EMMANUEL: Why I left the mainstream media for the Western Standard – Western Standard


Everyone knows that someone could be secretly watching you or your child with your webcam right now? Is it worth taking such a risk? camDown can help stop them!

Laura Mae Lindo is a walking, talking refutation of one of the basic premises of critical race theory–namely, that Canadian society is riddled with “systemic racism”—yet for some reason, she wants to shove the theory down the throats of Ontario youngsters in both the public school system and in post-secondary education.

Ms. Lindo is an NDP member of the Ontario legislature, elected in 2018 in the riding of Kitchener Centre with 43.38% of the popular vote. The next closest candidate, the Progressive Conservative, got only 27%. In a field of seven candidates, 43% is pretty much considered a landslide.

Lindo’s Wikipedia biography says she was born in Canada to Jamaican immigrants. She is black. She boasted shortly after the 2018 election of being the first MPP to wear dreadlocks to Queens’ Park. Her PC and Liberal opponents in the 2018 race were both white women.

Lindo holds four degrees: two BAs in philosophy and African studies, a Masters in Education, and a PhD in education. Before the 2018 election, she worked as Director of Diversity and Equity at Wilfrid Laurier University.

Clearly, her colour and her dreadlocks have never held her back. If Canada were indeed the cesspool of systemic racism that she alleges it is, surely by now something along the way would have intervened to prevent her from achieving success after success, both academically and politically. Nothing did.

Lindo is currently in the spotlight for sponsoring Ontario Bill 67, a private member’s bill that would amend the Education Act and five other existing Ontario statutes by inserting provisions that essentially call for the implementation of thought control in the school system and in post-secondary education.

The bill’s definition of “racism” is far too abstract for my tastes: “the use of socially constructed ideas of race to justify or support, whether consciously or subconsciously [emphasis added], the notion that one race is superior to another.”

I don’t know what a “socially constructed idea” is, or how you would distinguish it from any other idea that just happened to pop into a person’s head. However, what worries me most is the attempt to govern subconscious ideas.

On the first page of the bill, there’s this penalty clause: “Every person who disrupts or attempts to disrupt the proceedings of a school or class through the use of racist language or by engaging in racist activities is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $200.”

What are “racist activities”? Would thinking subconscious thoughts qualify? If so, this bill sets up Ontario classrooms to become horrible petri dishes where students will be under continuous scrutiny to ferret out any forbidden subconscious thoughts.

The bill goes on (and on, and on) to ensure that teachers, school staff, and even school boards will be trained, programmed, and incentivized to be hawk-eyed in their scrutiny.

Ontario has had since the 1960s a Human Rights Code which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, etc. Got a grievance? You can file a complaint, and have your case adjudicated. Bill 67 goes much farther than this, requiring the compulsory indoctrination of students, teachers, university faculty, staff and administrators.

And then there are the mystery components of the bill: the baker’s dozen of different types of regulations that can be implemented under the legislation after it becomes law, without further approval by the legislature. These regulations aren’t yet in existence, so members of the legislature voting on this bill can’t possibly know yet what they would be voting for.

Has Ms. Lindo given any consideration to how Bill 67 might violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which protects, among other things, “freedom of conscience…thought, belief, opinion and expression?”

It appears not. Or maybe she never bothered worrying about it because she never actually expected the bill to be passed.

Other commentators such as Barbara Kay here on the Western Standard have expressed the fear that Bill 67 will be a shoo-in, based on the fact that it passed first and second reading with virtually no opposition. And indeed, it is worrisome that the only MPP who stood up to vote against the bill was Belinda Karahalios, formerly a Progressive Conservative and now sitting as a member of her newly founded New Blue Party.

However, I suspect that the bill was a trial balloon, allowed to float by Doug Ford’s government for the purpose of testing the wind. It was referred to the Social Policy Committee for discussion before third reading, but the Social Policy Committee currently has no meetings scheduled to deal either Bill 67 or any of the four other bills on its plate.

The Parliamentary Calendar shows that between today and the date when the legislature recesses in advance of the June election, there are only 23 sitting days left. There are still a slew of unpassed bills—government bills, not private members’ bills—waiting to be dealt with. There’s a good chance the Social Policy committee will never deal with this bill, or that it will never be brought back before the legislature for third reading. It’s the government house leader—currently MPP Paul Caladra—who determines the order in which bills come before the house for voting.

However, it’s best not to be complacent. If Ontarians are opposed to this bill, they should make their views known to both the committee members on the Social Policy Committee (here’s a list) and to the MPPs in their own ridings.

Karen Selick is a columnist for the Western Standard

After all of that camDown is the solution for securing your webcam from cyber criminals and pedophiles and I know your family would agree!