The Fascist Pigs XII “Hegel, Will, Film and Cohen with Greg Johnson”

Greg Johnson of comes onto the podcast for a wide ranging talk concerning philosophical notions of the will drawing on Hegel and liberalism. (((Hollywood))) films, and a retrospective of Leonard Cohen’s work and significance.

Trudeaumania: Top Five Reasons why Justin Trudeau is an Intolerable POS

“We can still hear that high and sometimes irritatingly nasal note of whiny self-righteousness today among Canadians who, accepting the undoubted superiority of American military power, feel that their distinctive contribution to the alliance can and should be a quality in which Americans are poor, while Canada is specially, even uniquely rich – morality.”

Marx’s often quoted passage about historical repetitions is worth playing with in the case of the two Trudeaus, father Pierre Elliot and son Justin, as hereditary Prime Ministers of Canada. The term ‘Trudeaumania’ was first coined in 1968 to describe the wild popularity of the father, whose countercultural leanings induced a Lisztomania-like effect on the Canadian public. Whether it was pirouetting behind the queen, opening flirting with Marxism, legalizing homosexuality or implementing the War Measures Act and taunting journalists with the infamous “just watch me,” line, there was an intellectual charisma to the man that the son lacks in spades. This second generational round of ‘Trudeaumania’ may well be reminiscent of Marx’s repetitive historical reversal, and the term may come to define Justin’s ‘out-of-season’ liberalism in a clinical way – ‘Trudeaumania’ as a descriptive for Justin’s pathological psychological state rather than public enthrallment, which is wearing increasingly thin.

As I pointed out when JT was first elected, his immense popularity was in large measure due to the failure of Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party to form any meaningful ideological base as much as his smiling, youthful, celebaby, selfie-talking, bumpkin persona refueling nostalgic sentiment. However, Justin himself frames the win over Harper’s Conservatives in terms of an ideological shift in governmental policy that is simply not there or only to a very superficial degree – the Canadian equivalent to Obama’s empty ‘change’ rhetoric.

Some of the apparent similarities between JT and Trump have been dully pointed out. However, while I maintain that Trump has come to represent the contemporary Zeitgeist, Trudeau has come to represent history repeating itself merely as farce, Junior is not simply the shadow of his father, but his shade he just does not know it. When papa Pierre broke protocol and normalized relations with Cuba and Castro it was seen in the context of the times as a heroic and defiant gesture, the radical Left was in the ascendant and Pierre was just one icon of its Zeitgeist, however when Junior unequivocally positively eulogized the former communist dictator, he was lampooned by the same media that usually fawns over him and the hashtag, #Trudeuaeulogies became a widely popular treading topic – memorable for me because it was the day that I finally won the internet, that is with my own Trudeaueulogy:

“Today we say goodbye to Judas Iscariot, who will always be remembered for his affectionate embraces and practical business sense. #Trudeuaeulogies”

Trudeau’s glib blunder sparked a media storm backlash; Cuban-Americans like Marco Rubio Twitted out in condemnation of the Prime Minister’s radical partisan eulogizing asking if it was a joke. Trudeau effectively whitewashed the illiberal atrocities of Castro’s regime sent a wave of condemnation his way – a laughingstock ensued.

Part of the reason for Justin’s blunder is because he is living in the past, he is the echo of his father’s legacy of the 1960s and the cultural Marxist hegemony of yesteryear, seemingly unaware that what his father stood against has become the system and the establishment utterly – that his ‘rebel sell’ image only worked against a stuffy “old stock” party bureaucrat like Harper. The jig is up, the tide has turned and JT is lagging behind, with a plethora of alt-lite media and personalities taking the fore against a radical Leftism that has reached the end of its rope.

This is an attempt to corral together a compendium of Justin Trudeau’s most blatant chronic idiocies and twisted contradictory SJW logic.

  1. The SJW Hypocrite


Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau delivered remarks and participated in a Q&A session at Elementary Teachers of Toronto Federation Day 2016 held on Friday, December 2, 2016 at Toronto Congress Centre.

Responding to a question about how Justin Trudeau ‘checks his privilege:’

This idea that, like it or not, we are society where I was given power and a voice that I did nothing to earn, that I did nothing to deserve, other than end up being born luckier unfairly than anyone else.

The reflection that I had and actually I did free verse style reflection on being a straight white male, but the essence of it was that if I am lucky, and I am, then I have a responsibility not to go around hanging my head and beating myself up for being lucky, because I didn’t take it, it just happened.”[i]

This is typical of limousine liberal’s political usage of “oppressed groups” to further obscure their own elitism, which is based on wealth and class, rather than the groveling of minority identity politics. How about Justin Trudeau is lucky, not because he was born a “straight white male,” but because he were born Justin Trudeau! Trudeau was “given power and a voice” that he “did nothing to earn,” and he “did nothing to deserve” because he was born a Trudeau, not because he was born a SWM! He is privileged because he never had to clean a public toilet, or serve tables, or wash dishes to pay his way through school and he never had to keep doing those McJobs long after he graduated because there was no place for him even with a degree. He never suffered from crippling student debts, he never had to compete with favored minority groups over a dwindling pool of decent jobs, he never had to worry about whether he could make the rent, or afford a vehicle, Trudeau has no idea what it is like being a member of the white working poor, who are then scolded by limousine liberals like him that they are part of a “privileged” class  – Trudeau was born lucky because he was born rich and famous, not because he was born a SWM. Instead the weak Liberal apparatchiks rallied behind him because of his scion name recognition;

“The way he (Trudeau) clicked with delegates he attracted like groupies at the party’s Montreal leadership convention that year was a first glimpse of how Trudeau could parlay mere name recognition into a much rarer thing: the illusion that fleeting contact with a star is both welcomed and somehow meaningful. ‘I was surprised and enthused by the response I got from party members on the convention floor,’ he writes.”[ii]

In order to virtue signal his inclusivity, Trudeau’s first public relations stunt since winning the election was making a big show of his gender-parity cabinet appointments, based on equality of out-come rather than merit “because it’s 2015.”

“Trudeau appointed 15 women to his cabinet. Harper, in his last cabinet, appointed 12. That’s despite the fact that he had fewer women than Trudeau to choose from. The main difference is that Trudeau’s cabinet was capped at a more reasonable 30 portfolios, Harper’s at a bloated 39, including a slew of ministers of state. So percentage-wise, Trudeau hit his 50 per cent quota of XX chromosomes.”[iii]

This also meant that women in the Liberal Party had a 3/1 advantage of securing one of the illustrious and lucrative cabinet positions over their male counterparts, a privilege they secured entirely based on their luck to be born women that is based on gender not merit.[iv] But Trudeau’s empty SWJ rhetoric and hypocrisy does not stop there, according to the “male feminist” (who is putting a ‘Canadian Rosa Parks on the nation’s currency) SJW logic of Justin we should all then feel pity and a sense of “responsibility” for the Fuerdai like Chelsea Jiang who although she is one of hundreds of thousands of Chinese millionaire immigrants flooding Vancouver – since she is not a SWM, she is therefore not socially “privileged.” So when a straight white male Vancouverite gets priced out of the housing market by these poor stigmatized minorities, and is then serving them crab legs or pumping the gas in their Lamborghinis, we can rest assure that his “privilege” has been sufficiently checked. If there is to be found a lesson in these and other rich minorities it is that the only common humanity to be had is wholly material, and that higher universalisms that liberalism attests are mere confetti in the parade of individual vanities.


  1. The Limousine Liberal (Corrupt Elitism)

Trudeau’s SJW’s campaigning, which effectively does nothing to his and the actual global positions of those privileged and powerful – the wealthy global elite, while simultaneously placating an entitled minority by socially signaling solidarity with “the oppressed.” Even more condemning, is that like Hilary Clinton, Trudeau has been caught red-handed in a ‘pay-for-play’ scandal for which he is suffering, according to Michael Den Tandt of the National Post, “a crippling erosion of his brand.”

“To understand Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reluctance to acknowledge what is plain – that cash-for-access fundraisers violate the letter and spirit of his own rules for open and accountable government – we must first appreciate this PMO’s approach to what is euphemistically termed ‘issues management’; that is to say, scandal.”[v]

The highly exposed fundraising event at a Chinese Billionaire’s home went down like this:

“One of the guests at the event was a well-heeled donor who was seeking Ottawa’s final approval to begin operating a new bank aimed at Canada’s Chinese community.

The Globe and Mail has learned that wealthy Chinese businessman Zhang Bin who, with a partner, donated $1-million to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation and the University of Montreal Faculty of Law weeks after the fundraiser, also attended the event. Mr. Zhang is a political adviser to the Chinese government in Beijing and a senior apparatchik in the network of Chinese state promotional activities around the world.

Chinese Business Chamber of Commerce chair Benson Wong played host to Mr. Trudeau and 32 other people at his Toronto home. Among the donors was insurance tycoon Shenglin Xian, the founder of Wealth One Bank of Canada, and several Chinese billionaires.”[vi]

So for a $1500 dinner plate, Chinese billionaires got access to the PM which explicitly violates the ‘ethical rules’:

“Attending the fundraiser appears to breach the ethical rules laid down by Mr. Trudeau after he took office. These “Open and Accountable Government” rules state “there should be no preferential access, or appearance of preferential access” in exchange for political donations.

The fundraiser also appears to violate Liberal Party guidelines that require party officials to ban anyone from attending a fundraiser if they have direct business interests before the government.”[vii]

Obviously we can see a conflict of interest, because a few weeks later those Chinese billionaires donated $1 million dollars to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation and the University Of Montreal Faculty Of Law, and then got federal government approval for a bank to service Chinese capital in Canada. If Trudeau had any sense of decency he would step down like Nixon.

Trudeau defended this weakly, stating that he had no formal or informal relationship with the Foundation, despite his brother, Alexander Trudeau, being on the Board of Directors. Recently this tangled mess of obvious corruption was even lampooned by the Taiwanese.


  1. The Telescopic Philanthropist

Limousine liberals like Justin Trudeau carry on the liberal tradition of the Anglo-upper classes in practicing what Charles Dickens called telescopic philanthropy. Trudeau signaled this very hard by pushing onto the national agenda the Syrian refugee crisis. Trudeau used the humanitiarian crisis to morally signal Canada’s place in the world, and was recently putting his drama degree to good use by crying while talking to a refugee. However, when disaster struck closer to home Trudeau made light and joked during a crisis involving Albertans.[viii][ix]

(The Greatest Justin Trudeau satire!!!!!)

  1. The Regionalist Supremacist

This brings us to his longstanding regional supremacist tendencies. Time and time again Trudeau has made statements claiming that Canada belongs to Quebecers. And again dismissing the concerns over Albertan job losses by pointing out that “we’re in Ottawa…” This carries on the Trudeau tradition of ostracizing western Canada, his father passed the National Energy Program.[x]


  1. The Star Wars Fanboy

This may seem the most innocuous charge on the list, but may in fact be the most incisive. The Star Wars universe is defined primarily by a Manichean divide between good and evil. There is no nuance to the Star Wars universe; its patent appeal therefore will tend towards simple minded folk who demand simple answers – good vs. bad. The fact that Trudeau is such an ardent Star Wars Fanboy, points to his inability to conceive of the social world in terms that are not readily identifiable in a good vs. evil schism – the refugee crisis was tackled from this emotive moralizing rather than practical concerns or reservations – it was simply the right thing to do.[xi] The major concern with people who view the world in absolute terms is that they can become zealots, and indeed liberals often cloud issues with excessive moralizing, using their heart instead of their head and thus overturning the order of the classical soul.














Originally published at:

Richard Spencer. Love him or hate him, or lukewarm water him? Richard Spencer, say it in a sing-song voice to the melody of “Under Pressure.” Say it three times while looking in the mirror in a darkened room and suddenly he appears.

Indeed, Richard Spencer seems to be ubiquitous as of late; a portentous, well-mannered, troll-smiling “whyte supreeeeemacist” whose whack-a-mole publicity tour is making national headlines and whose reverberations reach into the highest offices of the land – Richard Spencer is unavoidable. And it is precisely this notoriety that will propel the Movement forwards.

Spencer is becoming the face of the AltRight, at least as it now stands. Spencer’s National Policy Institute (NPI) conferences in the bleached bones of the nation’s capital seem every year to attract more and more participants who are younger and younger, and along with that more and more opposition and media coverage.

Like “a specter haunting America,” unexpectedly the masses grow aware of the almost numinous presence emerging from the repression of racial and identity politics for European Americans who have been the target and victim group of the secularized religion of Progressivism for nearly half a century.

Of his many public engagements, his interview appearance with Roland Martin has been the most fascinating and telling. More generally and broadly the interview covered some interesting ground beyond the backdrop of ‘un-American and un-Christian’ activism.

Curiously, Roland Martin dismisses race as a “social construct” and then defined himself as “a man,” and “a Christian.” But according to Progressivism, genders are also “social constructs,” and what more is religion than a cultural construct?

There was a cotton-picking debate, along with a segment on amateur Egyptology, in which Martin effectively affirmed “we wuz kangs.” As well as an interesting bit wherein Martin failed to understand that affirmative action hiring practices are in fact discriminatory towards White men.

However, the most significant aspect of the interview was that of the the Black man lecturing the White man. This was done in two primary areas – firstly about America and secondly about Christianity. Martian lectures Spencer about what “America” is –”this is America, you don’t do that in America” (4:44), referring to the Bellamy salute (also known as the Roman or NAZI salute) that was prominently featured by the MSM after the NPI conference. BTW this absolutely has been done in America.

Of course, this sort of thing is arguing semantics. The Black man can and is in a position to lecture the White man because he is the personification of both “Americanism” and “Christianity,” in the progression of the Whig narrative of history – this was the token symbolism of “Messiah” Obama.

One wonders how engagement of this sort is anything other than moral posturing, but that it not really important. Later on in the interview Martin evokes the American secular saint Martin Luther King Jr. “Dr. King talked about it was Black people that made America live up to its ideals that it wrote on a sheet of paper…” Indeed the proposition that “All men are created equal,” was fulfilled by the ascendancy of the black man, and this is the secular religion of ‘Americanism’ as it has come to be known today.

Roland Martian then traps Spencer in a second ideological worldview by invoking Christianity to his cause. As Chesterton himself wrote, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.” Martian’s use of the notion of (capital F) Faith as revealed (capital T) Truth makes it so that one cannot argue with someone who has a monopoly on the Truth – “the Word.” Thus, Roland rebukes Spencer:s notion that historically Christians have been Identitarians (and were slaveholders etc.,) with the notion that Christians of the past “allowed their culture to inform their Faith instead of allowing their Faith to inform their culture.”

This kind of rhetorical ‘sleight of hand’ can, in the midst of a debate, bring about confusion in one’s opponent, because of the subtle play on the same words, the inversion being potentially baffling. Spencer, kowtowing to both American patriotism and Christian idealism, failed in engaging in the philosophical and ideological challenge to Martian and proceeded to play his game, arguing over the semantics of what the founding fathers actually believed, or how Christianity has historically been practiced – both are losing hands in our struggle.

Indeed, Roland Martin was masterful at framing the issues and Spencer fell into his traps by playing politics – the Alt-Right is not Christian and is not “American.” Spencer, by trying to nuance both America and Christianity, both of which move in the direction of the Whig narrative of history, lost from the onset. The Alt-Right is not Christian and it is not “American” and it is not Whig. It is a thing onto itself, to paraphrase Kant. (Is the AltRight completing the system of German Idealism?).

The lesson we can learn from this is that we must engage the enemy on our own terms, which entails a strengthening of our core ideological worldview. A Big Tent, including Identarian Christianity and civic nationalism or patriotic Americanism, will always contain the antecedents of contradiction and hypocrisy.

Nearing the end of the video, after he had gained the upper moral hand, Roland Martin slipped up by challenging Spencer in terms of open and direct warfare:

“Here’s the reality, we’re not going anywhere…you might want to train harder cause we’re training harder and we’re going to catch up.”

Herein, all Roland Martin’s moral posturing and feigned high idealism is shown for the tools of advancement for his group and other POC that they are – and nothing more.

Martin alleges:

“You’re afraid that you’re now going to have to compete, you’ve had such a head start, you’ve had an eighty yard head start in a hundred meter dash and now you’re afraid that other people are catching up, why are you so afraid?”

Direct conflict between Blacks and Whites has a distinct 
tendency to favour one side more than the other.

If Martin now openly acknowledges the factual view of the world as being one of competing groups, why would any group want to subsidize the opportunities of a competitor? Martin finishes his preaching:

“We will fight till hell freezes over and then we will fight on the ice, you better go workout because you got a fight on your hands.” 

If this is not a direct incitement to racial warfare I do not know what is. At this level of honest engagement Spencer smiles his best yacht club grin and gives his best:

“We’re going to win and, Mr. Martin, I want to tell you, you’ve got to prepare yourself, you’ve dealt with a bunch of guilt-ridden silly whites all your life and we are waking up, we are recognizing who we are and we see an amazing future, so you better get ready.”

This is our battleground, when the enemy removes the masks of Whig history and Christianity, masks that the white man gave him to wear in the first place, he is exposed for what he is, an alien amongst us, who, behind his masks of universal brotherhood and the lie of equality, hides his true face, which is one of coveting, resentment, and opportunism. Spencer succeeded in momentarily uncovering Roland Martin’s mask and for that and his organizational efforts we should be jubilant and grateful. However, there is room for ideological and strategical improvement – but in the end we will prevail – hail victory, sempre Europa!