's within shooting distance of the presidents and there's
somebody on a roof stop seems like an no-brainer yeah yeah so I don't like it
I'm a little bit unfortunately skewed to deliberate why we don't know um I do
have a theory why though I'd love to hear was a hypothesis um Trump has said that he
would um want to stop the war in Ukraine and uh what he would say to zalinski and
Putin is basically the land Putin that you have won is yours but not a step more and zalinski what you've defended
is yours and and you've been able to hold on to and it's over sort of thing and there's people in deep state that
don't want the war over now maybe they're right the war shouldn't be over maybe Putin needs to be removed this is
their way in I I can't critique on that per se but I don't think somebody is going to try to take out a candidate
like Trump because of pronouns or Dei it's going to be something of that tier
like starting Wars stopping Wars taking down entire um Empires that that level
stuff well I mean think we're in that that sphere of um what would you call it
um what would you call it Jason that it's not it's it's a global issue to take down president Trump not a uh
something small and local yeah I mean I think you just said it like I I think that it's a it's
something that is um there would need to be a major reason for wanting to get behind it but that being said uh I I
don't think like a like a sing like a single shooter doesn't necessarily have to subscribe to that theory like a
single shooter can be motivated by some you know whatever crazy pass you don't think they can like um so I don't want
to talk too long in this because you can do a whole episode on Trump but you don't think they can't uh they don't
have their tentacles out there and know which kids are easily to manipulate and whatnot and just you kind of guide them
into that position so they really think it's their own doing but you've just literally LED them into you've socially
manipulated them into that sure yeah no absolutely that or to what degree stepping back and making it a little
less um um suspicious what role does the media have after 89 years telling the
America day in day out Trump is The Reincarnation of Hitler in a country of that many guns some kid who's mentally
ill doesn't say well then I'll be the hero that kills the new Hitler M the media doesn't have a certain amount you
don't even need to find a specific individual you just generally sweep sweeping broadcast that message across
the state the entire country and at some point somebody's going to try to do something right your hands are clean but
I will say and this is going to touch on some stuff that I wanted to talk about today certainly the media is somewhat
culpable in this um obviously not officially but it is something where you start singing the same song
all the time and and and throwing out labels which are actually pretty um harsh labels like uh the whole literally
Hitler thing that's a that's a pretty tall bar and and castigating somebody as
such is is if you're in the public sphere and you're you have people listening to you that are easily
susceptible to um persuasive comments then yeah eventually uh there is some
sort of moral responsibility there that I think they're well it lends into what you were saying like this whole post-modernist approach to changing the
definitions of words literally everything is Nazi and Hitler these days or if you're even a touch a touch not
communist you're far right like is chucking labels of things and making very rash black and white good versus
evil assessments mhm you know and absolutely no room for nuance anymore it's exhausting too and and and it just
it devalues when you know it devalues Hitler you know it's like Hitler you
know Hitler was Hitler that stuff he did was pretty bad so I think it we're
seeing this a lot we saw that a lot with the Trump all that hyperbole surrounding Trump and labeling him as uh giving him
all these kind of harsh labels and unrealistic labels and just people are
being very loose with their language and yeah like to some ENT that has consequences and no I guess what we're
going to talk about today um with these new Canadian laws is something that I'm
I'm sort of been seeing it's almost like the the bill that the bill that we're going to be talking about Bill uh C63 is
is worded in such that it's kind of um almost reflecting society's use of these words and and it's the the language is
fairly ambiguous the themes behind it are fairly opaque like there's a um
lack of crystallization to some of the offenses that they're talking about that
I think is going to cause problems down the road and it's it's bad enough that we have the media and Society speaking
in words H that are open to interpretation and and and changing and
dynamic like you know at a very rapid pace so nobody's really sure what we're talking about anymore but it's even
worse to have this um codified into laws because now are very Freedom might be at
risk because of you know just not understanding what a law is freedom is a dirty word Jay it's it's it's where
we're at because it's like um you know the government's I think the government's um role in the minds of its
citizens they've been trying to this is what power does is the government a servant or a
savior they're taking them the role a savior we are here in every instance to
try to make sure that we as the government protect you and protect me
from what being offended you know like you're going to you're going to make it an offense to offend not hate we already
have plenty of laws and you know it's fine we know that but this is actually like if I suspect what you're saying may
actually lead to hate down the road therefore we're going to charge you of
something right like it's it's so slippery that slope and how are you going to draw so what I'm offended by uh
professional wrestling like what do you go what do you like you know you can be like it's so subjective that it is as
open-ended as something could possibly be which the net result will be everybody stops talking because in it's
like stepping into an elevator of a stranger I don't want to offend you and that's that'll be like the microcosm
like the example for the entire civilization well that that's certainly happening in society already like you
have uh certainly in the workplace you people are just speaking less and less and when they do it's this very
innocuous kind of um anod conversation where it's like 50 First Dates you talk to someone 50 times
and you still don't know a thing about them it is as super it's for all their depth they're trying to portray it is as
superficial as something could be oh right yes exactly I know oh my God I can
if it's Trump let's say oh of course you so could never like that kind of that's all they want you to do and then you get
Game Theory into one pack or the other well you said something interesting before we started this where I'm not
sure if it was the Chinese government or you're talking about how people could
create laws in such a way that uh you you then have because they're so
subjective and because they're the it basically the language covers any
possible offense and the fact that you just have sheer quantity of laws that at any given moment you're breaking some sort of law you could never possibly be
prevy to right all right and so everyone just goes quiet cuz well I probably did something wrong on the way to work today
and I don't want to get in trouble so I don't know if what he's doing is right but I'm not going to say anything cuz if he turns back on me I might get you know
that kind of sort of thing and everybody goes silent and then you get a situation where the laws have largely become
irrelevant what's actually written in them has become irrelevant it just matters whether the state has its eyes on you it's a web exactly and whether
it's a yeah the most so I'll give you an example like one and I you know as we mentioned in the podcast before I lived
abroad for 10 years one very Greece is very very similar in this case somebody had opened a new business and uh when
they were having their launch party they had balloons at their table set up in the front DJ music it's all really nice
well the balloons had their store name on it sounds nice sure no problem the man who made the balloons didn't have an
issue like sure that sounds like a nice idea the guy who ordered the balloons didn't have an issue but a compete a
competitor saw the balloons and knew a law that the other two people didn't know it's illegal in Greece to have
balloons with your store name it's anti-competitive because if you have balloons and I need balloons everybody
needs balloons so they called the police cuz they knew somebody the police came and it was a huge like 50,000 fine which
is a very big sum in gree before the store even launched it was closed down cuz they couldn't afford the fine was it
the store that was F or the balloon company uh that's a good question the store got the fine um I'm sure I don't
know if it went back two steps to the person who produced them but yeah because the person breaking the law at
that moment because you sell someone in balloon doesn't mean they're going to fly it I guess something like that right so that is a very lived experience we're
like oh my God so every time I do something I need to consult a lawyer who's going to do that you just hope nobody actually points a finger at you
it's like that whole tyranny grows in silence kind of thing so everyone just goes quiet and lets the sort of uh um
the state the superpower operate as long as you're kind of like bullets going over your head in a battlefield as long as I don't get hit I'm
okay yeah it's very uh and much um as we'll we'll hear about
this this uh bill in Canada um it it's sounds a lot like the way this bill is
written uh sounds like a similar experience a similar thing could happen as as that story we used to say like in
back in those days too like this isn't a stupid system in Greece it's actually the it is expertly created to control
the populace right so like have you noticed the way the media portrays when they talk about this bill
C63 um no but I think we should pause for a second just to describe what the bill is and what it just so that
everybody is aware okay um so Bill C63
uh otherwise known as the online harms Bill uh it does a few different things
it's main sort of um ostensible reason for being is uh to combat harmful
content uh on the internet so um notoriously slow to adapt to
changing uh Landscapes like I think the legal system always sort of takes a while to catch up and I think this
putting this out having a having a law that surrounds online content um and governing certain things um like child
exploitation deep fakes um bullying online bullying um the incitement of
violence like all this stuff is sort of combined in this law and it's um or sorry in this bill and uh the idea is of
course that in Canada it goes through several um readings in Parliament and then it is uh goes through Senate
approval and then becomes a law uh or does doesn't become a law and uh this one
um but so that's what this one does mostly mostly guarding against uh harmful content um and of course this
brings up things like what is harmful content and um there are a lot of um
points to this which kind of um flush this out a little bit I don't know how much detail I should go into on it but
it a lot of it is used like harmful content can be described content that
sexually victimizes a child or or uh revictimized a Survivor um you have content that can be
communicated without consent and this has to do with like um deep fakes or uh
photoshopped images so this is now something where you know if I post a video of my high school teacher online
and um put a nude body to her then that constitutes a crime assuming she didn't
um approve approve its transmission um uh and there are a few caveats here that
are really interesting to say but I'll just kind of finish this up just so it's um we all understand what this what this
the ostensible reason for this law is um it also is harmful content can be
described as something content that is used to bully a child content that ferments hatred content that incites
violence or content that incites a violent extremism or terrorism so it covers a lot of ground um sure but would
you not say most of that is already covered by current laws yeah I think some of it is I think
this is just to Define it for the online world but yes I I do I do think that the
whole idea of this um creating laws to govern the online World should just be
um really taking existing laws and and amending them to the newer exactly so like the media the way they if you the
way I've caught it over and over again the way they would uh portray this law as opposed to as we are approaching it
cautiously what does this actually mean you'll see these broad sweeping announcements like the long awaited
online harms bill is being introduced what do you mean long awaited well we've all been clamoring for you talk to the
average person they have no idea b60 B uh sorry Bill C63 exists what it is
what's it's called the long awaited and this gets the problem with the media now too in the news like obviously if you
have just corporate interest behind media you're not going to get the best thing but now you have like the government plus corporate and you're
just getting a sing single narrative pushed all the time so how do s to interject how do you think that that's pushed though because for example like
well who's looking at the language of that and saying we should spice that up a little and put in a um the long
awaited part you know like 100% that's how the government wants it spoken about but how do how are they communicating
that to the well in Canada the government pays like journalists 35% directly of their salaries yeah but how
is it is it just journalists kind of taking it upon themselves to be supportive of the government or are they Lally dict sure they get just like the
The Trusted news initiative like how we going go back to like build back better and all the different or you know all the things that the media seems to you
can find on Twitter X all kinds of different clips where the media around the world all starts using the exact
same phrasing that can't be simply spontaneous agreement around language right so there's there's mechanisms in
place behind here um primarily from like the governments down to the media and
how to speak about certain things MH so I mean to a degree I understand the
government has to shape the culture of a country a bit but um they're not being
very transparent about it and particularly when we're having like sweeping and controversial changes
nothing should be very um if it's very controversial it shouldn't be very sweeping you should go slow and take
your time and and really have a nuanced conversation about it so the things I don't like about the um just to quickly
kind of Riff Off a few things here that I don't like about this bill very generally hatred is left
undefined right that that's just you know so you couldn't get much more you are not tried in front of a judge but a
tribunal in Canada chosen by the Prime Minister it can look like a court but
it's not a court and how are you going to take the evidence and submit the evidence and the procedures behind that are not going to be the same as in a
court uh so so just to um flush that out I guess you're meaning so basically part
of this bill is it will create a digital safety commission that that's a new it will be a new body and it will be like
you said I guess appointed by prime minister um and that also there'll be a people's
representative as well apped to that but it's it's this is all done outside of the court system and the powers that are
conferred upon this uh commission are quite extraordinary like they they can it's almost like they have police like
Powers but without being bound to mandate versus law sort of thing like we've mandated it but it's not a law but
it's enough to make you behave in a certain way right you still yeah you're still compelled to do these things but
there's no for example weren't needed to to actually go into enter a person's
residence or something so those are the first two number three you're not allowed to face your accuser wow number four anyone from any
country can use this law against the Canadian oh I didn't know about that so now you can have the whole world looking
at what you're saying going I'm offended I believe this will cause hate at some
unknown time in the future therefore that is as you couldn't simply get more
open-ended than undefined hatred and uh it's subjective and it's open to Global
interpretation well one of the sort of catchphrases I've noticed in this is
just the um reasonable ground to suspect so for example if if somebody posts a
deep fake say I put a deep fake of um um I don't know Scarlet Johansson or
something like that and I have like um put a nude body to her or whatever it isn't that Scarlet Johansson has to um
submit a complaint but it's it's anybody can submit a complaint so you know whoever I'm battling with on Twitter uh
decides to um you know SE sees me do something that crosses the line in some way uh they can then submit the
complaint and then the complaint is almost um sarily uh like you know it's
passed on they have an obligation the government then has an obligation to pass that on to the service provider so
they would give a notice to Twitter or I guess and um in this case and then say
that you have to take this down it you can notify the person who who uh posted it um but and then but you have to take
it down in the meantime like basically until until we've get this sorted out so then you have a situation like first of
all this stuff all happens like you know nobody's going to wait around for a commission to you know sit down and like
figure out whether you know that is Scarlett Johansson or whether it's you know a legitimate so so you just have
this thing this technology that's operating at fairly light speed like um and then you have um this bureaucracy
coming into it and saying like well we're going to start Fielding these requests and our default is going to be
to shut things down and then you want you want to sort of make your case as to why this was something you could um you
could post then we'll listen to you but you know this is like who knows how long afterwards have you ever had um on X uh
somebody flag one of your posts and you were told do you have to take it down or you might have to be like you can't post
anymore I haven't had it it happened to me like two months ago oh and my post was something I was defending Iranian
women for wanting to not wear headscarves anymore and my point was a
woman should be able to wear what she wants um and not feel under threat of a
rape uh from Men Who simply can't control themselves unless a woman's wrapped up you know like what are you
doing you're just like pretending they're not as beautiful as they are by wrapping them up is that the original concept well perhaps that was good in
600 AD but we have laws now and we should have laws to protect women's rights that she can wear you know with
reasonable amount of clothing uh cing covering the you know the intimate body parts and feel free that she's not going
to be having to wear a head scarf to prevent men from raping her the person found that
hateful well yeah that's just goes speaks to the uh subjectivity why are you saying Muslim men I'm like well
these women are saying they want to feel free to walk around their cities and not be under the uh impression that they
need to wear a head scarf to prevent men from attacking them that was a partly part of the original concept of wrapping
their women up like that um and I appealed it uh and I waited a full month
I'm like I'm not taking this down and it's going to go to a person and I want somebody to read it because I am defending women's rights
here but then the whole uh Trump assassination and I waited extra 10 days like I'm missing some of the juiciest
news so I agreed to take it down but I waited five six weeks I was really trying to hold my ground here right so my point is at some point somebody might
interpret that as hateful oh so you couldn't post anything else until that was taken down wow interesting and I was
defending women's rights but that person on the other side from another part of the world found it
hateful probably somebody like the mindset of those in Iran who want the women to stay remain covered up so this
is ex's rules in terms of service though that and most free speech news platform
available yeah and to their credit all I had to do was take it down and I could go back up but I was like no I don't and
I wrote in my appeal because they do give you space to give you your thoughts like why I believe this is not hate
speech and they give you a time frame to as to when they'll be back to you no they said we will give this to a human
you know and we will look at it but you know with all the different things that happen yeah it takes forever but yeah I
mean why should I so if that happened now in the Canadian sphere under these laws like what what what what I'm
I'm in from my position I'm defending women's rights yeah yeah you know or to
divert a little bit into the whole do you want to get into the xxxy Olympic Fiasco if somebody were to take the side
of what is a man what is a woman for the women's boxing and somebody doesn't like the position you take they're going to
call it hate speech M do you know do you know that Richard Dawkins got his entire
Facebook uh page deleted without any word from meta
whatsoever TW this the other day I can actually I will pull it up okay right so
Richard Dawkins got his entire apparently uh Facebook account wiped out
deleted for something he uh wrote and so his tweet was my entire Facebook account
has been deleted seemingly no reason given because I tweeted that genetically
male boxers such as Iman khif XY
Undisputed should not fight women in Olympics of course my opinion is open to
civilized argument but outright censorship so now if it's enough to
delete you from Facebook at what point would the Canadian law and UK has laws like this too are going to circle around
going well dude that was actually hate speech we're going to start putting people like Richard Dawkins in jail for hate speech because he's talking about
XY and saying dispute me like talk to me it's open to dispute tell me what you think yeah it it it's it's chilling
um and really I mean it almost just thinks makes me think like the the extent that this is gone really does
reinforce this idea that we're living in a simulation because it's almost like how is this madness
still continuing are they not using Dawkins as a shining example for everyone else to shut up yeah and again
it's kind of like who see and even the they in the circumstance um because for
example like this Daw thing like in your circumstance it just takes one person to be like I I object that's hate speech
and what is their punishment for for falsely labeling something as hate speech right there's no I'm presumably
not nothing you know hate today so yeah the fifth point I don't like about this Salah you do not have to take an action
but on suspicion that you might say something hateful you can get a life
sentence well is that 100% true I know the life sentence is there for well has to be criminal because there's like
there's a there's two elements to it but if you if it happens to fall in there but my point is it's it is so slippery
slope it's like if you might it's we're getting into pre-crime MH sort of area now like we we we've decided that you've
done enough of these things therefore you know well I'm not sure if that one
um instance in particular that you're that that one stipulation whether that's covered that you would possibly get a
life in prison but I know that that can happen with uh some of these other things like you know uh language that
and listen right now I'm sure most of the hate out there is going to be people
on the pro Palestinian side saying terrible things about Jewish people if I wanted to be and I'm not racist I be
like this crime this bill is amazing lock all those suckers up because there's a lot of them chatting in their
language that I can't understand and I'm sure it's not pleasant and I'm sure it's not I'm sure it's it is objectively
hateful speech so but I'm defending their right
to speak freely as long as it's not you know really overt like call call the violence on somebody you know so like I'm I'm
right down the middle here I'm calling a spade a spade you know if I had a bias it'd be like yeah lock those suckers up
I don't you know they have a right as long as it's not inciting hate to speak but if it's something like the suspicion
of hate yeah that's not good for society overall and may maybe this is what the
government's trying to do they realize immigration has hit a very difficult moment and they're cracking down on this
sort of stuff and they just don't want to admit it so they're calling it in this sort of innocuous you know online harms Bill
meanwhile the things that the people on the center to center right are saying about immigration are being uh fortified
around language like this MH yeah it's kind of like bringing in a new species
uh introducing a new species into an environment to wipe out this other invasive species and you're just kind of
compounding the problem by um and really playing whack-a-mole but do you see what I'm saying like maybe the government is
talking pro-immigration all the time but really they're enacting laws that are going to be overwhelmingly used against
those who are spouting most of the hate which will be people newer to the country right well but and the reason
why I say that because people might s because like what do you mean the far right who are natives haven't said Terrible Things sure but it's usually in
response to those who have already come you know what I mean so like it's like the Chicken and the Egg sort of
thing um yeah like but you don't want to tiar up application of the law it needs
to be equal both ways of course yeah but and of course that's the that's the
problem with this kind of language and this kind of um this kind of a bill like it's such it's just a um
spectacularly poorly written bill in terms of clarity and it [Music]
um getting away from the concrete language and the concrete expectations are just going to make things um more
and more difficult for letting people know what what is okay to do and what isn't and when it's subjected to just
having um when when when words are just based you know
the the hatefulness of somebody's words are based on somebody's interpretation
of what is considered hateful or not and just and there's not sort of an explicitly defined um you know what it's just all
so um ridiculous like it's just it's so so clear that when you form formulate
these things like when they built the Constitution when they built the Charter of Rights they had absolutes in there they were like it was like um but now
Jason the courts are allowed to determine how they interpret the charter or in Canada's Constitution we think
it's like this shining thing the courts follow it's kind of the other way around the courts are deciding how they
interpret the Constitution well they always have to be because but it because you what you do is you you have like a
broad broad scope so you have something like freedom of speech and it's like okay does freedom of speech like as
that's the whole idea of legal precedence right so you have like people the judges will make decisions based on
um B based on a specific case and then you kind of narrow the scope of what something like freedom of speech means
for the country that we all live in yeah but my problem is just like the uh as we saw was it Claudine gay the uh Harvard
um CEO or president you know just like we've seen our educational
institutions be infected with the mind parasite of wokeism I believe we're
seeing the same thing in our courts so just like we have the weaponization of empathy with pride and all that sort of
stuff we now have the weaponization of Human Rights so the way I would see it is if I have human rights that means you
have less because I can insist you behave in a certain
way I don't follow yeah so let me think think about the way we're doing human rights now compared to like 15 20 years
ago ago I I insist you must use my pronouns
because I have human rights so because I have human rights you have less rights
because I'm insisting on your behavior modification right that's the weaponization of Human
Rights see I'm forcing you to do something you otherwise wouldn't want to do in the name of Human Rights but then
that triggers a charter challenge because you can say like well you can't force me to do to say something that I
don't believe it but they can now and it's I believe in the states it's a law I don't know about Canada at the moment
highly recommended to put your pronouns and everything and use them what's the word we use nowadays dead
naming right I yeah I think that that's um like I don't even know where to begin
I I I feel like I'm I'm talking about this and I'm just befuddled because there's so much here and there's I I don't it's not doing it justice like
it's so egregiously wrong like um like we can talk like really the kinds of
conversations we should be having are nuanced conversations about you know maybe specific cases where it's kind of
a borderline case and everything these are so broad though it's so broad it is so patently ridiculous that it's it's
like well clearly we don't want to live in a society that just has you know like based on somebody's interpretation of
what one word means like we we can't like be living in a societ anywhere on Earth you know so like Twitter so not X
let's try think we should use them like Twitter how it used to be X as it is now back when it was Twitter if you didn't
use somebody's preferred pronouns and they complained you got taken off the sight you know like literally their
human rights Trump your choice of words coming out of your own mouth they might be offended and you might be acting like
a jerk so be it just ignore the person block them move on but we literally have allowed inside the corporate structure
of the weaponization of that person's human rights so I'm not quite sure in the Canadian context of those rules have
become codified law but I believe in the states they have so now we're not just telling people not what not to say it's
back to Peterson in 2016 we're forcing people what to say MH we just don't
notice it because it's ubiquitous and it's kind of like a cult it's around you everywhere all the time you're like but
of course that's just the way we do things so what do you think in terms of like this kind of a you know and this it
may not be passed right this this law like it's uh changed a bit since its initial um proposition and who knows if
it's going to be approved or not but um you know I have a suspicion that's going to depend a lot about you know who's in
power at the time that the it get goes to the final reading um but what do you
think in terms of Canada like what do you think this means for like if Canada starts making laws that are so
drastically different from like like this is putting a lot of onus
on for example like a a Facebook or a um uh Twitter like why would they want to
do business in Canada like it it becomes overly onerous where there well they're making some money and they are definitely doing what the government
tells them they are one one and the same like we know in the states like the CIA and Twitter not X um Instagram meta all
that they're all completely working hand inand in locks up with the government but they but they're fines right like
they're they can be fine what is the fine it's like something like 8% of your Global revenue is a potential fine for
these like if if say so Define what the fine for the fine is for if you're found
that you're not acting so for example if you were issued a takedown order and um
and you don't comply and you're and then the commission you know the commission this Digital Services Commission decides
to you know appeal to X and you know Elon says like no I'm not doing that or something just refuses to do it they can
impose a fine for like you know 8% of their Global Revenue quite amazing they tried really hard not to have them buy
the app you know and basically stole from them a government surveillance you
know tool and now I'm I don't know how closely you've been following the UK riots but you know there's a big push on
X right now to ban X in the UK and jail Elon Musk and as you see these new laws
being enacted around us they're like yeah let's not make assassination great again but we'll find you into poverty or
we'll find a criminal law that you're breaking or we'll just block you out from the entire country right that sort
of thing but this is I mean it doesn't make any sense for a corporation to want to
do business in Canada if if the risks are that high of you know 8% of global Revenue it's like well you know like the
Canadian Market is just not that big so I mean it's the same with like meta where they stopped doing the news and do
you feel like overall this is kind of what the government wants basically if you're going to make any money at all
you better do it our way or you're gone because there is a push sometimes you see I feel like there's these social media influencers like I'm deleting my
Twitter account I'm deleting and it's making almost like the good person would just delete it right you know and this
they'll just let it die like um ham radio or something yeah but Canada isn't
doesn't have the international like Swagger to be able to do something like that like no but is it a country bycount
basis if they can reduce the amount of uh social media activity in a political sense across the globe by 50% they
wouldn't consider that a win but but again it's kind of like who's they right like as a as a as a as a government like
why you're you're citizens are going to be continuously complaining about we don't live we live in a global
marketplace now right you can't continuously complaining about what uh the fact that they can't access like
access what that which they told was a hate platform yeah but they're they're they're getting still getting
information from other sources about things that are going on like if they if if x was banned in Canada today we would
get information from Facebook or Instagram there would be the same kind of or the CBC podcast and you kind of go
right back into play's cave uh you yeah I don't know I mean what you wouldn't I wouldn't but the
average person probably would maybe what's happening in Britain is shocking these days like I I I think that that's
kind of I wouldn't have expected a country that big I mean um to to kind of
um be buckling The Way It Is Well you know they've had their CCTV cameras for
a long time like you want to talk about like yeah the amount of invasion of privacy I have a clip um can we play a
clip we can permission granted uh this clip let me see here is uh the UK
authorities and um talking about the riots and the new laws that are Advanced from where Canada is and uh here we go
we'll talk about it when we're done racial hate to it involves uh
publishing or Distributing material uh which is uh insulting or abusive which
is intended to or likely to start where hatred so if you retweet that then
you're republishing that and then potentially you're committing that offense and we do have dedicated police
officers who are scouring social media their job is to look for this material
and and then follow up with identification arrests and so forth so it's a really really serious people
might think they're not doing anything harmful they are and the consequences
will be visited upon them that's some pretty sinister stuff
um and it's it again uh you know living in a Similac room here like this is like
um this is this is crazy that this is happening in the Western World in 2024
that this that these are the things and we're told it's the good way so what he mentioned there was not just if you
wrote something if you retweet it wow so one of the changes they made
on X I think is they made your likes private now yeah yeah a good idea very good idea but why was that
necessary exactly to Hype hide this who becomes Enemy Number One now Elon Musk
ask the average person who's mostly clueless what do you think of Elon Musk oh crazy guy yeah you do get a lot of
them tell me why why why exactly and I do not particularly like EV cars but you
don't like the you don't like Teslas no really yeah like just like like driving
one you don't like it like it feels good no no no I mean like uh sorry like I
just think in general that technology where Elon is correct is that he's very good at extrapolating where the world is
going literally 50 to 100 years from now not 10 to 15 oh so I don't think we have
the infrastructure we don't have the redundancy we don't have but it's forcing infrastructure Perhaps Perhaps
and perhaps that's where he's got it right but um I don't think it's Greener I think you know you don't even believe in climate change though sir we I want
clean air and clean water more than most most I just want to make sure the methods that we go about it are going to
get the most impact for our dollar spent but um so they that my point is I could go on and on about how in the next
little while the way they're pushing EV cars is not correct but it doesn't mean I'm going to just write off
Elon right so when I Circle back to something like X the average person like
oh I love my Tesla but the man is just crazy because look what he's doing you know they're not and I'm like sure tell
me why yeah they have no actual point I don't mind if we disagree at all I love it no big deal I might change my opinion
but they have no reason to back up why they feel like that now the average person unfortunately is just far too
emotional and far too much um you know there a little maybe it's not appropriate for a podcast but remember
when we were kids and you'd watch like professional wrestling and a good guy turns into a bad guy right and then all
of a sudden it's like cool to hate on them Andre the Giant that happened to yeah and then a bad guy turns into a
good guy and all of a sudden it's cool to cheer them yeah and every yeah yes yes exactly and everybody's
unfortunately most of the planet still operates like eight or nine or 10 year old kids watching wrestling yeah and
whoever is promoted as good or bad the vast majority of people just follow
isn't it amazing though that it's that they're successful and they they've really they're you have to give it to
the the powers the be like they're they're really have the Playbook and and
they perfected it like they they don't need 100% of the population they don't need assassination yeah they really
don't they have like going back to the fines in 8% they really have other mechanisms to control you I mean you we
started recently the last year I would say I I've been looking at things a little more like actually since October
7th I feel like when October 7th happened a lot of people who would otherwise have been um sympathetic to a
lot of liberal ideas started thinking hey wait a minute what's happening why why are there protests happening in
Toronto about uh you know basically like kill the Jews and this you know that kind of rhetoric coming out of these
things and they're going like well what's what's going on why who are these people saying it and they're finally starting to take a look at what what
their society and their their laws and their culture has now been produced wokeism takes its hits and um but it has
proven itself when you weaponize empathy it is exceedingly robust right and I but
I and I and I've been looking at the the last year I I've been thinking to myself like okay we're making progress people are starting to wake up like um you know
the pronoun stuff has been minimized a lot like there's no real like it sort of we hit Peak pronoun use at at uh you
know my office and things like that like like people are starting to people are starting to take them off if anything
that's fascinating but pride flag too this year there's a lot of push back against it which may have stemed after
October 7th so I think that I think that the the the needle had started to shift a little bit but that being said there's
you look at the Playbook and it's like there's more than one ways to one way to skin a cat and they're just like okay what's next like what can we do next
they are robust and pushing it so here's a quote from Plato and I I just I can't believe how unfortunately human behavior
has been so predictable for thousands of years there is this and no other is the
rote from which a tyrant Springs when he first appears he is the protector
it's weaponizing empathy I will protect you I will give you safety I will look
after I will Champion those who are downtrodden MH you know and that's that's the Tyrant that will haunt you to
no end because they're doing it for your own good right and that's where we are it's literally like we're in a haunted
house and we can't exercise these ghosts yeah there's um it's it is the same it
is the same mentality like you know Julius Caesar wanted to you know he he
was a he was of the Roman people and he wanted to um like it's it's just power corrupts
right like so the the higher you get up on the Chain the more and the more positive feedback you get from the
people you rule the more you think hey I'm doing a pretty good job I why don't I just this next thought that pops in my
head let's do this too like and those few rabble rousers who are saying they don't want it well they just well just
push their their views aside and um and yeah it's becomes this um
corrupt yeah so this is this is exactly so I think we saw some hints of uh
wokeism dying on the battlefield of uh you know the the Gaza Strip um because
it was pushing in a sense you know terrorism wokeism was supporting
terrorism and a lot of people a lot of people on the globe got behind
it yeah so I I really don't like it so it's like forcing virtue on people and
uh um that's the problem with the whole B sorry the bill c663 is that it's just it's literally
like this this is the higher virtue to which we all must aspire to and we will
codify it into law and force everybody along with such an open-ended interpretation that however we decide as
a power to use it we can so what happens now if this becomes law like you then
get I mean what happens when this becomes common place where people are actually you know this becomes law
people are people are objecting to certain content when this podcast maybe somebody objects to that they can't put
everybody in jail so I think their goal is to Simply take the uh the more prominent figures and like Dawkins or
Peterson and just get everybody else to go oh my God I don't want that to happen to me I got a mortgage to pay right
right and they just go quiet yeah so the most important thing I think is very kind open-ended political conversation
like we try to have here sometimes and in the real world where you just gently make people know that you can speak your
mind and if we disagree it's absolutely awesome is there's no problem with that whatsoever Maybe I'm Wrong like Muhammad
Ali and I've said before one of my favorite quotes if the 50-year-old you agrees everything the 20-year-olds who
said congratulations you just wasted the last 30 years so I never like I this is
what I believe today based on information I live life I may change my opinion 10 years from now tell me this today might be the day but why ha on the
person telling you this because we're told through media to hate on the other person you know going back to the pride
thing because it does go into here if you were 85% into whatever Pride stood for but you didn't really didn't like
the last 15% then they hit you with the there's no place for hate sticker right you like there's no in between
point that's that's fascism that's totalitarianism yeah and I mean it
really is where we're heading I I guess part of the problem with this law is
this bill is all also the just the maximum life sentence and you know you'll hear people talk about this kind
of Defending it it's like well like that's not that's only going to be imposed upon in the in the worst most
extreme circumstances etc etc but there's nothing built into the bill itself you can't rely on the discretion
of judges to to impose or not impose a penalty I think once you realize we are
at War except the tools have changed um and these are the types of tools they're
using now um M viruses um getting the people to want and beg and gleefully
cheer for these new laws and then basically you know China doesn't need to take over Canada they just need to make
Canadians think like Chinese people and then then it all becomes like one
World um I don't want to use the word government but one sort of ethos in
which we all agree to globally but again where do you think I mean you mentioned China so do you do you think that this
stems I mean I'm sure that stems from sort of the ideology of totalitarianism but where does it like who again World
economic forum is that where we're at with I think they're they are a lwh hanging fruit but we are talking about
organizations that are supranational you know so what you can pick there's a whole web of them uh we
can have a whole podcast on that people have drawn out amazing charts of all these you know giant uh somebody like
Justin Trudeau once they're done being prime minister are looking at well that was easy what's the next step up
right and this is the problem even if you start off really conservative and
you become Prime Minister As you move your way up you never become a liberal you know it's just it's what the
system sucks you up into or you don't you don't make it any further so yeah I think we once we realize we're in sort
of a cold war State and these are the new tools of the war that when all of a
sudden saying things like Freedom become negative you got to really stop and ask yourself how did that how did that bomb
get dropped how that that mental bomb that Viral parasite you know and who dropped it and
what is the reasoning for this doesn't and you come back to the reasoning this is where I get a little conspiratorial
in my mind like because it really start there really seems to be a almost
Coalition of forces trying to steer the world in a certain direction which is
counterintuitive in many ways like it it doesn't make sense even for just a healthy Society um to have people for
example questioning gender questioning like you know for race relations to be so granular and you know again like we
we're doing really well with race relations until uh maybe 10 years ago right and it just got worse and worse
now um it's the classic divide and conquer but it's divide and conquer to what end it almost seems like there's a
reason for it like for example like maybe there's something let's think of AI or whatever the next you know UFO
um maybe there's some contact with um with with an alien race and and
governments of the world are aware that there's like maybe 5 to 10 years left to um maybe they have to maybe there has to
be some agenda that is pushed that is so dramatic that they need a certain level of compliance in the global population
and that's why we're seeing these drastic oh I agree there could be yes like you look at the debt in the states
and if they realize at some point we're going to have to declare bankruptcy and that's going to mean the end of abundance and austerity and the riots
are going to happen before we get to that point which will cause chaos on the streets and will take forever then to
get out of as a civilization if they don't devolve into a civil war let's get
the mindset of the people to be a little more Pro Authority so when that moment comes they're more willing to listen to
the authorities and we're in the beginning steps of our preparation for the default
but they're not doing a great job because like if it's almost like the um I mean I I would think Society was
probably more Pro Authority like 15 20 years ago right like I mean I had a lot more trust in the government
then Fair Point maybe technology plays a factor here and now they need to tighten it up because we got we got looser and
now they need to bring us back I mean I'm sure overall as we enter into this
um economic unknown future they would much rather not have social media around
and if they're going to have it around they want to use it as as a psychological manipulation tool to help them get you to do more of what they
want if they could go back to have us all with 13 channels and watching the CBC every single night they would
definitely love that but they know that that is already escaped so they need to then tighten up those mechanisms and use
them back towards us which is a it's a good game plan and if you wanted to like if you wanted to
steal man their position why are the bad guys doing these things that might be the good reason why to prevent more
chaos in the future I'm not against that I think that actually is a solid plan my
issue with that and I think I've said it before here is that once we do turn that corner who's to say they're going to
allow the old ethos of freedom and Free Speech to come back there's no guarantee
of that so that which goes away may never come back for a very long time so therefore I would take the
chaos and whatever comes with it as long as we don't lose our souls in terms of the beautiful experiment of the western
liberal civilization that we have been that must endure and I I don't the temporary
extinguishing of that because of some sort of impending debt is too much of a risk because history would tell us what
America has achieved in the last 100 years is not the normal situation so therefore we have to fight
tooth and nail to keep that alive and if it means if it means
unfortunately Chaos on the streets over a period of time of transition and austerity perhaps that is actually the
better path if you extrapolate like Elon Musk would over a 250e period you know
like if you're thinking what's better for the next six to nine months but really unfortunately how do politicians think these days very narrow termed how
to win the next election cycle and whatnot so I don't think they're thinking of the preciousness and they've been trained not to think of the pre pre
preciousness of the uh civilization we've created in the last 100 years right yeah it it is a lot of
short-term thinking but but it there's no incentive to not be short-term and thinking you know this is almost um
which is how they get gamed and that's how good people turn out to do what I would consider very bad things do you
think there's some sort of global uh cabal that is that is governing
Society meaning if you if you take that to like if you have um government's
thinking short term everybody's kind of thinking myopically and it's in their interest to do so like there has to be
some sort of like who if not government and if not individuals in uh
positions of you know the everyday individual like the the person on the street who's just trying to make a
living like they want to stay away from anything controversial because they're just trying to do the right thing and like live their lives have children but
like so so who who Who's guiding the ship I guess like who if everybody's
thinking myopically who actually is stepping back and saying let's look at this from that 50-year 100-year plan and
where do we need to go I think there's a few because I think if I were to the the
idea that I just expressed about the wonderful you know experiment we've had
politically in the last 100 years in the west they they're intelligent and they're aware of that so they must be
then they must be then aware that if they're putting it away um they're
putting it away for a reason so I think there are those who think long term that they're just only
those very few at the very very top and there you know like Rome had its moment
what caused it to recede uh Greece Babylon you know even the 1960s America
that was probably I wasn't a fan and I'm not a fan of you know the whole like hippie culture but I have to give credit
where credit was due the books the ideas the movies that came out in that time
was the closest I think we've had to like Enlightenment in the West in a very long time it was well adjusted well
financed families raising healthy educated kids and had the free time and
luxury to dwell on such ideas and uh you know I used to hear
this as a child like Twilight Zone The Original black and white show was um so intelligent the government actually
didn't want that around because it was getting people to think too much outside of the box yeah I mean that was just something
I heard as a small child but you go back and you revisit those television shows like this is an amazing concept right
and yes of course as humans we all have the innate ability in us today to do that but it's not either promoted well
financed and doesn't become part of like sort of the social ethos that we all live you know so there there's got to be
those to answer your question at the very top um so if they're putting away this experiment they're putting it away
for a reason right and that's always goes back to my thing like uh as we I think I've
only developed it in the time we've been speaking here but over the the episodes we've done but the concentration of
power is my greatest fear overall you need to have diversity of
power okay well that's um I think we sort of covered what we want just
wanting to sort of bring more attention to this bill before it come becomes law like I you know I used to play online
poker and I remember when um in 2006 the Bush Administration um
Junior uh pushed uh an online Gam Ling law they kind of snuck it into the safe
ports act like at the last minute and um and it effectively banned online poker
uh in the US so it was um you know it just kind of killed the game and I I
just thought what a Despicable uh move by by a Despicable president um so it
shouldn't have surprised me but it it was just basically saying like you know I'm not sure what group he was trying to
appease by by pushing that in there but um it it uh it destroyed the ability of
grownup Americans and uh to to just go and play a game that they like to play
online right like um and seemingly for no reason other than to be a nanny State
and to say like no you can do this you can't do this because it's bad we think it's bad and that's it um but I remember
being in Canada at that time and I was like well what are the laws in Canada cuz I was just sort of would play it and I was trying to dissect the criminal
code because it it's all again nebulous like it's very like there's nothing specific about like online poker because
poker isn't really a game of luck right like it's a game of there's some skill there's some luck so it all kind of
um it's it was hard to categorize it so if you're if you're just trying to like parse the criminal code and you're just
kind of an average person like myself you're it's like inscrutable like you can't figure out whether it's legal or
illegal so my concern was that I would be playing i' win a lot of money and then you know i' just get it confiscated or something like that and be like well
you shouldn't have been playing and you're going to prison and um this is the problem I see this more and more
with like like yes there needs to be with laws they need to be Broad in some
sense that they need to Encompass you know larger you know you you can't can't get too granular with them but they
there needs to be a level of specificity so that you are talking about something that a population can understand so
something like the one the bill that we have now the C63 it's like you're talking about hateful content you have
to be able to Define what hateful is and this government has not been able to do that like um it seems to be a very
capricious notion um you know one person's hatred is another person's you know patriotism or whatever well I've
heard it said before by politicians we must have the safest internet in the world like again how you
going to fight that statement right by your statement like what you don't like safety yeah yeah exactly so they it
brings us back to like a little bit of that covid safetyism you know in Ultimate safety is going to lead to
tyranny it's where again the government becomes the Savior instead of the servant and uh some harm is a
consequence of Freedom that's just a price we have to be willing to pay yeah it's a shame we're still having this
conversation because it just seems like such a no-brainer to I think both of us and I probably a lot of people out there
um but we're kicking against the trites here so I I don't know uh I don't know
why um it's the Arc of time we're living through and it's coming through like a multi-headed beast in many different
facets of our world and I don't until it's defeated but it's going to be very
hard to defeat going back to that Plato quote it will be the thing that haunts us because on a certain level it's
appealing and those in power know that yes they're playing us like a
fiddle aren't they um all right I think that's all the
time we have today um thanks everyone for listening and um be safe out there
[Music]
[Music]