Reflections on Vancouver, British Columbia and other topics, related or not
Will they stop at
character assassination?
Some Canadian perspectives on Robert Kennedy Jr.
Greg Klein | May 1, 2023
With a lengthy speech—“this is what happens when you censor someone
for 18 years”—his April 19 announcement begins about 35:25 in this video.
He seems too good to be true. So maybe he is.
But with his nomination campaign for the U.S. presidency officially underway, Robert Kennedy has unleashed by far the most realistic challenge to vested interests in living memory. Here are some notes from a Canadian angle, preceded by an admission: Unlike virtually every other Canadian with even a smidgen of political interest, I’ve never followed American issues. I don’t even understand how the American federal system works.
On the other hand, American-preoccupied Canadians feed their American preoccupation with American MSM misinformation. That leads to an initial point:
As always, Canada’s media will imitate America’s
Almost no Canadian who’s allowed a public voice discusses American issues from a Canadian perspective. Looking at recent American presidents, Canada’s MSM obediently followed American propaganda about the chocolate-coloured god guy, the big-haired satan guy and the sweet old guy who’s not seriously demented, oh no, not at all, he really is in charge and, moreover, he and his family aren’t thoroughly corrupt either. Not even a little bit.
The MSM won’t find Kennedy an easy target
It’s not just his lineage. Although heavily censored he’s built his own media outlet and attracted many highly accomplished and articulate supporters. He might do alright with donations, although in much smaller amounts than his opponents get. If he’s not misrepresenting his past (I never paid attention to him until my embarrassingly late mRNA skepticism began in summer 2021), he’s spent many years as a hard-working and skilled activist/litigator.
His 2021 exposé The Real Anthony Fauci presents a tour de force of research, insight and courage on a level unimaginable in mainstream discourse.
He speaks clearly and intelligently, expressing insight and, if he’s not faking it, strong commitment. He addresses issues no one else will touch, and brings out the human element of public policy.
He looks good. People can get used to his voice, and minor disabilities can sometimes enhance a public image.
America’s (and therefore Canada’s) MSM can’t continue ignoring or dismissing him. But the Trump treatment won’t work this time. Opponent misinformation now requires a much more difficult campaign to supposedly “debunk” him and attack his character.
Some possible angles for character assassination
The search has no doubt begun for any evidence of conduct unbecoming, or anyone willing to accuse him of such. There’s something about a drug-addled stage of immaturity. His first wife committed suicide. He’s associated with Whitney Webb. Although he talks up his supposedly saintly antecedents, some earlier family patriarch was reputedly a bootlegging anti-Semite. Possibilities abound—real, exaggerated or wholly fictional. Trust the MSM to once again prove themselves untrustworthy.
Or maybe just assassination
If what he says about them is true, he must have no end of enemies as dangerous as they are powerful. As for America’s (and therefore Canada’s) fourth estate, it hasn’t been so compliant since WWII, if ever.
Such animosity against someone who talks about healing the divide
But the theme runs contrary to establishment divide-and-conquer tactics, typified in Canada by Justine’s PC denunciations to marginalize dissidents. Another defining aspect of our society is the deliberately created hierarchy of identity groups, which favours some people over others. Its most extreme manifestation is Canada’s stated goal of “reconciliation,” based on unlimited guilt-mongering, special powers and enormous payouts that could eventually provoke widespread anger.
Kennedy brings out the human element of public policy, addressing how specific issues affect groups like poor blacks, rural whites and the middle class. He says corporate feudalism hollows out the middle class and keeps Americans in a constant state of war. He talks about a populace so divided and fearful that they’re easily ruled. He says America’s corporate/government merger “loves it” when blacks fight whites, Republicans fight Democrats and rural fights urban, allowing those at the top to continue their exploitation.
His environmental stance challenges Canadian environmentalists
Most of Kennedy’s April 19 announcement focused on environmental issues but he didn’t once mention climate change. Canadian environmentalists, meanwhile, give the impression there’s no environmental issue but climate change. All too often they use this “science” as a rationale for self-righteousness as well as anti-social behaviour (for example blocking people’s freedom of movement), anti-Western animus (targeting Canadian industry while ignoring Asia’s incomparably bigger polluters) and establishment collaboration (supporting nonsensical taxes and even social engineering).
And again, Kennedy discusses the environment on a human level. His campaign launch said nothing to support the World Economic Forum.
What most threatens the middle class—corporate feudalism or self-destruction?
Apart from Kennedy’s environmentalist-challenging environmentalism, he spent much of his April 19 speech defending the middle class—without which, he maintains, democracy is impossible. The question arises, however, of whether the middle class has abandoned democracy.
From antifa to MSM, stereotypical activists might be thoroughly bourgeois themselves but many of them hate normality. Furthermore “leftists” had little or nothing to say about mRNA, lockdowns and other outrages against health and freedom. Unless they sit out the nomination campaign, they’ll have to back the senile guy and his handlers’ program of corruption, agency capture, censorship, surveillance and foreign wars.
Kennedy vows to rescue the middle class from impending extinction but even the non-activists among those he would save have been brainwashed by generations of propaganda in news, entertainment and education, not to mention peer pressure. Many of them have fallen for divisive identity group politics. Those not motivated by misplaced anger often act as if ideological conformity justifies their smug belief of moral superiority. At any rate, considering new ideas requires thinking for oneself, an enormous strain on North American middle class sensibilities.
On a positive note, though, Kennedy seems able to cut through the ideological debasement of language that breeds confusion: he speaks clearly. His style, refreshing as it is, could attract supporters who’d otherwise pay little attention to details. All that could help build momentum, a force of its own.
Kennedy’s possible influence on Canadian politics
Maxime Bernier might pick up some of Kennedy’s policies, but probably to no effect given Bernier’s lack of previous success. Pierre Poilievre might try to borrow some of Kennedy’s style, although that could be difficult without taking a much tougher stand than “everything seems broken.” Kennedy’s style combines straightforward speech, a new approach to issues and—unless it’s all a pretence—genuine commitment.
Just the same, even demagogues like Justine might try to co-opt Kennedy’s anti-demagoguery. That might be fun to watch.
As for Kennedy’s apparently sincere environmentalism, it should embarrass Canadian Greens, if they’re capable of embarrassment.
But if Kennedy’s successful in getting elected and implementing reform (obviously two separate accomplishments), American-imitating Canadians could finally have excellent reasons to be American-imitating Canadians.
How much do we know about this guy?
For all his straight-talking bravery, Kennedy has yet to address problems ranging from education to crime, drug culture and immigration. The founder of Children’s Health Defense has been strangely silent about trannyism for kids.
If elected, how much could he accomplish?
The extent of real power that Kennedy and his elected supporters might have is a topic for those who understand American politics. A somewhat stronger challenge to reform, however, is the death of Western civilization. In North America, that has happened.
But even if he fails Kennedy might bring welcome change to public discourse—especially since, short of getting whacked, he’s not likely to give up.