A video of Pierre Poilievre going door knocking has been posted to social media in which the Conservative Party leader he can be heard referring to Justin Trudeau and Pierre Trudeau as “Marxists” – a term used to describe a supporter of the political and economic theories of 19th century philosopher Karl Marx.
“They’re both Marxists,” stated Poilievre regarding two of Canada’s most prominent Liberal Party politicians.
“Some experts are throwing cold water on the claim,” media reported in a segment produced by CHCH, an Ontario-based media outlet.
Of course they are. As patriots, we must remain wary each time media begin to throw around the term “experts.” The word generally refers to left-wing academics, many of whom receive substantial federal government bursaries, therefore willing to brand all forms of communist association regarding the Trudeau family as “misinformation.”
In truth, a branding of the leader of a western nation as a communist is tricky business. Marxism and communism involve a wide berth of policies, some economic; others more socially-oriented.
In the realm of political science, the term “Cultural Marxism” has been kicking around for quite some time. Specifically, the school of thought espouses that all cultures and societies are at their root equal.
The pragmatic goal involves equal distribution of wealth on a global basis. For example, Somalia should not be mired in abject poverty while Switzerland basks in luxurious living.
No prime minister in history has taken so much tax money from Canadians, and transferred it to so-called “developing nations” like Justin Trudeau has. Billions upon billions of dollars have been earmarked by the Liberals to be shipped Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Eritrea and dozens of other 3rd World nations.
Upon taking office, PM Trudeau increased the amount of foreign aid to every one of these countries. Cultural Marxism in action? You be the judge.
Economic policy may lend credence to our argument, but the down-and-dirty activity heralded by the Liberals arrives in the form of the ideological. If one looks deeply into the scenario, it doesn’t take long to discover a fundamental fact:
The Liberal Party may not be Marxist-Leninist in the purest of senses, but they certainly enjoy appropraiting communist political tactics for their benefit.
The most obvious being a synthesis between government and media.The Liberal gameplan goes like this: recognizing that advertising revenues were dropping like a bomb due to the advent of the internet, the Feds jumped in with giant money directed toward– get this– over 1000 media outlets in Canada.
How many of us think it wise to “bite the hand that feeds them.” Think about it. If your boss handed you your bi-weekly pay-cheque, would you then turn around and spit in his face?
Neither would the CBC, Globe & Mail or Toronto Star. Thus, the birth of media bias, Liberal-style. In this way, Marxism certainly has come to Canada. It’s source being communist China, who largely innovated the style of government media control we speak of.
In this, we come to understand how communism can be leveraged by a western government without the political structure affecting all forms of governance.
That Pierre Poilievre believes Pierre Trudeau to be a Marxist should come as no surprise. Trudeau Sr. is the individual most responsible for opening a door for the government of China to waltz into Canada, so much so that 50-years later, “experts” are accusing China of rigging the past federal election.
Upon which we offer statements made by Pierre Trudeau regarding his admiration for China, as well as communist form of governance:
“I wouldn’t be prepared to think I would be successful in arguing that communism for Canada at the present time. But such times might come, who knows?”
Five decades later, here’s what Justin Trudeau has to say:
“You know, there’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime.”
Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen responded to Mr. Poilievre’s statement. He called it a “massive misunderstanding of the term, and an insult.”
“The experience of that superb strategist Mao Tse-Tung might lead us to conclude that in a vast and heterogeneous country[Canada], the possibility of establishing socialist strongholds in certain regions is the very best thing.”
Well, Mr. Trudeau, one can surmise that if every region of Canada is a “socialist stronghold,” then Canada would have transitioned to a socialist country.
Which is, arguably, the goal of our current Liberal government. The vehicle to accomplish the task is found in our immigration policy. Cultural Action Party[est. 2016] has referenced this concept on myriad occasion, therefore brevity is in order.
The unspoken element of Liberal immigration policy should be understood by all. Millions of immigrants equates with millions of votes for the Liberal Party.
As migrants move in volume to rural areas of Canada, local ridings flip from Conservative to Liberal. Keep up the immigration pattern for 30 years, and what has transpired?
90% of federal ridings fall under Liberal control. What then is the point of elections? Why would financial donations thrive as directed toward the Conservatives or NDP? They wouldn’t.
The long term project ends up eliminating a need to federal elections. It’s a “fait accompli” from day one. Why bother with it? May as well pack up the democracy tent and flip the switch to one-party state status.
Never to to be projected by Canadian media. Democracy dies in the former Great White North.
To be certain, it’s not an inevitability. What it does show is an ability for the conversion of Canada to a communist state, as alluded to by Pierre Trudeau. Think Justin Trudeau not be be interested in such a transition?
Is Pierre Poilievre misguided in his observation? Can it be that Justin Trudeau, like Pierre Trudeau before him, is a communist in sheep’s clothing?
The “experts” will always say no, but then again, they’re generally Liberal government puppets.