The Death of Canada

 

The recent decision by Justice Rouleau that the Trudeau government was justified in declaring the Emergency Act to end the Freedom Convoy protest in Ottawa last year demonstrates that the corruption of democracy in government extends to the judiciary. 

But this is not news. The Canadian courts, and the Canadian Supreme Court, have been partisan for decades, and have been eagerly legislating from the bench. There is an obvious flaw in the system: judges being appointed by the Prime Minister, they are political appointees. They are beholden to the government. 

Once, we relied on professional ethics to overcome this: in effect, the old code of chivalry. There was a gentleman’s agreement binding on the powerful not to abuse their power, and to protect the weak. It was the strength and durability of this code of chivalry, not found elsewhere, that allowed Europe to outpace the rest of the world from 1500 on. It seems that it was strongest in Britain, and Britain did best of all. It was all, ultimately, founded on Christianity: the premise that all men were brothers, and so had intrinsic dignity; that government was not the supreme authority; and that, on Christ’s example, he who would lead must be servant to all. 

“Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, ‘Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.’”

It is also this code of gentlemanly conduct that allows democracy to function. Without it, as in the Third World, those in power would hunt down and imprison or kill those out of power. We would simply shoot those we disagree with politically. We would not bother with Marquess of Queensbury rules.

And this code of chivalry has broken down. It is breaking down everywhere in the Christian world, but perhaps fastest in Canada, which has now gained a reputation for being especially “progressive.”

Beginning I think, with the rejection of “conventional morality” for the sake of more sexual pleasure in the 1950s. Then feminism rejecting the chivalric code of courtship. That slipped down the toboggan run to everyone doing as seemed advantageous to themselves, and feeling morally justified in it. You have power—why not use it?

After all, as Hitler argued in Mein Kampf, if anyone else had the power, they would use it against you.

All of which has now put the full stop and the hand brake on freedom and democracy in Canada. Freedom may return—although it is not evident how—but it no longer exists when the government can arrest anyone or freeze their assets if they feel threatened; and without recourse. It seems likely it will get worse now, perhaps much worse, before it gets better.

The one bright light is the convoy itself. If the government and judiciary cannot be expected to act honourably, the members and leadership of the convoy acted throughout with remarkable decency, public spirit, and restraint. They were a spontaneous model of what Canada is supposed to be: a community of peace, order, and good government.

How can it be, then, that the elites are depraved, while ordinary people are still moral and decent? At least a large part of the problem, surely, along with the inevitable temptations of power, has to be with our system of education. For this means that, the more formal education a Canadian has, these days, the less moral and tolerant he is. Our education system is doing the opposite of what an education system is for: creating good people and good citizens.

Because instead of instilling morality, our current system mocks it and demands transgression.

Providentially, then, our education system is in any case technologically obsolete. For that matter, any kind of ruling elite, corrupt or not, is probably technologically obsolete. Everyone can in principle now study online as and when needed. They can have their choice of instructors. 

And with expert systems, “experts” will find it harder to obfuscate and maintain a monopoly on information.