Spicy take Dan :) While much of what you say may be true…as a Canadian resident who experienced one of the longest lockdowns in the world, there are some things about the USA to be envied still! At least some of the states anyway! Cheers
I second that. The lockdown was a horrifying experience in Canada. I. Quebec, they even had curfews from 8:00 pm on. I lost my faith in the country and in my countrymen when I saw this movie rolling before my eyes for years in slow motion. Not to mention the Freedom Convoy, which gave us the misfortune of seeing Trudeau’s dictatorial impulse crushing his peace-loving and freedom-seeking citizenry with a vengeance. I would give up my Canadian passport in a flash to join America and live under a real constitution that would protect my rights and freedoms.
As a Canadian who has personally known W.L.Morton, Ross Dowson and Mel Hurtig this Canadian wrap youself in the flag is total crap. The Ottawa and Toronto regimes are as odious as there is. Let the Americans clean out the augean stables. What a pleasure it will be to see thes lots chucked out hard. Regular folks will cheer.
The U.S.A. has the first 10 amendments to The Constitution...The Bill of Rights.
Canada has The Notwithstanding Clause; and any time a Trudeau is Prime Minister the War Measures Act and/or The Emergency Powers Act dissolves the social contract and installs tyranny as the national authority.
Thank you for your great essays on the march of imperialism that is happening today worldwide, in all countries. And thank you for making the common sense decision to offer them free to all as you are so correct that in the middle of this war we need open discussion accessible to all.
As an Australian, I found your description of the Canadian system, especially your points in your note to Sean, to be exactly the same as the systems that are in place in all of the British Commonwealth nations, we are still in effect under imperial rule.
I had a shocking wake-up call last year to the ugly truth of this when an ex-SAS Australian, David McBride, who exposed the war crimes of the Australian army in the Middle East was arrested by our government and put through our courts.
In court McBride's argument for the expose was he felt he had a duty of care to the Australian people to reveal war crimes being committed in their names. But the government lawyer jumped up and said McBride had misunderstood matters. He pointed out that as a soldier McBride had sworn an oath of obedience to the British monarchy not to the Australian people, and not to the Australian constitution. The judge agreed and savagely criticized him for opening his mouth about war crimes, and gave him a harsh 5-year prison term saying it was to send a message to other would-be whistleblowers.
This is the day I woke up to the fact that Australians are still British slaves.
The British empire is still very much in power, but we are given the illusion of freedom. And I think this is the point about the Myth of Canada documentary.
There are several mechanisms that are used to create foreign control over all nations today, but in particular over the western nations who live under the illusion of Magna Carta and 'Democracy.' These control points include, but are not limited to:
1 Commonwealths - the British commonwealth creates a system where the British monarchy remains the head of government.
2. Oaths to the Monarchy: All of the senior political and government service positions swear an oath to the monarch, which today is king Charles - prime ministers, politicians, bureaucrats, military, intelligence, law enforcement, and the courts etc.
3. Courts: our courts are based on the British system, and the BAR - all roads lead back to London, again they swear an oath of obedience to the monarchy.
4. Central Banks & Money As Debt: The greatest control is through the Central Banks Cartel, headed today by the Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland, and the privately owned Federal Reserve, with all central banks in all nations coerced into the cartel of borrowing from the bond markets, which creates a debt+interest obligation (as opposed to govts simply printing the money and distributing it free of debts) -
All cash is CENTRAL BANKS CASH, so it is debt, and all other money is created by CREDIT, which is done through public and private banks under the central banks control, again DEBT + INTEREST.
So in this way all citizens are trapped into the 'money is debt+interest' system, which is a parasitic wealth extraction machine. This is a global system. And it is the key way that France still exercises economic control over the 14 countries it has yoked to their central banking system.
5. United Nations: The United nations swamp,with over 76 international organizations, which thanks to the world's governments passing laws like the USA's 1945 International Organizations Immunity Act, they are operating as NEO-Monarchies - immunity from investigation, immunity from prosecution, immunity from visa requirements, and immunity from paying tax.
The United Nations acts as a world government and through the TREATIES system, it ties nations up in knots with what I call top down tyranny - foreign control.
We see this clearly with the COVID-19 lockdowns, with the primary control mechanism being the World Health Organizations updated 2005 IHR International Health Regulations, which instructed all nations to implement bio-security laws for 'emergencies' just one of the multiple control mechanisms use to lock down 4.5 billion people under house arrest for the common cold.
And it is exactly the same with the 2015 Paris Accords, which gave us the Sustainable Development Goals, a blueprint for developing World Government - out of which comes DEI, ESG, Net Zero, Digital ID, Carbon tracking etc., etc.
6. World Economic Forum: The WEF represents the investment arm of the richest people in the world, the monarchies, the bankers, and the billionaires, and their economic institutions that have long been used to control the economy and extract the wealth, which includes the international banks, and all the multinational corporations - through the WEF they work as a transnational cartel, and again they are used to implement and force policy from the top down.
This is why all the multinationals follow the tyrannies - when you dig into the shareholdings you see the same swamp of international banks, finance, and investment corporations own everything - with BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, which control 30% off the worlds investment funds, being the icons of this group, but it is a very large group - and they own each other. They own the competitors of almost all sides of all industries. Netflix and Hollywoods studiios-same owners. BYD and Tesla same. Pepsico and Coke-same Amazon Big Retail like Target or "China's" Temsu same owners. No matter where you look you see that global Monopoly Capitalism is running the show. Larry Fink of BlackRock sends out an annual letter
8. United Nations World Economic Forum's Public Private Partnership - this was signed in 2019 just before they launched COVID-terrorism on the world. This is now one single institution in effect using both public and private sectors to force the policies of Agenda 21 and its Sustainable Development Goals down the throats of mankind who are literally choking to death on the corruption, fraud, and propaganda.
7. Freemasons - The global Freemason's network illustrates the power and reach of the secret societies of the world. They have over 6 million members. And the global HQ is in the City of London. And the British Monarch is the head.
All Freemasons swear an oath of absolute obedience, and so once again you have an organization that has infiltrated almost every nation on earth, but is all through the western nations, and can be used to get the leaders in our community to march to the same tune - E.g. At the beginning of COVID-19 the global HQ sent out instructions to follow the World Health Organization for the 'pandemic.'
These are some of the mechanisms of foreign control that are being deployed now on a global basis. I believe we are living in the End Times of the Crown Monarchy Imperialism of the Roman Empire, which is still alive and well today, but it is hidden in plain sight, and run by the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, which originates in Babylon, as does the title Pontifex Maximus.
The Roman Empire never died, but simply transformed itself into the Roman Catholic Church, and centralized all power under the popes, the new Pontifex Maximus. At the point when it is claimed the western empire fell that is misleading as well, pointed out by the American historian Dr. Roy Casagranda, because at the time there were 2 pope-emperors, the one in Constantinople took over because by the time that the western empire 'fell' between the Roman Catholic Church and about 2,000 families on the Italian peninsular they had robbed the people of all the wealth, the Church had 50% and the oligarchs had the other 50%, and the people were either slaves or starving homeless peasants. Poverty, pain, and suffering is the end result of the regressive tyranny of the rule of oligarchy of the Crown monopoly system.
There are 2 key points in your comments to Sean and your essays that I want to suggest are simply illusions that give the people the idea that they are living with freedom and rights, but are in fact not so at all. Magna Carta and the American Revolution.
Magna Carta Illusion?
In your comment to Sean you talked about the origin of the British system going back to the Magna Carta. I believe that the British establishment has always known the Magna Carta is voided by 2 key points, but they have allowed the people to live with this cherished illusion of freedom as it suits the objectives of Imperialism.
King John early in the 1200s had a fight with the Vatican as he wanted the right to appoint the Arch Bishops of England so they were loyal to him and not to the pope. The Vatican, and the Church fought him - and for about 2 or 3 years they cancelled all Church services. No baptisms, no marriages, no confessions, no services. All to put pressure on the king. The king capitulated in about 1213 if memory serves me right. The king and the Vatican signed a treaty to resolve their differences and the king on behalf of the British monarchy and all of his descendants swore an eternal oath that England would remain a vassal of Rome forever. Forever.
In 1215 when the king was forced to sign the Magna Carta by the Barons who were tired of his excessive taxation the Vatican promptly issued a Papal Bull that CANCELLED THE MAGNA CARTA. Because it violated the earlier treaty. The Papal Bull trumps the Magna Carta and always has done in the Roman law system.
But the people, and more importantly the barons, were allowed to live with the illusion of free speech and other 'rights' that they think the Magna Carta gives them. But the elites all know the truth. It was NULL AND VOID and what the people get was really up to the king and Rome.
Thank you Ivan! 🙏 The more layers I peel back in how this system works, the more disheartening it all becomes. Almost everything I believed 10 years ago has come unravelled.
I have been through exactly the same Julius, but only since they locked us down, and declared 4.5 billion useless eaters.
I started with the question: "Who has the power to lock us in our homes, call us non-essential, force the world into facemasks, censor us relentlessly, and intend to jab us all?"
I got obsessed with understanding this and like you it has unravelled everything. And for a while I nearly went insane with angst, indignation and rage.
Then I decided I had to get past that, we are in a war I say to myself, it's like being in the middle of the Blitz in London the bombs are falling, and we must survive, strive, and seek to thrive again. I calmed down. I got back to meditation. I learned to recognize my triggers, and let them go.
Now I can have discussions about all of this perfectly calmly, and am focusing on positive ways to fight back. We can be disheartened, or we can reach back into our past, tap our ancestors DNA, and fight back in every way we can.
You're doing great work - keep it up. It's important what you do.
We see the ugly, inconvenient, and evil truth of this when we examine King Charles' TERRA CARTA
Have you seen it? Look it up. He has literally issued Terra Carta to cancel and 'upgrade' Magna Carta - and the arrogance of the monarchy in assuming that they have the right to do this shows what power they think they have. The Terra Carta follows the philosophy of Net Zero - and lists the priorities as Nature, People,, Planet - in other words the people are subservient to Nature. And smack bang in the middle of the top half occupying about 1/3 of the logo is the Crown - indicating that the absolute power of the Crown Monarchy Imperialism is going to impose this on nature, the people and the planet.
Another possible illusion and con is the alleged break with Henry the 8th when he allegedly took control from the Roman Catholic Church and created the Church of England. Based on the eternal oath of king John before Magna Carta, I have come to the conclusion that this was all about being controlled opposition, and it created a home for all the dissidents - the Protestants, under the watchful eyes of the British Crown and establishment!
American Revolution Illusion?
We are all led to believe that the American Revolution was the people's fight against the British tyranny of the Crown. That's the popular narrative and that the founding fathers were all heroes who fought against tyranny, and saved the people by creating the Constitution and the Republic? But is this true?
Firstly it was not a revolution. It was a civil war. A tiny detail but in terms of framing probably worth remembering.
In the book Rulers of Evil, the author Saussy dives deeply into the history leading up to the American Revolution and shows us that the American-British Freemasons, and the Jesuits were the key hands behind the revolution. I believe he brings enough receipts to the table for us to conclude it was faked. The question is why?
Before the war the British had been fought to a standstill by the Indian Wars, and I think the date was 1763 that the treaty with the Indians created a proclamation by the British monarch which created a line down the border of the 13 colonies, which it was forbidden to expand further west and to take more land from the Indians.
I personally believe this was the key reason for establishing America as a supposedly independent nation. Because as soon as America was formed they went sweeping in all directions, took land right across the continent and united it all into the United States of America.
Now if Saussy is right and the truth is that the Roman Crown, which includes Britain, was the true power behind the revolution to create America, who benefited? Well firstly the Roman Catholics who streamed into America in wave after wave after wave, and they got the vote under the constitution. Saussy argues that the Crown was simply replaced by the Roman eagle, which Americans believe is the American eagle. Every single American Federal and State institution of power uses the eagle as their symbol.
One of the founding fathers famously said to some woman who asked about what type of system that they had created: "A republic madam if you can keep it." I think it was Benjamin Franklin. That line always jarred with me. "If you can keep it" - infers that there is a force acting against you to take it off you. After I read Saussy's book it made more sense to me. The majority of the founding fathers were Freemasons and British establishment. If we are to assume that the created America as a republic in order to open it up to worldwide migration, to bring in millions of people to take the land off the Indians, to settle the lands, to carve the wealth out of the wilderness and to create the prosperity, which then can be systematically stripped by the banking system, the Federal government, and their oligarch partners, once called the Robber Barons, now called billionaires, then it makes perfect sense, or it does to me. I believe the American founding fathers set up the system just like the Roman Republic, which was very much controlled by the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, created great wealth, and then when it suited the elites they switched to the dictatorship of the Caesars - the God-Emperor-King of all Kings Pontifex Maximus title, which Saussy (Rulers of Evil) shows us travelled from Babylon to Pergamum to Rome.
If the American founding fathers had truly wanted to stop the tyranny of the Crown Imperial system, then they would have built in additional mechanisms to stop, or to cancel, the formation of laws that create tyranny - but they did not do that. They created just enough to give the people the illusions of freedom, and the elites from the beginning used the built in weaknesses to systematically create the Federal Government, expand its power in all directions, until it looks exactly like the Crown bureaucracy that other nations live under.
America is, IMHO, living under the rule of the Roman Imperial Empire, through the power of the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, the monarchies, (which includes the Vatican), the bankers, and the billionaires rule us all, and Washington D.C. is the new Rome.
This provides an excellent counter-point to Fortissax' "A Fighting Chance". I've long suspected that this mess began with Woodrow Wilson, and this confirms it. Yes, repealing the 17th would be a lasting victory, far more permanent than any stroke of the pen (however intoxicating DOGE's reforms might be). This also confirms my impression that Canada is too far gone for easy reform, and needs a drastic overhaul, like becoming a US territory!
There are those in Alberta, that think perhaps as a part of the negotiation to become the 51st state, they can get the 17th Amendment repealed, which would benefit the other 50 states.
Personally, I am warry of this, because I am afraid of ending up like Porto Rico. A never never land where the center gets to plunder without restriction.
Perhaps we need to go back to City States. Vancouvers interests, and Prince Rupert's interests are not the same. If we in Alberta, can choose to go to Prince Rupert, or Kitimat instead of Vancouver with our goods, we would have leverage. Right now, if Alberta were to go it alone, the Federal Government would simply close the ports in BC to us, and we would be back in line, and Vancouver would be cheering wildly.
City states might be a good idea if it were not for the CCP criminal cartels running Vancouver and Toronto (and very likely the Feds) as Sam Cooper has reported.
Toronto needs a thorough cleansing if it is not to implode... not holding my breath.
Exactly, which is why we in Alberta would want to be able to trade through Prince Rupert, not Vancouver. Corruption has a lot less power, when there are alternatives.
Fantastic piece. Agree completely on a repeal of the 17th Amendment. I've said the terrible three- the 16th, 17th and 18th Amendments- helped create the Leviathan that exists today.
The 16th is responsible for income tax and was never properly ratified. See Aaron Russo's brilliant, 10 minute intellectual exercise and Q&A of former IRS chief counsel in From Freedom to Fascism (2005) on that.
The 18th Amendment was responsible for Prohibition. Today, we have our cherished War on Drugs, which is about to be put on steroids to add a War on Fentanyl.
People have no idea what fentanyl is, why it's so popular among drug producers and distributors, how easy/difficult it is to make, how it made its way into the drug supply to begin with, how difficult it is to detect, or that many analogues exist and more are being concocted regularly. In the near future, fentanyl will be able to be produced by 3D printers.
It's impossible to stop and our ruinous War on Drugs has been the worst failure of any "war" in the history of civilization. It must end. Now.
You hit the major points of disfunction in the Canadian system precisely.
Can it be fixed? Vexed question because the political class is committed to the idea that Canada is not broken. They will fight hard to maintain that idea.
What an informative and thought-provoking article. I do not agree that the Prime Minister gets to 'select' Senate members as well as the Governor General, no matter who the PM is. It is like a growing cesspool of 'yes' men and women. There is so much off about Canadian politics and it certainly isn't for the weak of heart.
Provocative take. Be careful or Kim Jong Sparklestockings will hang you for treason. Have you come across Kirkpatrick Sale? He wrote a book called The Human Scale, worth looking at. He objects to what he calls "giantism." I think this idea speaks to your concerns with centralization and federalism. And Jane Jacobs is important in this domain as well. She pioneered research into how cities went from hospitable to impersonal and unfriendly. There's a demographic tipping point. I bring this up because if one were to design a truly representative (representational?) system, one would have to understand this problem. At a certain point, a population is no longer cohesive. I think Jacobs put it at 200k, but I could be mistaken.
I'll check out Kirkpatrick Sale and Jane Jacobs' work - thanks for the tip! 🙏
I think there's definitely a strong case to be made that organizations, cities, and other complex systems begin to break down beyond a certain size. I wouldn't want to put a number on city size without digging deeper, and it probably depends on the context of each organization or system, but 200k for large cities definitely would make a lot more sense than our mega-cities of today — none of the mega-cities of today seem to be functioning; all seem to be on some path towards chaos, stagnation, or social unravelling, wheres the smaller cities are still (mostly) fairly functional and cohesive.
To your point, in the cattle industry, the ideal balance between farmer and cows raised in a traditional European or North American small-farm setting used to be around 100 cows. Beyond that, the social structure of the cattle herd begins to change, and the relationship between farmer and cattle also becomes more impersonal and more health & stress issues begin to crop up in the cattle herd. However, there are other contexts where vast herds numbering in the 10s of thousands work effectively, but an entirely different management system has to be build around that to make it work, otherwise it becomes a catastrophe.
Glad you brought up farming in this context. Surely, there are principles of giantism at work everywhere. Food processing and distribution would be another area for investigation: at what point does the amount of meat, say, passing through a plant become a liability requiring all manner of measures that are themselves toxic?
Thank you Julius for your time and research to produce this essay. I found it very helpful, along with the two you wrote last week, to better understand the history, and differences, in our systems of governance. When we know better, we do better. Keep shining your light – heaven knows we need more truth sayers. As Trish Wood said “Truth over Tribe”. 👊
You are exactly right Julius about repealing the 17th Amendment (reverting to Senators being chosen by State Legislators). It would certainly not be the first time an Amendment has been repealed and should be given high priority by the States.
The American Constitutional Republic is not perfect, and their is much restoring that needs to occur, not to mention oh so much unconstitutional regulation and law that must be rescinded, but it is by far the best tool American citizens have to fight against the tyranny of globalist socialism.
It is the creation of the Federal Reserve and ultimately Nixon's abandonment of the gold standard which has brought us to this place in America with the dollar having lost 90% of its value over the last 100 years and accelerating rapidly now. If the States were to consider this carefully they would realize that a shift of power back to the States is exactly what is required to avoid a second American Revolution. As to Canada, things seem to be pretty far gone and without an original republican foundation to fall back on it is not looking promising that your tyrants can be shown the door.
Reading the essay is the first time I've understood how the American Congress and Senate were designed to work; that had always confused me. Your article does a great service in contrasting that with the Canadian system of federalism that had oppression baked right in from the start, yet somehow managed to convince Canadians for generations that we actually live in a democracy.
I wonder if you've seen this video that challenges some of the significant nation-building documents, claiming they're all fakes. If it veers into the "sovereign citizen" concept it would seem dubious given the total rule by judicial precedent and case law. Could be fake news itself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wHj2vucj4o
IN regards to your question about the video, I'm honestly not a fan of the "Illusion of Canada" video for several reasons. For starters, I don't like the many unprovable suggestions of conspiracy (like that Queen Victoria's death might have something to do with Marcioni's radio waves 12 km way).
These kinds of injected conspiratorial claims serve as a storytelling tool to prime viewers with an overall sense of "shadowy forces" working behind the scenes to make viewers more receptive to the video's broader claims, yet actually add nothing to the story about Canada. As to these conspiratorial claims themselves (like about Queen Victoria's death), as Carl Sagan used to say, "ordinary claims require ordinary evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." These injections of "conspiracy" provide no evidence to back them up (these are NOT widely accepted theories, so the authors must back up extraordinary claims like that in order to be believable). That oversight is so glaring as to give me pause about the intensions of the video.
But leaving that aside, the larger point of the video is that Canada is a legal illusion, which I also do not agree with. Our legal system, inherited from the British, doesn't function in the same way as the American system, and so the gaps in the legal line that the authors point to in the video don't mean the same thing as they would if this was America and some Constitutional amendment had been adopted but not ratified.
One of the issues is that Canada, like Britain (but unlike the US), does not have a single document as its Constitution -- we have a mix of laws, documents, traditions, and unwritten rules (so there is a lot about our system that is "de facto law"). This makes it impossible to draw a single line through our constitutional history in the way that Americans can with their written Constitution ("de jure" law), where every change to the Constitution must be traceable and be legalized by a new constitutional amendment to prevent anything that comes afterwards from being declared "null and void".
Our system doesn't work that way. Canada has lots of orphaned laws and treaties that appear to be broken because something wasn't ratified or repealed, yet our Supreme Court validates all subsequent changes if contested in court because that's how "the spirit of our system" works -- by design. Our current system is legitimate because tradition, the courts, and the people themselves have accepted the current state of affairs. It's been that way since Magna Carta in 1215 and there are TONS of gaps in the chain between then and now. That's how our system works.
For example, Quebec never ratified the 1982 Constitution, yet the Supreme Court has since ruled that they are bound by it nevertheless. No court would ever rule against that decision, so it has become law, and Quebec is powerless to do anything about it and is therefore bound by that 1982 constitution (short of separation) and anyone acting against those 1982 rules would rapidly find themselves occupying a jail cell.
The argument that Canada is a legal illusion comes from the "de jure" interpretation of constitutional law, which doesn't fit well in the Canadian context. Canada's De Facto system is essentially a mix of laws, the ever-changing judicial re-interpretation of those laws by our politicized courts, all combined with old fashioned "might makes right" in the British tradition.
Even on the off-chance that there was some glitch or oversight in the legal "chain" as the video suggests, it is irrelevant because the courts will rule according to the "intent" or "spirit" of the law, and there's absolutely no higher authority that will intervene to change that. Our Supreme Court?, the United Nations?, the ICC?, the Monarchy? — no chance. In other words, there is no "undiscovered" legal loophole that will right all the wrongs. (It's the same issue with the "sovereign citizens - common law" arguments, as you pointed out in your question.) But it does serve to inject a massive rabbithole into our constitutional discussions to distract people from focusing on the practical steps that we must take to reform our broken system.
And so, I believe the authors of the video are not serving viewers well at all when they tell viewers that Canada's system has been illegitimate since 1931. But it relies on the assumption that our courts (the law) are impartial (they're NOT) and that exposing a break in the chain would change something or strip those who have authority over us of their power (it would NOT). It's as meaningless as a "sovereign citizen" trying to explain to a judge why they don't need a driver's license and should not be thrown in jail for driving without one because of Magna Carta and the British North America Act that established its first colonies as corporations. (All colonies were established as commercial ventures — but this "great conspiracy" of being "legally owned" unless you "refuse to consent" is irrelevant because "de fact" law has long since moved on since then — no one believes that no matter what it says in the books, so that's not how the law would be interpreted in a court today.)
This is why I believe the only way out of Canada's current mess is to become a constitutional republic with clearly defined constitutional rules about the limits of federal and provincial powers. Our system was designed to enable quasi-dictatorial "de facto" top-down control, while the American Constitution rooted in "de jure" law gives "we the people" a host of legal mechanisms to limit govt authority and hold it accountable to its own Constitution when those in power deviate from the meaning and/or intent of that original constitution.
In other words, our two systems are polar opposites in both purpose and design despite how similar they appear at the surface.
And how would you deal with the fabulously wealthy and influential parties behind the curtain who come hell or high water will not permit the necessary rejigging to occur?
Excellent essay. Canada was an experiment in submission to tyranny.
Peace, order and good governance really means,
Weak, meek, and submissive.
In Canada, you’re free to do as you’re told.
The loyalists hated freedom & personal responsibility to such an extent that they uprooted their families to move to the tyrannical freezer up north.
Modern day regime loyalists, who now call themselves Team Canada, are now willing to sacrifice their family to make sure Canada isn’t liberated.
Canada needs to be liberated from itself, and it can’t happen soon enough.
Thank you William! 🙏
"In Canada, you’re free to do as you’re told." — That is the best definition of "Canadian freedom" I've seen yet. 🏆
I never imagined a people could fight this hard to resist their own liberation.
Stockholm Syndrome.
Spicy take Dan :) While much of what you say may be true…as a Canadian resident who experienced one of the longest lockdowns in the world, there are some things about the USA to be envied still! At least some of the states anyway! Cheers
I second that. The lockdown was a horrifying experience in Canada. I. Quebec, they even had curfews from 8:00 pm on. I lost my faith in the country and in my countrymen when I saw this movie rolling before my eyes for years in slow motion. Not to mention the Freedom Convoy, which gave us the misfortune of seeing Trudeau’s dictatorial impulse crushing his peace-loving and freedom-seeking citizenry with a vengeance. I would give up my Canadian passport in a flash to join America and live under a real constitution that would protect my rights and freedoms.
Well, the whole experience was eye opening ….Yet I marvel at those who continue to behave as if the mask hasn’t been torn off…
As a Canadian who has personally known W.L.Morton, Ross Dowson and Mel Hurtig this Canadian wrap youself in the flag is total crap. The Ottawa and Toronto regimes are as odious as there is. Let the Americans clean out the augean stables. What a pleasure it will be to see thes lots chucked out hard. Regular folks will cheer.
Amen 🙏
Same!! I would be such a good American
I’m many things but brainwashed isn’t one of them. Still not jabbed for covid for one and still healthy unlike most I know who did 😔
The U.S.A. has the first 10 amendments to The Constitution...The Bill of Rights.
Canada has The Notwithstanding Clause; and any time a Trudeau is Prime Minister the War Measures Act and/or The Emergency Powers Act dissolves the social contract and installs tyranny as the national authority.
Canada 51 would be a liberation.
Hi Julius,
Thank you for your great essays on the march of imperialism that is happening today worldwide, in all countries. And thank you for making the common sense decision to offer them free to all as you are so correct that in the middle of this war we need open discussion accessible to all.
As an Australian, I found your description of the Canadian system, especially your points in your note to Sean, to be exactly the same as the systems that are in place in all of the British Commonwealth nations, we are still in effect under imperial rule.
I had a shocking wake-up call last year to the ugly truth of this when an ex-SAS Australian, David McBride, who exposed the war crimes of the Australian army in the Middle East was arrested by our government and put through our courts.
In court McBride's argument for the expose was he felt he had a duty of care to the Australian people to reveal war crimes being committed in their names. But the government lawyer jumped up and said McBride had misunderstood matters. He pointed out that as a soldier McBride had sworn an oath of obedience to the British monarchy not to the Australian people, and not to the Australian constitution. The judge agreed and savagely criticized him for opening his mouth about war crimes, and gave him a harsh 5-year prison term saying it was to send a message to other would-be whistleblowers.
This is the day I woke up to the fact that Australians are still British slaves.
The British empire is still very much in power, but we are given the illusion of freedom. And I think this is the point about the Myth of Canada documentary.
There are several mechanisms that are used to create foreign control over all nations today, but in particular over the western nations who live under the illusion of Magna Carta and 'Democracy.' These control points include, but are not limited to:
1 Commonwealths - the British commonwealth creates a system where the British monarchy remains the head of government.
2. Oaths to the Monarchy: All of the senior political and government service positions swear an oath to the monarch, which today is king Charles - prime ministers, politicians, bureaucrats, military, intelligence, law enforcement, and the courts etc.
3. Courts: our courts are based on the British system, and the BAR - all roads lead back to London, again they swear an oath of obedience to the monarchy.
4. Central Banks & Money As Debt: The greatest control is through the Central Banks Cartel, headed today by the Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland, and the privately owned Federal Reserve, with all central banks in all nations coerced into the cartel of borrowing from the bond markets, which creates a debt+interest obligation (as opposed to govts simply printing the money and distributing it free of debts) -
All cash is CENTRAL BANKS CASH, so it is debt, and all other money is created by CREDIT, which is done through public and private banks under the central banks control, again DEBT + INTEREST.
So in this way all citizens are trapped into the 'money is debt+interest' system, which is a parasitic wealth extraction machine. This is a global system. And it is the key way that France still exercises economic control over the 14 countries it has yoked to their central banking system.
5. United Nations: The United nations swamp,with over 76 international organizations, which thanks to the world's governments passing laws like the USA's 1945 International Organizations Immunity Act, they are operating as NEO-Monarchies - immunity from investigation, immunity from prosecution, immunity from visa requirements, and immunity from paying tax.
The United Nations acts as a world government and through the TREATIES system, it ties nations up in knots with what I call top down tyranny - foreign control.
We see this clearly with the COVID-19 lockdowns, with the primary control mechanism being the World Health Organizations updated 2005 IHR International Health Regulations, which instructed all nations to implement bio-security laws for 'emergencies' just one of the multiple control mechanisms use to lock down 4.5 billion people under house arrest for the common cold.
And it is exactly the same with the 2015 Paris Accords, which gave us the Sustainable Development Goals, a blueprint for developing World Government - out of which comes DEI, ESG, Net Zero, Digital ID, Carbon tracking etc., etc.
6. World Economic Forum: The WEF represents the investment arm of the richest people in the world, the monarchies, the bankers, and the billionaires, and their economic institutions that have long been used to control the economy and extract the wealth, which includes the international banks, and all the multinational corporations - through the WEF they work as a transnational cartel, and again they are used to implement and force policy from the top down.
This is why all the multinationals follow the tyrannies - when you dig into the shareholdings you see the same swamp of international banks, finance, and investment corporations own everything - with BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, which control 30% off the worlds investment funds, being the icons of this group, but it is a very large group - and they own each other. They own the competitors of almost all sides of all industries. Netflix and Hollywoods studiios-same owners. BYD and Tesla same. Pepsico and Coke-same Amazon Big Retail like Target or "China's" Temsu same owners. No matter where you look you see that global Monopoly Capitalism is running the show. Larry Fink of BlackRock sends out an annual letter
8. United Nations World Economic Forum's Public Private Partnership - this was signed in 2019 just before they launched COVID-terrorism on the world. This is now one single institution in effect using both public and private sectors to force the policies of Agenda 21 and its Sustainable Development Goals down the throats of mankind who are literally choking to death on the corruption, fraud, and propaganda.
7. Freemasons - The global Freemason's network illustrates the power and reach of the secret societies of the world. They have over 6 million members. And the global HQ is in the City of London. And the British Monarch is the head.
All Freemasons swear an oath of absolute obedience, and so once again you have an organization that has infiltrated almost every nation on earth, but is all through the western nations, and can be used to get the leaders in our community to march to the same tune - E.g. At the beginning of COVID-19 the global HQ sent out instructions to follow the World Health Organization for the 'pandemic.'
These are some of the mechanisms of foreign control that are being deployed now on a global basis. I believe we are living in the End Times of the Crown Monarchy Imperialism of the Roman Empire, which is still alive and well today, but it is hidden in plain sight, and run by the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, which originates in Babylon, as does the title Pontifex Maximus.
The Roman Empire never died, but simply transformed itself into the Roman Catholic Church, and centralized all power under the popes, the new Pontifex Maximus. At the point when it is claimed the western empire fell that is misleading as well, pointed out by the American historian Dr. Roy Casagranda, because at the time there were 2 pope-emperors, the one in Constantinople took over because by the time that the western empire 'fell' between the Roman Catholic Church and about 2,000 families on the Italian peninsular they had robbed the people of all the wealth, the Church had 50% and the oligarchs had the other 50%, and the people were either slaves or starving homeless peasants. Poverty, pain, and suffering is the end result of the regressive tyranny of the rule of oligarchy of the Crown monopoly system.
There are 2 key points in your comments to Sean and your essays that I want to suggest are simply illusions that give the people the idea that they are living with freedom and rights, but are in fact not so at all. Magna Carta and the American Revolution.
Magna Carta Illusion?
In your comment to Sean you talked about the origin of the British system going back to the Magna Carta. I believe that the British establishment has always known the Magna Carta is voided by 2 key points, but they have allowed the people to live with this cherished illusion of freedom as it suits the objectives of Imperialism.
King John early in the 1200s had a fight with the Vatican as he wanted the right to appoint the Arch Bishops of England so they were loyal to him and not to the pope. The Vatican, and the Church fought him - and for about 2 or 3 years they cancelled all Church services. No baptisms, no marriages, no confessions, no services. All to put pressure on the king. The king capitulated in about 1213 if memory serves me right. The king and the Vatican signed a treaty to resolve their differences and the king on behalf of the British monarchy and all of his descendants swore an eternal oath that England would remain a vassal of Rome forever. Forever.
In 1215 when the king was forced to sign the Magna Carta by the Barons who were tired of his excessive taxation the Vatican promptly issued a Papal Bull that CANCELLED THE MAGNA CARTA. Because it violated the earlier treaty. The Papal Bull trumps the Magna Carta and always has done in the Roman law system.
But the people, and more importantly the barons, were allowed to live with the illusion of free speech and other 'rights' that they think the Magna Carta gives them. But the elites all know the truth. It was NULL AND VOID and what the people get was really up to the king and Rome.
Continued-
Thank you Ivan! 🙏 The more layers I peel back in how this system works, the more disheartening it all becomes. Almost everything I believed 10 years ago has come unravelled.
I have been through exactly the same Julius, but only since they locked us down, and declared 4.5 billion useless eaters.
I started with the question: "Who has the power to lock us in our homes, call us non-essential, force the world into facemasks, censor us relentlessly, and intend to jab us all?"
I got obsessed with understanding this and like you it has unravelled everything. And for a while I nearly went insane with angst, indignation and rage.
Then I decided I had to get past that, we are in a war I say to myself, it's like being in the middle of the Blitz in London the bombs are falling, and we must survive, strive, and seek to thrive again. I calmed down. I got back to meditation. I learned to recognize my triggers, and let them go.
Now I can have discussions about all of this perfectly calmly, and am focusing on positive ways to fight back. We can be disheartened, or we can reach back into our past, tap our ancestors DNA, and fight back in every way we can.
You're doing great work - keep it up. It's important what you do.
We see the ugly, inconvenient, and evil truth of this when we examine King Charles' TERRA CARTA
Have you seen it? Look it up. He has literally issued Terra Carta to cancel and 'upgrade' Magna Carta - and the arrogance of the monarchy in assuming that they have the right to do this shows what power they think they have. The Terra Carta follows the philosophy of Net Zero - and lists the priorities as Nature, People,, Planet - in other words the people are subservient to Nature. And smack bang in the middle of the top half occupying about 1/3 of the logo is the Crown - indicating that the absolute power of the Crown Monarchy Imperialism is going to impose this on nature, the people and the planet.
Another possible illusion and con is the alleged break with Henry the 8th when he allegedly took control from the Roman Catholic Church and created the Church of England. Based on the eternal oath of king John before Magna Carta, I have come to the conclusion that this was all about being controlled opposition, and it created a home for all the dissidents - the Protestants, under the watchful eyes of the British Crown and establishment!
American Revolution Illusion?
We are all led to believe that the American Revolution was the people's fight against the British tyranny of the Crown. That's the popular narrative and that the founding fathers were all heroes who fought against tyranny, and saved the people by creating the Constitution and the Republic? But is this true?
Firstly it was not a revolution. It was a civil war. A tiny detail but in terms of framing probably worth remembering.
In the book Rulers of Evil, the author Saussy dives deeply into the history leading up to the American Revolution and shows us that the American-British Freemasons, and the Jesuits were the key hands behind the revolution. I believe he brings enough receipts to the table for us to conclude it was faked. The question is why?
Before the war the British had been fought to a standstill by the Indian Wars, and I think the date was 1763 that the treaty with the Indians created a proclamation by the British monarch which created a line down the border of the 13 colonies, which it was forbidden to expand further west and to take more land from the Indians.
I personally believe this was the key reason for establishing America as a supposedly independent nation. Because as soon as America was formed they went sweeping in all directions, took land right across the continent and united it all into the United States of America.
Now if Saussy is right and the truth is that the Roman Crown, which includes Britain, was the true power behind the revolution to create America, who benefited? Well firstly the Roman Catholics who streamed into America in wave after wave after wave, and they got the vote under the constitution. Saussy argues that the Crown was simply replaced by the Roman eagle, which Americans believe is the American eagle. Every single American Federal and State institution of power uses the eagle as their symbol.
One of the founding fathers famously said to some woman who asked about what type of system that they had created: "A republic madam if you can keep it." I think it was Benjamin Franklin. That line always jarred with me. "If you can keep it" - infers that there is a force acting against you to take it off you. After I read Saussy's book it made more sense to me. The majority of the founding fathers were Freemasons and British establishment. If we are to assume that the created America as a republic in order to open it up to worldwide migration, to bring in millions of people to take the land off the Indians, to settle the lands, to carve the wealth out of the wilderness and to create the prosperity, which then can be systematically stripped by the banking system, the Federal government, and their oligarch partners, once called the Robber Barons, now called billionaires, then it makes perfect sense, or it does to me. I believe the American founding fathers set up the system just like the Roman Republic, which was very much controlled by the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, created great wealth, and then when it suited the elites they switched to the dictatorship of the Caesars - the God-Emperor-King of all Kings Pontifex Maximus title, which Saussy (Rulers of Evil) shows us travelled from Babylon to Pergamum to Rome.
If the American founding fathers had truly wanted to stop the tyranny of the Crown Imperial system, then they would have built in additional mechanisms to stop, or to cancel, the formation of laws that create tyranny - but they did not do that. They created just enough to give the people the illusions of freedom, and the elites from the beginning used the built in weaknesses to systematically create the Federal Government, expand its power in all directions, until it looks exactly like the Crown bureaucracy that other nations live under.
America is, IMHO, living under the rule of the Roman Imperial Empire, through the power of the Roman Imperial Aristocracy, the monarchies, (which includes the Vatican), the bankers, and the billionaires rule us all, and Washington D.C. is the new Rome.
This provides an excellent counter-point to Fortissax' "A Fighting Chance". I've long suspected that this mess began with Woodrow Wilson, and this confirms it. Yes, repealing the 17th would be a lasting victory, far more permanent than any stroke of the pen (however intoxicating DOGE's reforms might be). This also confirms my impression that Canada is too far gone for easy reform, and needs a drastic overhaul, like becoming a US territory!
A very articulate summary of the issues.
There are those in Alberta, that think perhaps as a part of the negotiation to become the 51st state, they can get the 17th Amendment repealed, which would benefit the other 50 states.
Personally, I am warry of this, because I am afraid of ending up like Porto Rico. A never never land where the center gets to plunder without restriction.
Perhaps we need to go back to City States. Vancouvers interests, and Prince Rupert's interests are not the same. If we in Alberta, can choose to go to Prince Rupert, or Kitimat instead of Vancouver with our goods, we would have leverage. Right now, if Alberta were to go it alone, the Federal Government would simply close the ports in BC to us, and we would be back in line, and Vancouver would be cheering wildly.
Adam Townsend, an investor (@adamscrabble on X), envisioned a reversion to city states, even in USA. In some of his 2020 tweets, iirc.
City states might be a good idea if it were not for the CCP criminal cartels running Vancouver and Toronto (and very likely the Feds) as Sam Cooper has reported.
Toronto needs a thorough cleansing if it is not to implode... not holding my breath.
Exactly, which is why we in Alberta would want to be able to trade through Prince Rupert, not Vancouver. Corruption has a lot less power, when there are alternatives.
and remember Toronto, Ottawa do not speak for the rest of Ontario despite what Chow, Ford and the Libs might think
Fantastic piece. Agree completely on a repeal of the 17th Amendment. I've said the terrible three- the 16th, 17th and 18th Amendments- helped create the Leviathan that exists today.
The 16th is responsible for income tax and was never properly ratified. See Aaron Russo's brilliant, 10 minute intellectual exercise and Q&A of former IRS chief counsel in From Freedom to Fascism (2005) on that.
The 18th Amendment was responsible for Prohibition. Today, we have our cherished War on Drugs, which is about to be put on steroids to add a War on Fentanyl.
People have no idea what fentanyl is, why it's so popular among drug producers and distributors, how easy/difficult it is to make, how it made its way into the drug supply to begin with, how difficult it is to detect, or that many analogues exist and more are being concocted regularly. In the near future, fentanyl will be able to be produced by 3D printers.
It's impossible to stop and our ruinous War on Drugs has been the worst failure of any "war" in the history of civilization. It must end. Now.
Wonderful essay!
You hit the major points of disfunction in the Canadian system precisely.
Can it be fixed? Vexed question because the political class is committed to the idea that Canada is not broken. They will fight hard to maintain that idea.
grifters gonna grift
What an informative and thought-provoking article. I do not agree that the Prime Minister gets to 'select' Senate members as well as the Governor General, no matter who the PM is. It is like a growing cesspool of 'yes' men and women. There is so much off about Canadian politics and it certainly isn't for the weak of heart.
Provocative take. Be careful or Kim Jong Sparklestockings will hang you for treason. Have you come across Kirkpatrick Sale? He wrote a book called The Human Scale, worth looking at. He objects to what he calls "giantism." I think this idea speaks to your concerns with centralization and federalism. And Jane Jacobs is important in this domain as well. She pioneered research into how cities went from hospitable to impersonal and unfriendly. There's a demographic tipping point. I bring this up because if one were to design a truly representative (representational?) system, one would have to understand this problem. At a certain point, a population is no longer cohesive. I think Jacobs put it at 200k, but I could be mistaken.
I'll check out Kirkpatrick Sale and Jane Jacobs' work - thanks for the tip! 🙏
I think there's definitely a strong case to be made that organizations, cities, and other complex systems begin to break down beyond a certain size. I wouldn't want to put a number on city size without digging deeper, and it probably depends on the context of each organization or system, but 200k for large cities definitely would make a lot more sense than our mega-cities of today — none of the mega-cities of today seem to be functioning; all seem to be on some path towards chaos, stagnation, or social unravelling, wheres the smaller cities are still (mostly) fairly functional and cohesive.
To your point, in the cattle industry, the ideal balance between farmer and cows raised in a traditional European or North American small-farm setting used to be around 100 cows. Beyond that, the social structure of the cattle herd begins to change, and the relationship between farmer and cattle also becomes more impersonal and more health & stress issues begin to crop up in the cattle herd. However, there are other contexts where vast herds numbering in the 10s of thousands work effectively, but an entirely different management system has to be build around that to make it work, otherwise it becomes a catastrophe.
Glad you brought up farming in this context. Surely, there are principles of giantism at work everywhere. Food processing and distribution would be another area for investigation: at what point does the amount of meat, say, passing through a plant become a liability requiring all manner of measures that are themselves toxic?
Thank you Julius for your time and research to produce this essay. I found it very helpful, along with the two you wrote last week, to better understand the history, and differences, in our systems of governance. When we know better, we do better. Keep shining your light – heaven knows we need more truth sayers. As Trish Wood said “Truth over Tribe”. 👊
You are exactly right Julius about repealing the 17th Amendment (reverting to Senators being chosen by State Legislators). It would certainly not be the first time an Amendment has been repealed and should be given high priority by the States.
The American Constitutional Republic is not perfect, and their is much restoring that needs to occur, not to mention oh so much unconstitutional regulation and law that must be rescinded, but it is by far the best tool American citizens have to fight against the tyranny of globalist socialism.
It is the creation of the Federal Reserve and ultimately Nixon's abandonment of the gold standard which has brought us to this place in America with the dollar having lost 90% of its value over the last 100 years and accelerating rapidly now. If the States were to consider this carefully they would realize that a shift of power back to the States is exactly what is required to avoid a second American Revolution. As to Canada, things seem to be pretty far gone and without an original republican foundation to fall back on it is not looking promising that your tyrants can be shown the door.
The illusion of sovereignty goes hand in glove with the illusion of democracy. Great essay Julius.
Great Read. Can a Convention of the States repeal the 17th amendment? I don’t see a path of getting 2/3 support in both houses of Congress.
There's definitely a culture war that would have to be fought to get there!
Reading the essay is the first time I've understood how the American Congress and Senate were designed to work; that had always confused me. Your article does a great service in contrasting that with the Canadian system of federalism that had oppression baked right in from the start, yet somehow managed to convince Canadians for generations that we actually live in a democracy.
I wonder if you've seen this video that challenges some of the significant nation-building documents, claiming they're all fakes. If it veers into the "sovereign citizen" concept it would seem dubious given the total rule by judicial precedent and case law. Could be fake news itself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wHj2vucj4o
Much appreciated, Sean!
IN regards to your question about the video, I'm honestly not a fan of the "Illusion of Canada" video for several reasons. For starters, I don't like the many unprovable suggestions of conspiracy (like that Queen Victoria's death might have something to do with Marcioni's radio waves 12 km way).
These kinds of injected conspiratorial claims serve as a storytelling tool to prime viewers with an overall sense of "shadowy forces" working behind the scenes to make viewers more receptive to the video's broader claims, yet actually add nothing to the story about Canada. As to these conspiratorial claims themselves (like about Queen Victoria's death), as Carl Sagan used to say, "ordinary claims require ordinary evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." These injections of "conspiracy" provide no evidence to back them up (these are NOT widely accepted theories, so the authors must back up extraordinary claims like that in order to be believable). That oversight is so glaring as to give me pause about the intensions of the video.
But leaving that aside, the larger point of the video is that Canada is a legal illusion, which I also do not agree with. Our legal system, inherited from the British, doesn't function in the same way as the American system, and so the gaps in the legal line that the authors point to in the video don't mean the same thing as they would if this was America and some Constitutional amendment had been adopted but not ratified.
One of the issues is that Canada, like Britain (but unlike the US), does not have a single document as its Constitution -- we have a mix of laws, documents, traditions, and unwritten rules (so there is a lot about our system that is "de facto law"). This makes it impossible to draw a single line through our constitutional history in the way that Americans can with their written Constitution ("de jure" law), where every change to the Constitution must be traceable and be legalized by a new constitutional amendment to prevent anything that comes afterwards from being declared "null and void".
Our system doesn't work that way. Canada has lots of orphaned laws and treaties that appear to be broken because something wasn't ratified or repealed, yet our Supreme Court validates all subsequent changes if contested in court because that's how "the spirit of our system" works -- by design. Our current system is legitimate because tradition, the courts, and the people themselves have accepted the current state of affairs. It's been that way since Magna Carta in 1215 and there are TONS of gaps in the chain between then and now. That's how our system works.
For example, Quebec never ratified the 1982 Constitution, yet the Supreme Court has since ruled that they are bound by it nevertheless. No court would ever rule against that decision, so it has become law, and Quebec is powerless to do anything about it and is therefore bound by that 1982 constitution (short of separation) and anyone acting against those 1982 rules would rapidly find themselves occupying a jail cell.
The argument that Canada is a legal illusion comes from the "de jure" interpretation of constitutional law, which doesn't fit well in the Canadian context. Canada's De Facto system is essentially a mix of laws, the ever-changing judicial re-interpretation of those laws by our politicized courts, all combined with old fashioned "might makes right" in the British tradition.
Even on the off-chance that there was some glitch or oversight in the legal "chain" as the video suggests, it is irrelevant because the courts will rule according to the "intent" or "spirit" of the law, and there's absolutely no higher authority that will intervene to change that. Our Supreme Court?, the United Nations?, the ICC?, the Monarchy? — no chance. In other words, there is no "undiscovered" legal loophole that will right all the wrongs. (It's the same issue with the "sovereign citizens - common law" arguments, as you pointed out in your question.) But it does serve to inject a massive rabbithole into our constitutional discussions to distract people from focusing on the practical steps that we must take to reform our broken system.
And so, I believe the authors of the video are not serving viewers well at all when they tell viewers that Canada's system has been illegitimate since 1931. But it relies on the assumption that our courts (the law) are impartial (they're NOT) and that exposing a break in the chain would change something or strip those who have authority over us of their power (it would NOT). It's as meaningless as a "sovereign citizen" trying to explain to a judge why they don't need a driver's license and should not be thrown in jail for driving without one because of Magna Carta and the British North America Act that established its first colonies as corporations. (All colonies were established as commercial ventures — but this "great conspiracy" of being "legally owned" unless you "refuse to consent" is irrelevant because "de fact" law has long since moved on since then — no one believes that no matter what it says in the books, so that's not how the law would be interpreted in a court today.)
This is why I believe the only way out of Canada's current mess is to become a constitutional republic with clearly defined constitutional rules about the limits of federal and provincial powers. Our system was designed to enable quasi-dictatorial "de facto" top-down control, while the American Constitution rooted in "de jure" law gives "we the people" a host of legal mechanisms to limit govt authority and hold it accountable to its own Constitution when those in power deviate from the meaning and/or intent of that original constitution.
In other words, our two systems are polar opposites in both purpose and design despite how similar they appear at the surface.
That's my two cents on the video!
Cheers,
Julius
And how would you deal with the fabulously wealthy and influential parties behind the curtain who come hell or high water will not permit the necessary rejigging to occur?
In the Canadian system, I honestly don't know.
I admire people who can say, "I don't know" instead of dancing all over the place. Thanks & best to you.