Last night I was watching Tucker Carlson. Please do not lump me into that group who blindly support Trump and all the unsavory connotations that can go with that. I simply watch Tucker (and sometimes a bit of Hannity, which follows) because they say something different from the mainstream media, which is now almost unified in its narrative and selectivity (which any sociologist will tell you is part of a narrative).
Anyhow, Tucker had a guy on his show who had written/probably was promoting a book about soft totalitarianism. I can’t remember the book title but when I heard that term “soft totalitarianism” I did a double-take so I would remember and be able to follow up.
The idea of soft totalitarianism rings true to me, especially with regard to how I perceive what’s happening in Canada today. True, we don’t have tanks and riot police patrolling the streets. But our freedoms and opportunities are definitely on the wane.
What can we do about it?
Maybe nothing. But I just can’t sit here and watch what was once a great, free land turn into some kind of fearful, politically correct duplicate of places like Ukraine and Belarus.
Carlson often says that he feels Russia is not a threat to the USA. He’s mostly worried about China’s influence as a handful of US billionaires – as he sees it – make unethical partnerships with the Chinese system. And he may have a point. For me, however, it seems Russia is the biggest threat to our Canadian rights and freedoms.
The book-promoting guest on Carlson’s show said something that you almost NEVER hear up here in Canada. He said that soft totalitarianism reaches into government, business, and the universities. It was that last element that made my ears perk up.
I’ve told my own story many times at earthpages and feel no need to repeat it. But suffice it to say, even the university agreed that I did not get fair treatment at that same university. But unlike previous years when I dealt with Canadian bureaucrats in search of justice and a fair deal, this time around nobody gave a damn nor did anything. I often felt that if I was a Native person or a Muslim woman I might have had a better chance of acquiring justice. But because I was a white male, it wasn’t politically expedient for anyone to assist me in my quest for social justice. It just wouldn’t look good on anyone to help a 30-something white guy, even if he fought – and funded – his way up the ladder through hard work and the reception of highly competitive scholarships.
Try getting those scholarships if you are not a rich person to begin with. You’ll see it is not easy. You not only need top grades but also outstanding reference letters, along with some community volunteer work, and a general aura of “well-roundedness.” I actually struck out the first time I tried for PhD. funding. But I didn’t give up and the second-time around hit the jackpot. Or so I thought…
The fact that nobody helped me when the university itself admitted there was a problem with a certain professor, well that, my friends, is what I call reverse racism.
Social justice should be for all. All lives matter.
And when nobody gives a damn about certain sectors of society because they do not happen to fall within the ‘flavor of the month’ and likely threaten some snake-eyed goon lurking behind the scenes, that in nutshell, is soft totalitarianism. Only certain people matter. Justice for some but not for all.
As I say, no tanks. No (visible) guns. But the harmful effect is just the same.