The Canadian federal election–actual election day–is this coming Monday, September 20, 2021 (https://elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=vote&document=index&lang=e).

Elections.ca provides you with basic information about your riding (electoral district).

By the way, at the advance polls, I refused to submit to contact tracing when I voted. I did not provide them a phone number nor let them write down my name on a separate log. I explained why–that I was there to vote, not to surrender the personal private medical data of myself and others. In any case, the voting process requires personal identification anyway along with a voting card–which I presented. I made an audible point of not cooperating with contact tracing. I was prepared to escalate the issue with the authorities if I was prevented from voting. Contact tracing is a spying/surveillance system being planted for a totalitarian “future” and has nothing to do with voting. 

As Canadian citizens we have a right to vote and to participate as candidates in elections:

Democratic rights of citizens

3 Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

Maximum duration of legislative bodies

4 (1) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date fixed for the return of the writs of a general election of its members. . .

A strategy of principle–not to depend on voting–is to email all candidates in your electoral district and make them aware of the real issues to do with the large-scale fraud and dictatorial system being introduced worldwide. Challenge them on their policies and attitudes, on their own beliefs and on their party’s platform.

If you email, phone (or message via social media) all of the local candidates, it keeps them on their toes. It benefits our cause of freedom in a broader way because it potentially reaches more people with information and arguments that they haven’t heard before

If you treat them with some degree of respect, like human beings, it may go even further in persuading them–and their families and friends–of whatever errors they may hold to.

I believe that the left-right political divide is a false construct and almost useless. I have friends obviously who buy into it but I don’t.

CFR historian and Georgetown professor Carroll Quigley indicates in Tragedy and Hope that elite, establishment circles have been in control of the major political parties–left and right–for a long time.

Along with Quigley, Antony C. Sutton heavily documents the fact that the oligarchy also funded and controlled extremist, far right and far left totalitarian systems.

Furthermore, in my view, even smaller parties can be locked down by the influence of counter-intelligence agents–persons who make a living undermining causes and dissenting voices who could derail the actual Brave New World agenda of the elites.

To address the vote-splitting argument, it makes no sense to follow the emotional impulse being broadcast that focuses on a particular personality such as Justin Trudeau.

From the oligarchy’s point of view, our emotions exist in order to manipulate us and to turn us against each other–blindly and thoughtlessly.

If a major party leader is making statements and promising the same anti-freedom, globalist policies, and his/her party has a consistent record of supporting or deliberately allowing votes to pass that should not have passed (such as the gender bills of recent years), you can count on him to continue the same totalitarian, anti-human policies. The party leadership in that case have the same core but covert agenda they have have had for many years–pretending to be in opposition to the overall agenda. The media and major parties at the leadership level have succeeded in fooling people into believing otherwise.

A particular local candidate might possibly have a set of opinions that are at variance with their party, but to vote only based on party when the party has clear, major platform statements contrary to what YOU believe in and what YOU want is really counter-productive and an attack on your own beliefs. I believe it is self-destructive and an exercise in denial.

Now is not the time for denial and make-believe any longer. Now is the time for everyone to wake up and deal with reality–and to speak up and show solidarity towards others who care about the real dangers we face.

I have had experience with organizing a small political party and running as a candidate in multiple elections.

I have a sense of how controlled the system is in terms of allowing candidates to even communicate with the public: there are practical obstacles in terms of going door-to-door and getting access to apartment buildings for example when they are not aware of who you are.

Attitudes and sensitivities about door-to-door and phone calls have been deliberately changed over the years also as people are not even aware of what an actual democracy would require in terms of their engagement. It’s ironic how people have been directed to obsess over privacy when it comes to phone calls (or emails) from businesses or even political parties but many are quick to surrender their privacy at a fundamental level when it comes to social media, buying groceries (loyalty cards), medical information (screening) and even the totalitarian vaccination passports–although huge numbers of people do not support that infringement!

People need to start backing each other up–yes, doing small business with each other again–and communicating with each other again.

They need to stop being afraid and they need to stop just being isolated individuals. To stand up against totalitarianism, we need to communicate with each other and rely on each other. Be an individual who thinks for himself/herself but don’t be isolated any longer.

Continuing, there is limited time for the campaign; there is limited money; there is a basic signatures requirement; there is a requirement to have an official agent do the bookkeeping; there is low limit on individual donations which did not exist decades ago–and I’m sure a major reason for limiting political donations is to neutralize dissent, dissidents and small parties.

There is also sometimes a very limited set of debates available which a small party candidate may not even be invited to. There is censorship–limits on ad spending–that also affects public interest groups during elections. Such restrictions become very apparent to small political parties and to members of the public who try to influence the direction of society with politics.

There are serious concerns about the political system we live under which I’ve touched on, and I’m not trying to minimize those (oaths being an example). I am of the opinion, however, that we need to hold on to whatever can stabilize us and make use of whatever tools we can use in good conscience–in order to influence other people and the direction of events.

By the way, note the restrictions or blackout preventing new election ads on election day (https://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=proc&dir=pol&document=index&lang=e) in addition to other limits.

All paid ads by political parties, candidates, electoral district associations and third parties must carry a tagline stating who authorized the ads. The blackout period—the ban on transmitting election advertising on election day—must also be respected.

Here is a 2015 warning about election day advertising and media polls also. (More details here ). I don’t think these types of restrictions are consistent with the Charter of Rights.

We need to have an understanding of how the political dialectics have been created artificially–usually decades ago–in order to artificially divide people, to pigeon-hole, ghettoize and marginalize dissidents into the various flavours of “left” and “right” and limit thought and therefore speech.

Besides the arguments already made, it would be lengthy to try to prove to you that these private organizations–major political parties–are controlled by the oligarchy.

It takes time for people to investigate the information that is available in order to understand this. There is a financial oligarchy, with a set agenda, clearly represented now by the World Economic Forum. It has had this agenda for many decades. It is now very explicit about it–it’s called the Great Reset.

Many posts at this site have mentioned the origin of neoconservatives, and I have quoted William F. Buckley who made a famous statement about the need for a “totalitarian bureaucracy” for the duration of the Cold War.

I have quoted the famous New World Order speeches of George Bush, a Republican. However, Democrat Bill Clinton praised communitarianism, which is related to Agenda 21–all of these are just different terms for the New World Order.

Agenda 21 has been covertly supported–and directly legislated under different names–by both/all major parties in Canada since 1992 (and under-reported to an extreme by media)–since it is a public-private agenda that is carried out both by private groups and by government legislation from all parties. Another term for this agenda is Sustainable Development. Agreements along these lines were created by the UN before Agenda 21 (Brundtland Commission).

Speaking of dialectical traps, I have, to a some extent (not enough) criticized other right-wing movements that Buckley attacked and which influenced me over the years. There is a lot to say about those movements, about alternative media, and about Donald Trump also. I think that various groups are right about some issues, yes, but even the best of them can also be leading people down the garden path to failure. This is what agents do.

I don’t know how honest the vote count is going to be. I can’t vouch for the electoral system. All I know is I believe Canadians tend to be honest and that some of the people running the electoral system in the past seemed to have integrity–but that was the past. The COVID environment has opened up new possibilities and levels of corruption. However, your vote might be counted honestly and it might present some kind of picture of opposition to these totalitarian policies.

However, if you get caught up on voting along tribal lines only because of emotional arguments, it might not register at all as a vote against freedom-destroying policies.

I don’t understand the point of YOU voting for parties that explicitly express policies contrary to YOUR priorities and values. Read their policy statements first.

Even more important than voting, why not speak up about what you believe (weighing the consequences)? Speak up and encourage others to speak up also.

Challenge these candidates–and the public and other officials you can reach–with information or points of view they haven’t heard before or don’t know enough about–about the fraud involved in the PCR tests and about the inflation of the death counts, for example.

I will just end this introduction here and plan to continue in Part 2 asap with the political party platforms.

---