The Duran Podcast - Canada at a crossroads w/Matthew Ehret (Live)

Episode Date: April 1, 2025

Canada at a crossroads w/Matthew Ehret (Live)

All right. We are live with Alexander Mercuris in London, and we are happy to have with us once again on the Duran. Matthew Eric. Matthew, how are you doing? Good to have you on again. I'm doing really good. Yeah, it was a pleasure to join you guys. Fantastic. Matthew, where can people follow your work? What work do you want to plug for everybody so that they can get to your amazing analysis? Yeah, thanks. Sure. Well, Substack is always a good place to start. I put up things nearly every day, mostly free. So that's Matthewerick.substack.com. Also CanadianPatriot.org. People can watch all the documentaries. My wife and I and Jason Dahl, our teammate, have put out over the past couple of years, as well as our books. So we've put out a lot of books, too. And right, last one I'll put out as a plug is rising tidefoundation.net, which is a nonprofit, more focused on inter-civilization.

dialogue and cultural understanding that my wife and I started back in 2019. All right, and I will have all of those linked up in the description box down below. They're already in the description book down below, and I will add them as a pin comment as well when the live stream is over. So a quick hello to everyone that is watching us on Odyssey, on Rockfin, on Rumble, YouTube, and of course our Duran locals community, the durand. dot locals.com. Big shout out to everyone on locals.

And a thank you to our moderators on YouTube. Harry is moderating for us on YouTube. And who else? And I will be moderating on YouTube. And I think that's it for now. But I'm sure more moderators will jump in. So Harry, it's me and you in the chat. And it's Alexander and Matthew on the live stream.

Let's talk about what's happening in Canada. which is making all kinds of news. So Alexander, Matthew. Indeed, let's talk about Canada, because suddenly Canada is very, very big news. Mr. Trump says it should be part of the United States. There is an election in Canada. Justin Trudeau is apparently departing the scene.

We now have Mr. Carney, who we know very well in Britain. By the way, he was governor of the Bank of England for quite a long time, as I very well remember. Anyway, he's now Prime Minister of Canada. There's elections going to happen in Canada. What is going to happen in Canada? Will Canada change its political orientations? It's now under some pressure.

Will people in Canada rally to defend Canada? What are their feelings about the sudden radical shift? Or is it really a shift in American policy? this all to discuss with Matthew, who is, of course, somebody who is there on the scene, has an understanding of these things, which a few have. In fact, I don't think anybody has the same extent. And as somebody who lives in Britain, where we have strong connections with Canada, both were good and ill, just to say, I mean, I think Canadians probably have mixed feelings

about our connections with Canada. Anyway, I am very interested in what goes on in Canada. And as a Greek person who remembers the role Canada played in saving Greece from hunger in 1942, I have an even stronger feelings about Canada. So Matthew, where are we? What is happening in Canada now? What's the mood of the people there? Are people worried about what's coming with Donald Trump?

What do they feel about Mr. Kani? All sorts of questions. but maybe you can start us off and give us, maybe your quick views about where we are, and then we'll go into things in more detail. Yeah, I think your introductions are fantastic, and I think you set the tone pretty nicely. For once, Canada, which is sort of a very big country,

but a country that people have been very much inclined to ignore for much of our history is on the front burner, and it's captured a lot of attention, due to some of the remarks that were made by Trump early on and after he was inaugurated, even a bit before that even, toying with the idea of expanding the borders of the USA, far up into Canada, Greenland, and even down into the dairy and gap even feasibly. So these are provocative words, whether we should take them with a, I think we should take them with a grain of salt.

But regardless, they have, they certainly play into a broader geostrategic and geocultural. dynamic, one which has really, I would say, in my observations, revived, rekindled a type of Canadian nationalism, which we haven't seen in a very long time as far as a fervent. And when I say Canadian nationalism, this is difficult for many Europeans and Americans to get. But the Canadian nationalism that I'm talking about, the only kind of Canadian nationalism that's really been created at its, at its inner core, is anti-Americanism. And that's an unfortunate thing to say. but most Canadians, and that's due partially to a lot of, I think, social engineering, multi-generational control over education system, our history books have been given the narrative

that our identity fundamentally is that we are not American and that we are the people who have resisted American imperialism time and again since even before 1776. Now, there's a degree of truth at times. I would say NAFTA was one turn towards a very vicious imperialism that did not benefit Canadians or Americans. But the same measure, it largely had a lot to do with the fact that America by this time of NAFTA, of course, had been sufficiently, I would say, recolonized by many of, through the financial sector and through the business sector by those agencies that had migrated around the forms of groups like Bilderberger, you know, the Bilderberger group that was set

up by Prince Baron Hart, very close associate of Prince Philip Mountbatten, and that had, you know, among its steering committee members over the years, people like Sir Henry Kissinger. And I say, sir, because he was knighted as a knight of St. Michael and St. George, as was George H.W. So you had a recolonization, I think, sufficiently, which destroyed, dismantled many of the nationalist structures that were constitutional and character and that gave America its best ability to fight against this system of oligarchism that the founding fathers originally broke away from. And when that happened over the dead bodies of people like both Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King and what have you, then what I think we saw was a sufficient idea of an economic reconquering of the USA as well as thence Canada that lot that eliminated our protective tariffs in the 80s with Brian Mulroney, with Jean-Critzien, who continued that in order to continuously consolidate power into an unelected grouping. in this case it was the neoliberal model of private business classes that could sue nations if they would do things like protective tariffs in opposition to certain promises that they were they believed were sort of like inalienable rights contained within the world trade organization of the Gat earlier on, which was never part of why nation states existed. So I would say Canadians have been brainwashed in large measure to think that we are anti-American in our essence. Um, that's a problem. There is a sort of, um, spirit of, of rallying around a strong,

what is perceived to be marketed to Canadians as a new Pierre Liot Trudeau, strong man who, you know, Pierreliot Trudeau was the man who was like the Lincoln of Canada, who kept Canada together in, in turmoil of the October crisis of the FLQ terrorists, which is just another gladio operation in Canada or later on against true referend that nearly tourist apiece and separatism. So Carney is sort of living into that that role model despite the fact that, well, not even despite that, which is actually, I would say a lawful thing since Pierre Liot Trudeau was also an ardent Jesuitical technocrat who despised the institutions of democracy to begin with, as does Carney, another Bilderberger steering committee member and somebody who is very, very vetted

very high up into the echelons of power of the empire, which doesn't really care about Canadians per se. So I would say to close up my answer, barring a certain movement within Alberta, which is sort of the Texas of Canada, which is rather favorable to the idea even of either becoming an an Albertaan republic or joining as a 51st state, I don't see this working in the benefit of anybody who thinks in MAGA or Republican terms, if anything, this is working against any type of initiative to make Canada a truly sovereign country or even a reliable partner with the United States. So that's one concern I'm having right now. You know, it's very interesting that you bring up Britain, because this is something that, from a British perspective, looking at Canada,

when you say that the Canadians have developed their nationalism around anti-American, That has always played, it seems to me, very much to the British advantage in the sense that it keeps a kind of connection of Canada to Britain in the sense that Britain is not the United States. And yet the reality is, and there's an extraordinary article about this today in the Times, by the way, the London Times. Britain and the United States, or at least the neoliberal globalist factions in Britain. and the United States are absolutely joined at the hip. Now, the article in the Times today is by our former Foreign Secretary, British Foreign Secretary, William Haig, and he describes his relationship with the Americans when he was foreign secretary. And he says that the only telephone, the only direct telephone line he used to have was foreign secretary,

was to the U.S. Secretary of State. he says that he was the only foreign leader who was able to visit the NSA and tour its headquarters and meet with all the staff there. He talks about how he used to go out to bars with Hillary Clinton and all of this. I mean, the whole quality that he conveys is of a class of people in London and Washington, who are to all intents and purposes exactly the same. So Canada, it's always seen to me, is caught in the middle in this, in the sense that sometimes in the past it's sort of thought of itself as being loyal to Britain, distinct from the United States.

That's why it still has the king. That's why we've got all of these parliamentary structures still in Canada, all of that. And, you know, that defines it against the US. Sometimes you get a kind of more anglophobic, I mean, anglophobic, more hostile attitudes to Britain, sort of republican sentiment's growing there.

But that tilts to the United States. And there's never been any clear understanding that Britain and the United States until now have been pretty much one and the same thing, at least certainly since the late 19th century, perhaps the early 20th century, ever since then. And Canada is caught in the middle. And it works for one and it works for the other. But actually, in reality, it's always been working for both. That's my own conception of what Canada is.

I think anybody in Canada has fully understood this. Yeah. I mean, I don't know how many people fully, fully get the nuance of what you said, because the character of the U.S. imperialistic tradition does certainly come from its conjunction with the reigning power structures of the city of London, which is the city within a city above the institution of the actual state of England, per se, which exerts then, you know, in the 19th century, 18th century, as much as it does, if not more, today, a huge influence over global policy, global monetary policy internationally. And it's really an empire of, an invisible empire of the monetary system, of intelligence agencies.

You know, the subtlety and sophistication of British intelligence is, I think, miles above anything we've seen as far as sophistication is concerned of U.S. Intelligence Agency operations, though the Five Eyes is certainly a big part of that reintegration of, you know, in a more formalistic manner of the belligerent colony. that somewhat broke free but not fully. And at the best of times, and I wrote a series of books called The Clash of the Two Americas, volumes one to four,

where I try to map out, at what times did America, did America's better anti-imperial traditions emerge, under which presidencies, which policies were active? And I found, you know, a common denominator was that those presidents that were reawakening that anti-imperial tradition, which was different for,

from this other thing that's been a parasite locked in since 1776 within the core of the USA itself, usually were those presidents who died while in office, eight of them, four by bullets, but there's other means of eliminating a president than simply bullets. And again, when you look at the character of their policies, and so it's something very similar, both in domestic internal as well as foreign policy that's looking for win-win cooperation with neighbors, that's looking to provide the means for poor countries that had been abused to have the means to stand on their own two feet with the privileges and benefits of education, industrial progress, as Franklin Roosevelt envisioned with his internationalization

of the New Deal that was sabotaged completely by his enemies that took power, you know, seconds after his, after he was dead. But we saw that, you know, in the case of Canada, there's, I think, an important insight that Pierre Liet Trudeau, a very important character in terms of shaping the terrain of the Canadian psyche in so many ways. He made a point that his foreign policy when he was asked by a journalist, what defines it? What's your philosophy? And he simply said, and I think it was very true,

and was to create counterweights, knowing that Canada is not a large power. It's a middle power, but that middle power plays a role within a broader global chemistry that he understood, you know, and he was toured. He was given a 512-day tour when he was, he was trained under Harold Lasky, the then head of the Fabian Society of England at the London School of Economics, after he had been sort of vetted by William Yandel Elliott, the Rhodes Scholar in Harvard,

who had also been training Kissinger at the same time. So he was sent from Harvard to Lasky. And afterwards, he was given, before he even finished his thesis, a 500-day tour of the empire in every place he went, Lebanon or Palestine. There was always some regime change, some form of geopolitical turmoil, before he was then sent back in 1950 to the Priddy Council Office in Ottawa, where he was sort of given the ropes, the training to appreciate the control mechanisms, the unelected control mechanisms of the Commonwealth. And especially in Canada or at the time, I mean, Australia in a different way, but especially in Canada, it's the Privy Council office, not the Privy Council per se. So that was sort of the cybernetics nerve nerve the central nervous system of the unelected aspect of our government then as now and out of that he emerged with more experienced and and really defined this new policy of seeing that Canada is a chess piece

within a broader great game and if the you know in the mannequian dualism of the cold war if if the geopolitical weight should pivot a little bit too much towards the Soviet side then Canada would, you know, under PL at Trudeau, go and embrace Richard Nixon or especially Reagan or something like that and do something pro-capitalist. But then if it would, it would pivot a little bit towards the capitalist side of things, then he'd go and meet up with Castro or, you know, sign a deal with a Soviet country. And so the idea of counterweights was just always an important aspect of the broader system. Now, I'd say the thing about Canada and our relationship to England and the USA. And I also wrote a series of books called The Untold History

of Canada back in 2012. I published them in book form in 2019. But one of the things I observed is that when you look at the, I mean, Canada itself is a nation founded by United Empire loyalists, right? That's why there's English speakers in Canada by and large is that there were factions amongst the nobility, the lower nobility of the New England colonies that wanted to remain loyal to the systems of hereditary power. And they were given sanctuary much as the Russian oligarchs were given sanctuary in England to create this little London on the themes. Same thing for Canada. The British or the English gave the sanctuary. And they reconstituted themselves as a minor appendage that became known in the early 19th century as the family compact, basically because

like any oligarchy, they just started forming family bonds as they would organize the schools and the business system. But on behalf of the higher structure of the British Empire. And this resulted in a crushing suffocation amongst the Canadian peasants who couldn't breathe under British free trade. They were supposed to be forever hewers of wood and drawers of water, no industry allowed. And they were looking at the U.S. that was at different times throwing off those, the yoke of free trade and engaging in developing rail, rail systems, you know, improving standards of living dramatically compared to us in Canada. And people wanted, they started wanting that and not wanting to suffocate.

And they had a rebellion in 1838. That was the only rebellion we ever had for, and it lasted for all of two seconds in upper and lower Canada, Papinorne McKenzie, William Lyon McKenzie. And there were two sides of the same rebellion, one for the French, one for the English, but they were coordinating. they also were naive and they tried to, I think, plucked the fruit before it was ripe. They didn't set the stage the way Benjamin Franklin had done earlier. They were trying to move too fast and they didn't realize how many operatives, you know,

there's a lot of espionage, a lot of operatives, agents embedded in their own ranks that were working for Lord John Russell to sabotage it from within. So it went to hell. It didn't work out. Also, we had a traitor in the U.S. That made it illegal for Americans to support the Canadians at a time that they really needed it then. So then you, you know, you had an emergency meeting in London where you had a guy named Lord Durham who was sent down to Canada in 1840 and he was assigned to figure out how can

you stop this from happening ever again, this danger of rebellion, you know. And he came up with something called the Durham report of 1840, which said, okay, let's let's give them limited government. Let's give them local controls. Let's let them have a bit of progress and we'll call it responsible government. So to the degree that that that they have a revolutionary tendency, we'll, we'll make sure that we redirect that towards them fighting not for independence or to become a republic or to join the U.S. when the U.S. was less of an empire, but rather we're going to have them fight for having the permission to have a responsible government, meaning as long as you're well-behaved and responsible will let you make decisions to the degree that you

step out of line, we'll take it away. And it kind of works. you know, but still not, not really. And again, you know, if you look at every single moment where Canada had a real decision to make to become free and adopt a truly Republican independence, we were either bribed, our leaders were killed, or in the case, for example, of Lincoln, and I'll just stop it there because I know I do context too much sometimes. But in the case of Lincoln, you know, you had a huge amount of support, especially since Britain had spread itself. So, thin for at that time when the Civil War was now being won for Canada to now become a republic. And instead, that was sabotaged.

The people like Sir Isaac Buchanan, who was a leader of Canada at the time in 1864, 65, who had kept Canada largely neutral during the Civil War. He was ousted. His enemies took power in the form of Sir Johnny McDonald's, who said, a Britisher I was born and a Britisher I will die. and this man became the father of confederation. Right behind Gary Elliott Trudeau, or maybe inversely, he's probably one of the most influential personalities,

the George Washington of Canada. And he said, I would prefer to keep Canada a barren wasteland for a century, except that I know that if we don't build rail across Canada and go there, the Yankees certainly will. And so he reluctantly allowed for the, for a policy from England to say, okay, since we're going to lose Canada at that time, especially with the pressure of Russia and the USA, Lincoln's USA,

so clearly exerting influence Russia had just sold Alaska to the United States in 1867 or 68, no, 69. It had, no, 1867, that's right, May 30th, 1867. A day before the British North America Act, our constitution was signed into law in London, which was the Canadian Constitution. A day before that, the Alaska sale was finalized, and the idea behind that was always, as Lincoln had given as a speech in his second inaugural address to the nation, to extend rail and telegraph lines through the Bering Strait that would extend his transcontinental through British Columbia and up into Alaska. And he said so.

And his followers, like William Seward and others, said so. So Canada was a very, very important geopolitical piece of real estate that had to be fought for. And so the idea was, well, under Johnny McDonald's, let's give them a constitution. They don't have one. Let's give them one. Okay, they have no development. They have no transcontinental railway. They have crappy industry because they're looking at the U.S. and wanting what the U.S. has.

Let's give them that too. But we'll say under our constitution that they have rights to life, liberty, and happiness, just like similar language to the U.S. Declaration of Independence. except will say that those rights are not inalienable, but they were granted by the crown. And thus could implicitly, legally speaking, be taken away, though it's not said so that way, but that is the idea if rights are simply given

as an emanation of a hereditary institution, they could be taken away. And we'll also say that in our constitution, which it says in the first page, that we exist to promote the interests of, to promote the interest of the British Empire, which is what it says, not the general welfare.

So that became the Delphic sleight of hand where we were given, okay, a bit of a comfort blanket saying now we have a constitution, now we have rail development, we have industry for the first time growing out of this transcontinental ambition, but it was done with the intention to ultimately keep Canada locked into this cage, this geopolitical cage, as well as to block any potential emergence of alliance

between the USA and Russia, which when I look at Carney and I hear him say that, that any potential collaboration on Arctic development is off the table forever, which is pretty much what he said directly when Putin expanded upon the benefits of Arctic development. Carney was assigned to directly re-invoke that traditional imperial mandate of Canada to remain as a stubborn block, a wedge. But perhaps be granted, he might unleash as Sir John A. McDonald unleashed. a limited amount of progress because Canadians are in despair. They feel the constraints and fear of the future.

The economy is not going to get really painful, especially in the coming period ahead, both because of tariffs but other things. And I'm for tariffs that's done right. So he might allow for a certain type of drogy plan, as drogy, who, as people know, worked very closely with Carney as, you know, anti-democratic technocrats for Goldman Sachs and then at the FSB and, you know, the Draghi plan currently calls for an increased centralization of the economy into something that looks a lot more like what Kudunhova-Klahergi called for with the pan-European movement in the early 20s.

That we're not there yet. It's calling for accelerating it so that you can get that under a war economy of industrialization. Carney has something similar under a Canadian Development Bank that would be a centralized lending mechanism both for his green policies that he's so devoted to but also for the type of thing like high speed rail which Justin Trudeau called for about seven weeks ago and Carney is is I think been a designer, co-designer of this idea that, okay, China has high speed rail. That is the future. We have zero high, zero high speed rail. So that's something that they're building. They've announced that they're going to be building and to finance these sorts of things, which I'm for, I'm for those

things. But I'm for them being done for the right reasons, not to placate Canadians to keep us as a geopolitical pawn. So that's how I'm seeing Carney sort of being used currently. Does anybody ever say in Canada, I mean, I know, to some extent, I mean, I know some people do, but does anybody ever make the point in Canada politically, at a political level, that republicanism is actually the route towards establishing a genuine Canadian. identity which has always been Canada's problem it's it's you know in English speaking country Joseph Chamberlain who is the great architect of late British Empire actually went said you know the nice thing about Canada as they speak English and if you cross the border into the United States

which you also wanted to pull into the imperial system but was quite successful in doing actually he said if you cross the border from Canada doing into the United States What you discover is that they speak English there too. So really we should all bring all of these nice things together and create this new great Commonwealth of English-speaking nations, which became very much the policy in Britain in the late 19, 30, 20th century. But does anybody make the point that through republicanism, you can actually break this.

You can actually establish a proper Republican system in Canada, distinct from the United States, break the link to Britain finally, which is basically established through the monarchy and that you're never going to create a proper Canadian nationalism, a sense of separate, distinct, real identity that people can rally around and coalesce around with the self-confidence that comes with that,

unless you take this step. I mean, is this point ever made politically? Yeah, it's made a lot more in Alberta, the province of Alberta than it is in other parts of Canada. Quebec used to have a little bit more of a robust discussion in the 70s and the 80s. Lesson it petered out in the 90s, it became more about language, my language.

and the idea of building a real nation. Because it's like I'm conditionally for the independence of any province because I don't even see Canada as an authentic country. So in that sense, if a province wants to feels that their developmental aspirations are being withheld because of the structures of the Privy Council control system that exerts a vast amount of control and influence over various provinces, both through elected and unelected. institutions if they want to then go at it on their own and call a plebiscite and do so in an authentic manner then go for it i'm i'm for that but it has to be done for something more than simply my language prejudices because if you're all it's like what are you saying if your culture is still burnt out and degenerate and mediocre then it doesn't matter really what language you're saying it's like what ideas are you expressing and if you can't think about

developing a competent program that could uplift people to a better way, you know, and organize your resources and your skills in a way that would be beneficial to future generations, then being a nation state is just a word. You would still be a chess piece for a higher oligarchical system that hates you. So I do see some authenticity currently active in a living way in Alberta, a little bit in Quebec, some in Winnipeg, where there's a bit more of a blue-collar spirit. like a sense of, okay, value is in what we create and produce because we're all farmers. So we know that if we don't do our job, people die.

And so it's harder to spin sophisticated arguments for people who work productive jobs and have real knowledge because they work in those jobs that would convince them that, you know, a green new deal. Decarbonization is somehow a valid thing to do that's not going to destroy a bunch of lives. Like they won't buy that because they do productive things. It's mostly just white-collar people who are detached from the physical productive processes of reality that tend to buy into this stuff in a more white or, you know, abstract way. So as far as today's situation, I think that you do need to get, we've never fought for our freedoms, right? So we tried. It was sabotaged after like I said, two seconds. and then we started allowing false narratives and fallacies of composition to be given to us as national myths that added that built on each other. And that's a big crisis of multigenerational psychological crisis, which is so difficult, both that involves a hate of America, a fear of America, a fear of Russia, right, as two behemists that are pressing onto us.

And the fear of Russia is a bit more of a, it was built up in the Cold War, but it's being revived like a hypnotic transinduction. almost added to a bit of fear of China, another Cold War unresolved monster that is now being sort of revived by the hypnotic sort of social engineers playing our zeitgeist against us, as well as a love of Great Britain, an unnaturally irrational love, I would say in many cases, because at the end of the day, it's not like we benefited so much by being loyal to the system of the crown, it offers some emotional comfort for people who like tabloids. But we would need to have some form of real fight to, I think, open up the Arctic, to go, to leap outside of our limits to get out of our comfort zone.

That's one of the preconditions to having a culture of republicanism that could be valid in the future is you got to get used to not being in a comfort zone like a subject. Subjects, because that's the thing. Like what's the difference between a subject versus a citizen? They seem similar, but a subject is somebody who waits for this, a higher power to take care of you, to make decisions for you. You don't see your rights as being part of responsibilities to defend those rights or to improve them or to hold accountable decision makers. That's not what a subject does. They're a peasant more than that, a hobbit, whereas a not not the Frodo Hobbit, the type of Hobbit that stays in their shell versus like a citizen is somebody who's the opposite.

They see that I am the government. I look in the mirror and I see I see somebody, I see the representative of the government, even if I don't hold an elected position. I am obliged to participate in the process in town halls and running for election if need be. I see myself as needing to fight to defend the freedoms that we're bled for. It's a different state of mind of which you don't tend to get too much of that in Canada, which results in some problems to answer your question, right? How are you going to get there? Well, if you have that type of identity, you're not going to get there for a long time. So I think that it's going to come through some form of, of, of development. I think the Arctic is, is a really great domain as a frontier of the earth to begin to explore our talents to

develop new capacity that we have been withheld from developing, because we've been told we're not allowed to develop for like the last 60 years. We've been told under since Pierre Leet Trudeau brought into just society, which was a cyberdetics model of stasis, basically saying that we're going to stop and halt all frontier research into nuclear, into, space tech into heavy industry. We're just going to shut that down. We're going to transition to a post-industrial model of simply resource reallocation adapted to an IMF World Bank type of structure that would then have Canada play a role as Mori Strong played a big role, another Bilderberger key figure, in transforming Canada into a nation that would virtue signal

and would temper other poor countries that wanted development into saying, okay, if you want that development, well, Maurice Strong, what did he do? You know, he set up the Canadian International Development Association in 1968 after he was the head of the Ministry of External Affairs. He was on the selection committee that selected Pierre Leet Trudeau. And under the CETA, which is still a very powerful institution, he basically said the new philosophy of international aid is not going to be to help nations develop next generation.

technology, which would allow them to help themselves, as Canada was formally doing with JFK in providing nuclear power reactors to Pakistan, to India, so that they would develop the skill set and the means to stand on their own two feet. Instead of that, Mori Strong and Pierre Eliot Trudeau said no, it's going to be now appropriate technologies. We will give you money on the conditions that you only use them for those things that don't impact the environment, your culture, which we suppose now are going to naturally have to remain in some mathematical equilibrium or homeostasis forever. And if you do that, then you will receive the money and it's fine.

And maybe rewire your education system in Rwanda or something. So they'll set up the Canadian-funded University of Rwanda to be like a local little mini Oxford that would train local elites to then become the technocrats that would manage on behalf of Barrett Gold and other multinationals, that part of the slave society of Africa, that you want to rape. But it had, you know, so that Canadian money that went into doing that would be fine. So that,

that's the sort of thing that, um, we've been, we did that to ourselves too. We got into a static mindset. And the only way to become citizenry is to really adopt anti, break out of our limit to growth, you know,

get out of this, this way of thinking about we have to adapt to, to less, which was what Mori Strong put forth as a logic in what Carney represents is the eco warrior of central banks. and really get back into this idea of not just creating abundance, but rather doing it for the right reasons, which is for having a harmony of nations working for common interests, win-win cooperation, and in that sense, looking to the United States, looking to Russia, looking to China,

as are potential allies and friends to build things together with. And in that context, I'm thinking maybe in the next generation, we can start having an identity that could understand why they should go for republicanism instead of hereditary power. Yeah. Well, it's all very, very interesting points, if I could say. Just a few things. Firstly, I remember Pierre Trudeau very well. Very charming, very manipulative man, extremely clever.

But as I said, very, very manipulative. That was my big memory of him. Secondly, you said that Canada is a middle-ranking power. In terms of the United States and Britain, it is, it's a place which we take very largely for granted in Britain. British people do. The British political class does. And they, with good cause, because Canada has always been there for them.

The Americans, I think, also take Canada very much for granted. The rest of the world doesn't. My experience outside, you know, the Western worlds, is actually Canada has had, in the past a positive and very high and rather good profile. It's been seen as a place that has done many good things. It's been regarded as if you like the most humane of the big English powers that's done lots of things. You talked about economic development and what Mark Carney is proposing, you know, the fast railway links and the tariffs. And by the way, I too have no objection in principle to tariffs.

I think tariffs, if they're applied properly and intelligently, with good planning behind them, they can be very effective. But what I would also say, and I think you will agree with me here, but, you know, especially what I think the technocrats, they're necessary in implementing plans and even drawing them up. But economic plans in my experience never really succeed in a big scale unless the political framework is there with the self-confidence and the drive and the energy that the political framework creates. So absolutely, develop the Arctic. Do all of these things.

I think Canada is incredibly well positioned to do all of these things. It's a huge country. abundant natural resources, highly educated population, very skilled, very strong industrial base. Pratt and Whitney and all of that. So you could develop the Arctic very well. You could play a very, very active role in world politics, developing the Arctic, doing many, many different things. But in order to achieve those, you need the self-confidence to be able to carry it off. otherwise if you don't have it

well the British will take you for granted and the Americans as they are doing at the moment will be saying well what really is the point of Canada why shouldn't you become another state because it's got really it's got

all of those resources but it doesn't have the energy and the drive that we have it can have it it's absolutely possible for Canada to do it there is nothing in you know the human chemistry that makes it impossible. It's just that there's this problem of the mind that holds Canada back. Yeah, it's totally in the mind. I couldn't agree with you more.

It's really, and people think about, I think, too much materialistic mechanisms, like what's the formula to solve our problems? And it's really, we have to go inside of ourselves and introspect and self-examine the these these subtle axioms that have, been embedded that are more than just axioms, their felt thoughts that are passed on almost subconsciously, transgenerationally, which we then, you know, pass on that deprives our children from being able to actualize their higher powers. And I couldn't, I love the way you put that. And it's true, like Canada used to be seen, and I think to some, that that illusion is mostly broken out. But we had up until not that long ago still a reputation of being a nation that

would stand for principles under even Jean-Cretzien, not that long ago. Canada would resist, had resisted the pressure of Dick Cheney to join in and support the bombing of Iraq. You know, there was there was the idea also of militarizing the Arctic back in 2004, which again, Paul Martin and Jean-Cretzien together said, no, we're not going to militarize the Arctic in preparation for some potential like, you know, future war with Russia, which currently is happening, um, Senator Justin Trudeau of April 2024, he adopted a new Arctic security doctrine that does, for the first time, actually place or accept the placement of long-range missiles in the Canadian Arctic as part of a broader full-spectrum preparation for some war against Russia and China at some point. And, you know, 20 years ago, that was political suicide. 15 years ago was political suicide. Last year it happened, nobody talked about it. And as far as I could see, Mark Carney is not against it. He might have been fully, fully on board. He probably is fully, fully

on board with it is, you know, he's the godfather of Christia Freeland's child or one of her children. They're pretty much the same species, except he's more competent and smart and thus dangerous than even Christia, who's a little bit more, a lot more unhinged. But they're both creatures, you know, spun in the realm, in the bowels of some special experience that they got at Oxford, which is not what your typical Oxford student gets. There's something special that happens to wrote scholars and whatever the hell have Carney experienced. I won't. I can only guess. But, but, but you know, in the sense of we lost that. And if you look at what, what was the, why was the liberal party so different 25, 30 years ago when it was doing these useful things versus

today's liberal party? Well, you got to look at things like Diane Carney and her role within the Canada 2020 think tank, which I've written. It's a chapter of one of my books on the Untold History of Canada, the Canada 2020 think tank was set up by a team of privy counselors in 2005 to prepare for a purge of the old school political class of statesmen like Jean-Cretzien, who I think is a bit more like a Trump figure, pragmatist, not ideological, not ideologically technocratic or anything like that. He's a pragmatist looking to make deals, looking to facilitate business relations with Essencee Lavalé and partners around the world. And, you know, he's old school in that sense.

And thus was not to be tolerated in the new type of liberal party that they wished to. And they did create, which needed to have a purge of people like him, influenced by him. You know, Chris was even given the friend of Russia award in 2014 for trying to work valiantly backchannel dialogue and discussions leading up to the Maidan. So that had to go. The Canada 2020 think tank was set up to oversee that reorganization of the liberal party. People like Thomas Axworthy, Pierre Elliott Trudeau's former personal secretary was a leading figure behind that. Also a key figure behind the North America Union, that task force with John Manley, a figure who was very high up in the Canadian version of Chatham House were both members of the task force that drafted the program. to create a North American Union that could only emerge under the conditions of an economic

crisis that would have a more European Union model to it. And people could read the, you know, you guys probably remember it vaguely, right? And it was put on the backburner at a certain point. The Amaro, they even designed, they minted a few coins of what the Amaro was going to be. They put that on the back burner in 2007 when it was becoming clear that people were not ready to just give up whatever dwindling sovereignty they had. But it didn't disappear. And I think My concern right now is that these forces, again, Diane Carney, she was the research director for the Canada 2020 think tank. They brought in all of the behaviorists around Larry Summers into Canada, Obama, Hillary, Gore, all of them were brought into Canada simultaneously at that

time that they were setting the stage to impose a behaviorist takeover in the United States as well. And that was the grouping that fielded young Justin, idiot Justin, you know, blackface who is brought in to see does he have the human, the skill set to be convincedable, that we can convince the Canadians that he might be a human, that, you know, and they fielded him in 2006 at a Canada 2020 conference, and they decided it's going to work and some training to coach him, which took a few years, but they finally released him after that period of training was over with a handler named Gerald Butts and soon another handler named Christia.

But the Canada 2020 think tank, it's still there. It's still very powerful. And Mark Carney, I think, they represent a very specific type of ideology, which is, again, very similar to what Mario Draghi also is doing and envisioning with his acolytes in Europe. And I think a lot of this has a lot to do with a trap. And I'm saying this as something because I presume that Trump means well. I want to, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt still. I'm operating on the hypothesis that he's an authentic patriot who is inclined to make big mistakes.

That's my hypothesis right now. If that's the case, I see certain traps being laid, for example, one of which being his, weird response to King Charles's offer to become an associate member of the Commonwealth, which you guys, you guys saw that, right? Yeah. Yeah. So there could be a trap, and I've been warning about this since the very beginning when Trump was wanting to make Canada the 51st state would be that not that this would make Canada more American, which would be possibly a good thing if America actually is authentically getting its true spirit back. But rather, the danger here is that America might be tricked into becoming more Canadian. And I could sort of see a pattern forming, thinking about it top down of a potential. If Trump is, if, if, if, if, if, if, If he's not just playing around, if he's actually seduced by the idea that King Charles is somehow outside of this other deep state Richard Dearloff thing that I think Trump hates, right? I think he's aware that there's something very vicious in England that tried to destroy him with Christopher Steele and Deerlov and the whole Schmorgasbord of, you know, he kicked out, what's his name, the ambassador of the UK and really, I think he's sensitive to a certain nefariousness within that class.

but I think there is also a certain tendency to look at Queen Elizabeth, the king, the current king, as being something more noble, admirable outside of the influence of this thing. And if it falls for that, I think that I could see a danger of the North America Union coming in with a different kind of caliber, but maybe tied to a deeper control mechanism of the Commonwealth as a whole, which would be a terror. thing. If that was actually a trap that is being set that that patriots are allowing themselves to fall into, that could set things back quite a bit, I think. I completely agree with you, by the way, on what you said. I think that Trump does have a certain affection, if you like, for Britain.

He's not a golf course, by the way, up in Scotland, which most people don't know. That may be the connection. But I think that that still makes him perhaps less sensitive to some of the realities. I don't think that is true of the people around him, by the way. I think there's a lot of others who have a much, much more hard-nosed and tough-minded feelings about the UK, about Britain. And I think also that Trump doesn't terribly like our Prime Minister. Now, you anticipated with your answer the next question I was going to ask you, which was about the Liberal Party and Justin Trudeau and how it came about that he became Prime Minister of Canada, which I still find, I still emotionally find very difficult to accept, actually. I mean, I remember the Canada before, and I just

found it very difficult to accept Justin Trudeau, someone who liked that as Prime Minister of Canada. It just made no sense to me. I presume that as in Britain and in some other European countries like that I know, Germany, for example, there is a certain demographic, if you like, a sort of affluent metro urban demographic that supports this thing in Canada too, as there is also in the United States. maybe you want to touch on that as well. But can I just make one further suggestion, maybe my last one,

which is that from an American point of view, from a Trump point of view, perhaps he can, it would be good to point out to him that a genuinely independent, Republican, patriotic Canada with a strong identity

would actually be an asset for the United States and for what he is trying to do in the sense that if you expand the United States to encompass all of Canada what do you get? You get a bigger United States whereas if you get the kind of Canada that we're talking about

you're actually getting a potential partner and a partner which might be able to do things to help you in places which the United States itself as a superpower might have difficulties. So Canada can talk, for example, to India. By the way, I know in India, there's a very, very high regard for Canada historically. Canada can also work with the Russians in the Arctic. The Russians won't be afraid of the Canadians as they might be of the Americans, for example, if it was a generally independent Canada. So there's things that a strong Canada, friendly to

the United States, acting positively and creatively in the international system, could do to stabilize the international system, and which would be helpful to someone like Trump trying to carry out reforms in the United States. So anyway, quite a few points. I mean, I'd be interested if you could just touch on the demographic, the question of where the electoral support for people like Trudeau comes from in Canada. I mean, we have people like that in Britain in abundance. And in Germany, as I said, which is the country, the other country I know also. But, you know, what sort of people support this in Canada? And also maybe last observations about the last point that I've just made on, you know, how a strong Canada could be beneficial to the United

States. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. I think I have been befuddled as well, but I mean, having explored the high level, very high level and very sophisticated social engineering that hypnotically put Canadians into a spell in the 1960s under Trudeau mania. I literally have a book called Trudeau Mania in 1968. And there was marketing teams employed to market to utilize the successful techniques of what sold Beatlemania to the world and especially Americans during the British invasion of the early 60s. Those same marketing techniques, even the same people who are playing the people, our game applied their their talents in the political sphere to to make pierre leit trudeau a rap you know

jesuitically rigorous clear-headed ugly guy super super sexy and people would girls would go crying in hysterics when they would see pierrely at trudeau in 1968 walking around or doing a handstand or something and it was it was over the top and then added to that the kabuki theater of him being the strong men at a time of national crisis when tanks were on the streets of of of of Quebec because of this FLQ terrorist group that traumatized all of the baby boomers. I mean, it was martial law for October a whole month. And, you know, you had a consular, a British consular who was kidnapped by this sort of red brigades kind of gladio Marxist, Leninist terrorist group, which was actually just handled by a bunch of unreconstructed.

Nazis and fascists, just like they were in, you know, in the case of the Red Brigades in Italy or in Germany. Same thing was with the FLQ. I think that there's probably, as a challenge, if people want to dig around the weather underground, I think they might find something similar of the NATO secret army operation that was heavily integrated into our five eyes. And so, you know, it was traumatic. It was scary. People did know what was going on. And Pierre-Aa-Truy was the man who was like the straw man who held us together and had, you know, a zero. Now, one of the consequences of that was the one politician who was killed was kind of like a proto-aldo Moro, our deputy prime minister or deputy premier of Quebec, Pierre Laporte,

was killed. He was kidnapped. Unlike Cross who got away, Scott, he was unscathed. Laporte was found in the back of his car strangled with a necklace cross by the FLQ or something else. I'm actually inclined to think it might have been a branch within the RCMP that was coordinating this with full knowledge by Pierre Elliott Trudeau. And I have a chapter in volume four of my untold history of Canada that goes through a pretty good case of why Pierre was actually in on the in on it. He was an inside job, not that dissimilar from 9-11 for the Americans.

So why am I saying this? I'm saying this because he was such such a an image was impressed upon the zeitgeist that resulted in his child being simply like a princeling, whose very name and ego was sufficient to just win over the hearts of baby boomers especially, who just had this felt thought that was still hanging on that wanted the hero back. They lacked the hero. And he was marketed as that, as long as he was just never allowed to go into uncontrolled environments and speak his own mind. then he was, they could maintain that image, you know, as long as he was never allowed to go off script or, you know, be away from his handlers for too long.

But, you know, he got worn out at a certain point. He was used up. And there's only so, so many scandals you could try to cover up before it just becomes a little bit too. And there was a legitimate amount of hate. And there was a back in February of 2024, groups within the liberal party and members of parliament and senators began circulating internal letters calling for Justin Trudeau. dismissal or stepping down in replacement with somebody who was not going to sabotage the party at this point, which is where I mean, I think that the decision to place Mark Carney was made well before that. But that was a necessary precursor to finally, I don't think that the precursor or that the initiating thing that got Justin out was Trump's belligerent remarks, which are hilarious to listen to. And I appreciated what he was saying to denigrate the idiot Justin but it wasn't that. The trigger was the decision had already been made well, well before that. And I think Mark Carney, there was probably an intention way back when he was still proving his stripes as the governor of the Bank of Canada even, I think to bring him in as the highly functional technocrat at a time of crisis, which who could be trusted to do something on his own, to be in a room with a Xi Jinping or with a Putin, which you could never trust Justin to do. And I think even now,

one of the dangers that I see possible, which touches on your question of like the Canadian identity, like it would be best if we had a national authentic identity as a trustworthy sovereign partner. I agree with you. And I even wrote a booklet that I published two months ago, which I'm trying to circulate to policymakers in Canada called Canada's potential Eurasian future, a vision for the 21st century and beyond. And it goes through 109 pages of different projects that could stimulate the best of Canada to really bring out the best of our physical economy, our culture, and do it in a philosophical framework where we're looking to the bricks as our friends. We're not trying to think in a zero-sum belligerent Hobbesian modality,

which unfortunately, ultimately at the end of the day, Carney is really wedded. He's really baked into that Hobbesian structure, which Xi Jinping has been and Putin have been trying to shake or remind the West that they're not going to, we're not going to avoid nuclear war if we remain in that in that framework. We have to get out of that. Karni, one of the dangers that I see possibly right now also is that while Trump, the Trump team is sort of trying to loosen the tension on the Russia front, I do see that Carney on the one hand is putting his foot down, even being doubling down on the belligerence against Russia, especially on the Arctic, which he says he'll never allow Canada to work on the Arctic. But I think he might also be opening up the door to trying

to loosen the Russia-China bond by floating or putting feelers out to see if China would be willing to try a second time at this Canada-China free trade agreement, which was scuttled in 2017, for good reason, because Canada is not trustworthy. I think China finally realized that they don't want to let something so non-independent and fake and dangerous get too much influence or become too dependent on Canadian resources at that time. So they scuttled the free trade agreement. But I do see a discussion, a dialogue around the revival of that beginning once again. Karnie's influence around the Brookfield asset management institution, which is not just the mafia connected, but it has deep penetrations into China,

into Shanghai. I think he's even possibly met Xi Jinping. I got to verify that. I've got to verify that. last year. I think that there is an attempt to try to get to trick China into getting addicted to the honey the honey trap of Canadian sheep abundant resources. And he might. I could see this. I'm just putting this out there, but I could see this as a very valid scenario based on what I'm saying about all of Canada's role as a chess piece historically. I could see him, despite his commitment to zero like zero growth depopulation as a Malthusian, despite all of that, I could see him unleashing a Johnny McDonald limited amount of pro-industrial orientation that could maybe even get rid of environmental regulations for a period, allow for new pipelines

to be developed that would satisfy Daniel Smith, the premier of Alberta, who said, you know, we're going to give a list of demands to Carney. And if he doesn't satisfy all of them, we're going to call a referendum in Alberta. Well, he might satisfy every single one of those, get rid of the say no to the carbon tax, allow for the pipelines, all of these things. He might actually say yes to all of her demands and put up the preemptively snuff the discussion of a referendum in Alberta. He might do that.

I think he could. And I think he might, he will. And I think at the same measure, if this, if I'm right about this attempt to seduce China, he could make it facilitate Chinese investments into Canada in a variety of ways that had been otherwise blocked under Justin Trude. and you know that I'm talking whether the the intervention by by Justin Trudeau and the Privy Council on the purchase of ACON Inc, the big construction firm. There's a number of things that force de-investment, divestment of Canadian, of Chinese industries

that or Chinese companies that had certain investments in Canadian resources or industries. They could reverse that and instead say, okay, look, you can get your resources cheaper through Canada than you quit through Russia. You know, they tried it with Stephen Harper in 2012. and but but if China agrees to that well they could also turn off the taps of the future in a more and at a time when the the Chinese bond might be weakened so that's part of what I'm seeing easily being gained right now I'm hope I think that China's still probably too smart to fall for that but who knows what a desperate situation the world could hold in the future

that might induce those sorts of traps to so it's not just the USA it's potentially China as well falling into that trap. Absolutely. Matthew, thank you, Matt, thank you very, very much for all you said. I'm going to, if you could just stay, because I know Alex is going to put some questions to you, but you've answered all my questions, as you always do, very, very insightfully and comprehensive. I've learned an awful lot today, just to say. Oh, thanks, man.

Matthew, 15 minutes to answer some questions. You got time? Dude, for you guys, just unleash and whatever. All right, let's do it. Let's do it. A couple of questions from Commando Crossfire. Comments and questions. Canadians are mostly globalist neoliberals.

They should rejoice at the removal of borders. Imagine with 40 million new votes, Biden would have won. Just kidding. Canadian liberals mad at Trump at a Trump win, convinced themselves that no one would vote for a woman, so they all refused to vote for a woman and picked and OWM principles, what principles, hypocrites, and parasites. And finally, from Commander Crossfire, and you can give your comment, Matthew, on the comments from Command of Crossfire.

Canada alienated China at U.S. orders, sent billions to Ukraine, collapsed its own manufacturing, flooded the job market migrants, that prices skyrocket while wages stalled, now trying to bark at the U.S. foresight, we have not. Your thoughts? I didn't fully understand the grammar behind the first questions, so I'm going to pass. The first one I think was more of yeah, more of just kidding.

Canadians are mostly globalistening of liberals. Okay, they should replace at the removal of borders. Imagine the 40 new voters for Biden. Right, okay. Yeah, I mean, in that sense, yeah, part of the concern, I think, for smarter Americans around the idea of whether Canada should become a 51st state was do you really want that many brainwashed Soros propaganda consumers to be part of the Republic? I don't, I think that might be

more of a liability than a benefit if you don't make, you know, transform subjects into citizens first. So yeah, that's pretty funny. I'm down with that. Sorry. How about Canada alienated China at U.S. orders and set billions to Ukraine, collapsed manufacturing. ring and now they're trying to bark at the U.S. Yeah. Yeah, that's again, the middle power, right, create counterweights. Like, what is Canada? It's a very malleable thing that is so, there's such little sovereignty when it

comes to the big decisions. Actually, you know what? Because, yeah, there's so many things that have been done, whether it's the Meng Wang Ju arrest, the whole Huawei debacle, which only happened really at, I think, at a certain point when it became clear that China was not going to go along with this plan of having a special relationship with Canada. And, you know, that, when that became fully clear in that, that scenario was finally jettisoned, then all of a sudden the, the, the plan, I mean, Canada was the only

country of the Five Eyes to allow for Huawei. That was part of the seduction dating game, you know, the attempt to keep that type of trusting, that space alive. And when that was clearly not going to be kept alive, then it became a little bit more full throttle. And I think that there was also an HSBC aspect of it, too. There was a HSBC had played a role. And I'm forgetting the details. My wife had actually written a brilliant article on HSBC's role in getting Mingwanju,

the CFO of Huawei arrested in Canada, forgetting it now. But that's a London-based drug bank. But yeah, as you pointed out, it's like we've sabotaged, we burnt all of our bridges with China, or not all, but almost all. I mean, most people in Canada have been led to believe that CIS, the Canadian sort of CIA, if you want to call it that, are full of patriots because CIS patriots, CIS agents and directors and former directors have been the most consistent at blowing the whistle over the loss of Canadian sovereignty. longer a sovereign country. Why? Because the Chinese CPC is, you know, running election interferences, doing all of these things. Whenever you try to find evidence for any of these things and you do more than just a little like more than looking for a Cliff's Notes commentary by some talking head, but you actually want to find evidence, there's nothing there. It's like

Chinese spy balloons. You know, there's nothing behind any of these things, but it's repeated. And it's resulted in total destruction of diplomatic channels. They've done it now to India as well as it became more and more clear that India is not going to just lay down and become an appendage of this military, industrial, eventual war with China. Then, yeah, like you said, you know, pressure was put onto Canada that started putting out messaging that we know Modi commanded the murder of our Khalistanii, you know, separatist leader in Vancouver months and months and months ago. And so they're putting out all of this undiplomatic bridge burning, rhetoric by design for these reasons, you know, and it's really unfortunate that we're not,

that we're allowing ourselves to be played as a tool within a great game this way. And it would be just so easy, so simple to look for points of, you know, China wants to build the polar Silk Road. India has all sorts of, there's so many great things we could build with India. There's such a big Indian population here. There's so many points of conjunction. But, you know, the problem is Canada's has been providing sanctuary to a bunch of terrorists from not just Ukraine, but, you know, from other parts of the world too. And, um, Kalistani groups are very welcome in Canada and they're, they're not very friendly.

That's why, you know, Jagmit Singh is not even allowed to go to India. Like, he was our, you know, head of a political party wasn't even allowed to go to Canada, go to India. because he's been playing with Khalistani separatists, you know, and it had been part of terrorist operations for a long time. And we're part of a whole infrastructure built up by the British in India that was continued, you know, of drug smuggling, arms smuggling other things in India for decades and decades. I don't know if they still do it.

Maybe they do. They were still doing it when Indira Gandhi was trying to clap it down. Um, so all that to say, yeah, we got some, we got some problems. We got, I agree. We have problems in Canada. Okay, from, um, one second here. Yeah, from Kat from Limassol. The most obvious sign that Canadian reps are cynical cowards.

Every single one of them clapped when a Nazi was paraded in parliament. They all went to high school, but they all clapped. Ignorance had nothing to do with it. And on the same topic, Matthew. From Nikos, Matthew, may I ask, what was your reaction of Justin Trudeau saluting a Nazi in the Canadian Parliament in 2003? I never laughed this hard in years. So the famous, the infamous thing that went down in the Parliament in Canada with Trudeau and that guy's name. Your thoughts.

Yeah, there you go. Your thoughts on all of that. Yeah, and he was part of like, I forget, was it the 14th or some, Galatian division like hard hard SS connected nasty yeah very very yeah hard Nazi not even like the lighter Nazi like hard SS Nazi um and it was it was kind of funny I was laughing too it you know the sad laughter but a laughter nonetheless you know and especially when the speaker of the house is like reading this commemorative speech to celebrate this this old guy who's been invited by Christy and Justin and who met Justin in his office right after this thing happened so

Justin knew. It's not like they don't just invite somebody and then and then and not know a bit of the backstory of why a Ukrainian World War II vet, you know, it's not like they didn't know what he was or what he was during World War II. But then the speaker of the house is reading his speech. And as he's describing this old heroic man who fought against the Russians in World War II, he stops in midway. There's this little gap where he's like, he fought the Russian. No, yeah, he fought. And he's like reading the speech for the first time, the Russians. And then he gets back onto his track, right?

And he's embarrassed inside, but he's trying to still, you know, maintain an error of confidence and keep the vibe going. And he finishes his speech and everybody stands up like idiots cheering this guy. He knows. And he got thrown under the bus and he lost his job because everybody said it was this guy. But yeah, I mean, it's, what else do you expect? Right? We had a war memorial in Ottawa that was set up.

And I think that they had, I don't know if they fully took it down, but there was a big scandal over the fact that this war, this World War II memorial had 500 plus names on it. And like 300 of the 500 names were Nazis, like people who were fighting with Germany against the Russians. That was like a huge scandal. And I'm pretty sure they took it down. Um, afterwards. But I don't know that. It might be up still. Um, so yeah, it's just that's that's Canada, man. It's it's unfortunate. John Roberts says, my American view, Canada has been the good cop to America's bad cop. Canada provided peacekeepers to troubled areas. We made the trouble. Our interests are aligned, but we have different approaches. Yeah. Yeah. I think in the best of times, we were authentically animated by a spirit of peacekeeping.

But, yeah, I think you're right, too. A lot of the time, even without people like Romeo DeLare knowing what they're a part of, You know, there were, I'm talking about the Rwandan genocide, which does seem to be something that was managed from above in many ways, the actual players on the stage of that drama. And I don't think Romeo DeLare, who was in charge of the Canadian operation of peacekeeping within, you know, I don't think he fully understood what was going on and destroyed him. But, yeah, I think that there is this use of Canada as sort of the peacemaker, the good cop, like you said, against the bad cop. You're right. I think that that has been used as a strategy at different times and to very bad effect. Stevenification says, as an Alberta separatist, I reached the conclusion a long time ago that there is no purpose to Canada.

Free health care is not a national identity. You know, one thing interesting about that one is that, like, because universal health care can be really good. And if you have a society that's not run by a death cult, it's fine. If you actually value human life as a priority, it's fine. It's good. It's just that when you allow an anti-humanist, a misanthropic ideology to become the top-down animator of everything, then your health care system, just like everything else, will be increasingly used to facilitate your death instead of your health. And you can see in a time of scarcity, in a time of abundance, it's fine.

But in time of scarcity, it could very easily in a very centralized fashion be used to facilitate euthanasia, expand euthanasia to more vulnerable members of the population that would normally not even want it if they actually had the means to know that they could get treatment for whatever is ailing them or their depression that's making them feel sad because they're 17, you know, or a drug addict that that's really on a bad place. it's easier to get a suicide pill increasingly, even for drug addicts that can now apply to made, then it can't, then getting proper treatment and rehabilitation that's useful. And they want to, again, expand this to underage kids.

If they get two doctors to simply say, yeah, you should die, they want to expand this to, they might have even done this to people who feel emotional pain because they're depressed. So, I mean, that is robust death and it's increasing at a fast rate. Made is increasingly becoming one of the top three, I think it's the top three or top four, top three forms of dying in Canada at this point is made. And that's only increasing year to year. And it's going to get worse when scarcity really cracked. Like you can imagine a context of economic collapse, like where supply chains break down.

And all of a sudden, the bad scarcity now is going to go out of this roof. And people are going to be, you know, lining up to the. Soylent Green Company or the Soilent Corporation, right? So that's that's one of the bad things about that. Now, one of the things about the fathers of Canada's universal health care system, that's the NDP party in 1960, that that was really brought in. Now, if you look at what the NDP party was, well, that was a reiteration. They got that name. Their former name was the cooperative Commonwealth Federation that was set up in 1933. That cooperative Commonwealth Federation was the political branch of the League of Social Reconstruction, which was a think tank that was set up in 1931 to

solve the Great Depression. The League for Social Reconstruction was known as the Canadian Fabian Society, and it was founded by five Rhodes Scholars and one Fabian. All, I mean, as far as I could tell, all of the dominant ones were eugenicists. Tommy Douglas was eugenic. He wrote his college thesis on eugenics and family controls in the 1930s. You know, this is the type of caliber of Oxford Rhodes Scholars, five of them, five Oxford Road Scholars. And one Fabian created the Canadian Fabian Society that set up Leifers Social Reconstruction, that created the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation that then created universal healthcare. And it sounds great. And I'm for universal healthcare.

Like I got to reemphasize that. But if you have a eugenics underlying agenda, then it's not so good. So, yeah, that's just an embarrassing part of Canadian history. Sancho Rlaxo asks, does the PPC stand the chance? Matt. Some of the best Canadians I know are members of the PPC. I endorse members of the PPC right now. I'm endorsing Tish Conlin. Actually, I'll just say that if anybody is able to vote in the Ontario Durham riding. Tick Conlin is a good friend of mine. Really, really great Canadian activist. I've got a whole slew of friends in the PPC. I've shared a stage with

Maxim Belignet. We've given a political speech. And I would I would say I endorse. Has reached out to Maxine. There in the A, please. Yeah. Yeah, I'm sure he'd love to come on and chat with you guys. Yeah. But, you know, do I think it's likely that the PPC is going to take power? Realistically speaking, no.

But, like, again, if you can get a bunch of real moral principled citizens into positions where their voice can carry further amplitude, you know, and get them into the parliament, that would be a great win right there, getting a few of these Patriots into positions where they could be gadflies and maybe create a space where at least they can hold accountable people who would otherwise not be held accountable. That would be fine. That would be great. All right. One more question from Eric. Canada has become a proxy of China. That's why President Trump needs or wants to annex it. All our politicians were bought out long ago. Your thoughts? I'm so glad you ended on that question. I'm so glad you ended on that.

Canadians have been hypnotized into giving their acquiescence to hating and fearing something that they have no reason to hate and fear. The thing we should be working against is this oligarchical death cults that I've been mentioning has been latched on and controlling Canada for over 200 years. And that is much more closer to home. It's much more close to the Privy Council, it's much more close to the five eyes, ceases operation. That's really what we should be looking at and figure the city of London and their tentacles within the big five Canadian banks that are very useful and have been

for over a century at laundering international drug money. You know, the head of anti-drug regulations at the TD Toronto Dominion Bank just was fired and the bank was fined $3 billion for drug money laundering, HSBC, which does have activity in Canada. was also fined and found guilty for drug money laundering for decades and decades and decades. That's why they were created in the 1860s, 1865, specifically at the end of the second opium war was a British bank was created called the H.S. Hongshang Bank of Commerce in order to process global drug money and profits as part of the war against China, to destroy China, to keep that, to keep China subdued, destroyed, and thus better, easy to steal from.

So there's a lot of like full, it's hard for Canadians to get this nowadays, but there's full spectrum. I've never seen this before to this extent. Every day, full spectrum narratives tapping in specifically to the conservative psyche. We've been profiled as conservatives. And there's a certain psychological profile that has been catered to that that is acting on certain unexamined axioms, assumptions about what's controlling our society. there is some racism that is being tapped into as well, but also a lot of unresolved issues from the Cold War, that the McCarthyites and the propagandists that the CIA convinced

us for year after year, we're all going to die because China, the commies, the red commies from Russia and China want to destroy our freedoms and kill us all. So that unresolved trauma, it didn't disappear after the Soviet Union. collapsed. It just went deeper into the subconscious, and now it's just being revived again with similar motifs. And if you scratch on any of those things, I haven't seen any evidence that China is in control of our banks. They're not, I don't, I've seen no evidence. And nobody has seen any evidence that China has actually run election manipulation. What you've seen, that, that's all been kept anonymous. You have to be a member of the Privy Council to even read any of

the so-called CESIS reports that so-called attempts to bring evidence to that fact. And nobody can read it. So even if you wanted to read it, you can't. Nobody seems to, you know, and I think it's, it's mostly conjecture and hearsay that's, again, through just repetition, becomes a felt thought, which is beyond logic. And I've written something with my wife called Breaking Free of Anti-China SciOps. And we've made a few documentaries on like how China kicked out George Soros in 1989, where today, no open society for the last 35 years has been allowed legally to operate within Chinese soil. It took the Russians longer. They only kicked out Soros in 2015. But China did it early. And they did it as part of a much broader campaign to keep the functions of the institutions

of their nation, like the central bank, national. And they didn't allow it to go privatized. They kept the Glass-Steagall separation of functions of speculation from commercial banking, from investments and insurance. They kept that all separated. Whereas in the West, that was all blown out under the big bang of Thatcher and then everywhere else. Glass Eagle was taken down. Four pillars in Canada were taken down. China kept it clear. They kept it in place because they kicked out Soros. They stopped the NED early on and they've been able to wield the power of the nation state in a way that we have it that has allowed them to emit large scale credit for building projects that have pulled a billion people out of poverty in China as well as outside. And they're able to

to create a such, like a valid fight with the help of Russia and other countries of the bricks. But they're able to actually, you know, show what a nation can do. Why does it, why does the oligarchy want to destroy the sovereign nation state to create a one-world government? It's because of the types of things we did under people like Abraham Lincoln or John F. Kennedy or what China is able to wield now. And so what better way when your house is on fire than to convince people whose house is on fire that water is the enemy? And I would say that our best chance of survival would be to actually accept China's offers to work together on the Belt and Road initiative and to join in a new type of like Yalta 2 or some form of a new Breton Woods that would involve acting, you know, like real sovereign nations reviving the spirit of mutual win-win cooperation outside of the ethos of European geopolitics and all this other stuff that's going to get us all killed. But we were too busy hating on China and freaking out and not looking at the real hands. of evil that we've allowed to take over and shape our own society.

We're not in our own backyard out first. So that's what I would say is my breaking free of anti-China sciops, volume one, volume two. It's on my website. Most of that content's free if they want to buy it. It's on Amazon. The videos I put out with my wife, a lot of content that we're trying to weave our arguments pre-concisely.

If you can refute them, try, but we're putting it out there in video format. Check it out. Watch it. If you like it, spread it. But that's what I'd say. And I will have everything linked in the description box down below. Matthew Eric, before you go, one more comment question from Anonymous. Free Alberta, Matt, why does B.C. exist?

Please talk about A.B. Sachs American Roots history. That's the comment from Anonymous before we let you go, Matt. You got momentarily. Okay, you got a little bit choppy. I'm sorry to be so anticlimatic. You got a bit choppy as you were speaking. We talk about A.B. Sacks American Roots and Free Alberta. Matt, why does B.C. exist? Okay. The way I can respond to that, because I don't have full, I'm not prepared to answer the first part of A.B. Sachs.

What I can say, yeah, Alberta probably is the only province that has the viability to be its own sovereign country. I think that that's true. Economically speaking, it has the resources. It has the industrial base. It needs to grow a bit more of that. But it still has that. It has the cultural dynamic that could be that of citizenhood of people who see. I speak in Calgary quite often at freedom rallies and different groups that meet up.

And these are the best people I know. These are citizens. The closest thing that I see to citizens out there, They lack a little bit of knowledge about the way the world works, but their hearts are in a place of citizenry. So that's valid. Why does BC exist if they want the serious, like, academic answer? It exists because the British Empire was able to keep control of Canada and not allow Abraham Lincoln's program to extend rail into Alaska and through the Bering Strait, as was originally intended in 1865. and which Zara Nicholas the second even commissioned American engineers in 1905 to go to Russia and do surveys of the Bering Strait, which was done.

That I think at the time they were looking at a bridge most economically viable. It's only about 100 kilometer separation with two little islands, the big and small Diomedi Islands. That was already done. People were thinking in those terms. That rail line was going to connect through Manchuria, Ben Manchuria, into China. Throughout Eurasia, there was maps that people could see from the 19th century, very ambitious, positive maps that look a lot like what the new Silk Road looks like today with the driving force being Abraham Lincoln's transcontinental going far beyond the limits of where it went. And BC was the domain where there was a colony separated by a lot of nothing, a lot of undeveloped private land called. Hudson Bayland. And those colonists were being choked economically. They had no future. Their only

economic relationship in that British colony was with California. And the big consensus then was let's join the USA. Lincoln had just won. There was annexation petitions going around. Ulysses Grant said he was for it. And their governor, Frederick Seymour, who was in favor and was supporting the annexationists of British Columbia, ends up getting sent off to go and resolve some dispute with some Inuit tribe by Johnny McDonald and ends up dying up there by some whatever, he comes back dead. And then all of a sudden his enemies take power and they accelerate getting B.C. into the Confederation, which basically prevents all of these things from happening.

And Canada is kept as a wedge to block development between Russia and the USA. And that's the quickest way I can answer that in a useful fashion. great matthew eric thank you so much for joining us matthew once again what is the best place to follow your work um my my books can all be found most easily on canadian patriot org and and my substack is sort of my bread and butter like that's the primary way that i earn an income is through substack so get get the free sub if you want to upgrade to the paid it gets you access to weekly meetings and stuff unfortunately mark carney i just discovered is a director of Stripe, and the only way people can get paid out from Substack is through

Stripe, which might see TAPS getting turned off if you have bad thoughts. So that's a concern also. If anybody knows an alternative to Substack, let me know on that note. I had no idea. All right. Matthew, thank you so much for joining us. Matthew, thank you very much. And thank you again for your very wonderful answers to our questions and to our viewers questions. Take care, Matthew. Thank you guys. Always a pleasure. All right.

Alexander. Let's answer the remaining questions. Absolutely. You all right? You're with us. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Very interesting program, by the way. Canada is a country, which as people will know, I have always had a very, very, very warm spot for.

Even though I've never visited it, my parents did many times. And my father especially loved Canada. All right, from Cat from Limassol says, yeah, all right. Thank you for that cat from Limassol. Pache, welcome to the Dramm community. Cat from Limassal says, I live in Alabama on a temporary work visa.

My family fled from the Baltics to Canada when I was a child, and now I find myself fleeing a home that hates me. When I'm forced to return, I will try my luck in Moscow. Wow. And Cat from Limassal also says, Sadly, my comment can't apply to the next generation. I'm 29 and was shocked when I learned a 21-year-old Canadian was only taught World War II in the context of how it affected indigenous,

used Internet to learn the basics. Yeah, well, I understand that history teaching in British schools is pretty dreadful as well. Thank you for that, and very interesting and disturbing comment. And Kat from the Missal says the denial of genuine redemption only leads to tragedy. This is the story of Russia and the United States since 1991. I would hope that Russians don't make this mistake if it presents itself. I agree.

I don't think they were. Nico says, I was reading the New York Times article before I went looking for a vomit bag. It was the most disgusting thing I've ever heard and proved that peace is dead. This came after many sabotages to peace. The EU and Ukraine did. what did Trump do after all this? He blamed Putin. He let the Europeans step over him.

He is so terrified by the media. The globalists are more, and they have a bigger voice, and that's why they always win, like in France and Romania. If people complain about Jorgescu or Le Pen, they'll just say, well, Russia banned that liberal candidate in 2024, so we can do it, and it'll work. I looked at the comments of pro-Ukrainian channels like Times Radio, and those morons say the war with Russia is necessary because North Korea sent troops. And finally, Alexander, from Nicos people in Europe hate Russia with a passion. It doesn't matter if prices skyrocket. When you own the system, you can print money all day. Its might makes right and Russians don't have the might.

Russia will never know peace until they disintegrate. Putin is posturing with stuff like the Oreznik. It was a prototype and they don't have enough. End the war, they need to do a big arrow movement, which they won't do. And that's why Matt Ho is right. Seven years from now, we'll still talk about it. Frankly, did you want, Cal, answer what you just said? Just finish.

Carry on. You want to finish? Frankly, I see the population of Russia breaking. before europe the generation under putin has grown spoiled and ungrateful via social media that's why in 2022 election they gave only 20 percent to him they blame the fact that their government has kept which election i'm i'm not sure 20 doesn't say but let me let me continue because this is this is long a long a thread they blame the fact that their government has kept them from the wonders of the west they don't even realize that people in Europe despise them. Europe will send troops. Russia can't get out by being

better economically. They need to show these sociopaths force, but they won't escalate into nuclear war and the suffering will continue. It's time for me to admit that Trump wasn't the person to bring peace. Nothing can be to the will of sociopaths. I'm sorry for the long comments. Your thought. Well, say very, very long comment. First of all, I absolutely agree. Just let me know if you want me to. No, no, I think, I think I've got, I think, I've got the essence of it. First of all, I think the article was every bit as disgusting, as you said.

I think one of the most mendacious articles I've ever read. And if you want a clear, concise, perfect summary of how bad it is, go to Twitter, Twitter, X, see Alex's ex-accam. He's done a brilliant comment about this in which he sums it up, I think, perfectly. It's all about what a wonderful guy, Bryden was. He was winning against the Russians, how the Americans, the American generals,

who were running the war were marvelous, and it's these silly Ukrainians who messed it all up against these Russian peasants who don't really know how to fight. It was a terrible article. In reality, and I really want to say this again, every single battle that it describes,

every single battle that these American generals cobbled together, in it they failed to achieve their objectives. The Russians comprehensively outgeneral them. If you look through the article carefully, that is absolutely clear. Now, about Europe, Europe has, I don't think that your characterisation of, Europe is true. I do think most Europeans hate Russia or hate Russia all the time. I think we are going through an extraordinary period of hysteria. But even within individual European countries, there are great differences. In Britain, which is perhaps one of the most anti-Russian countries,

there are differences. You find differences amongst demographics. You're also starting to see, this is becoming very clear now, even within the British political class cracks growing. And if you're talking about a United Europe, well, Stama and Macron have been trying to cobble together a European coalition against Russia, a coalition of the willing, as it's sometimes called. And they failed. Most European countries are not prepared to take on the Russians in that way. As to sentiments in Russia, they've gone on the diametrically opposite direction over the last 20, 30 years to the one that you said from a point in the late 80s, early 90s, when Russians were very favorably disposed to the West, very much in the way that you said.

Today, from every account, which I've heard, and I haven't been there for a while, but from every account that I've heard, it has gone exactly the opposite direction. And I speak to some of my friends, most of them in Russian friends, most of them liberals at various times. And they've now become in every single case extremely antagonistic towards the West. As for big arrow offensives and Russian victories and those sort of things, all I could say is this. It's clear to me that the Russians are winning the war. I'm absolutely confident they will continue to win the war. There's been further news to that effect. Today, maybe it's not going as fast as you would like, but Putin said himself, people in Russia don't think it's gone as fast as they would like.

Given how much America and the West threw at this war, perhaps it is not surprising. And I suspect that the Russians calculated, given the extent of the American investment in this war, and the way in which the Americans were running the war, that if they'd taken it faster, well, who knows, all kinds of disastrous things might have happened. Lastly, about Trump, I think he does want peace with Russia. I know that he's understood exactly how complex this conflict is. I still think that we are in a much better place than we would have been if Kamala Harris had been elected president of the United States.

And this article in the New York Times confirms that. Very true. Alexander from locals from Wade. I lost the full question, Wade, because of a jump. But Wade wanted to know if Australia is like Canada when it comes to its relationship, if it's historical relationship with the UK. And what were you talking about with Matthew? It's even closer.

I mean, they too have the king as their king. And the political class in Australia is even more closely interconnected with the British than the Canadian political classes. They do have one advantage over Canada, which is, of course, they're more remote. they're further away and they don't have the United States on their doorstep. And the presence of the United States to some extent, as we discussed over the course of the program, has meant that the Canadians have been very anxious to hold on to this British

connection, which I think is a major mistake. I think Matt Errett said the same. But they've clung onto this British connection in order to separate themselves, to distinguish themselves. from the Americans. In Australia, they don't have that to the same extent. They're perhaps more self-confident about themselves. And you also have a German Republican movement in Australia to an extent that you don't have in Canada until now. All right.

From Sancho Relaxo, the world's longest undefended border is now the front line between globalists versus MAGA. Ironic. True. Cat from the missile says final note for the conservatives refusing to clap for the SS Guard was the lowest of hanging fruit, but they didn't. Makes my point. Well, absolutely. Krista Soto, welcome to our community.

Nikos says, breaking news. Putin decreed that 160,000 people will be forcibly conscripted in spring. Unfortunately, I was right. Russia hasn't met their mobilization goals in Ukraine. and still 20 million people. This is completely wrong. You're confusing two completely different things. There is every spring and autumn, there is a conscription.

There is an annual call-up of conscripts. That is what this is. This is the regular annual conscription into the Russian army that takes place. These are boys, I think it was it 19, whatever it is, that they are when they're called up into the Russian army. they are not part of the special military operation. Matthew says, off-topic chaps,

but what are the chances now of European troop or air defense deployment in Ukraine? What would be the consequences if they get hit? I think that it is becoming increasingly remote. I mean, the British army doesn't want to go. I mean, they've made that absolutely clear. If you read the British media closely, you can see that. I think the French military are quite open about the fact that they don't want to go.

Macron and Stama are still pushing this idea, but apparently none of the other major European countries, Germany, Italy, Spain, want to go. And I think that gradually this plan is melting away. Stama and Macron are looking like generals without troops. It's still a problem. that this gets constantly talked about because, of course, it keeps the Russians, makes the Russians nervous. But that's about all that he manages to do.

Yeah. The fear for me is that Stammer gets swept up in all of this. It actually does send troops for an Ophi zone, right? Yes. That's the fear. Yeah. He gets swept up in this Churchill narrative that he's constructed. OMG puppy says, Liz Trust says that Cardi sabotaged her government.

Yes. She's right. I remember it. I said it at the time. One of the programs that I've done, which has many people in Britain have combated it upon. People still come up to me and say, you remember, we were doing it together. And I said, you know, I smell a plot. That was before Liz Truss and Quoting actually resigned. There was a plot. And Carney was right at the central. Yep.

Elza says, I don't know about Canada, but Alex's club. World is missing Trudeau. I don't know if I'm missing Trudeau. I'm not missing. I do not miss Trudeau. That's all I can say. We'll see where he ends up. He'll end up somewhere.

Jimmy S.K. says, I followed you when I was living in Burkina Faso four years ago, and I live in Saskatchewan, Canada. I'm from Lebanon. My wife is Ukrainian, and your channel helped me explain the reality to her. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Zissi Karayani's thank you for a super sticker. E.M. Henrique says, what are your thoughts on Quterte's comments saying that Ukraine has legitimate

government, so there's no need for new elections? Yes, I mean, this is absolutely in line with the attitude that he has taken ever since the start of the special military operation. He has consistently tilted towards the West, towards the, you know, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, um, Western side against the Russians. And the Russians are deeply annoyed about this, and they've made that very clear. Lavrov criticizes him all of the time. But that is what you would expect, of Kiteris. Can I just say, one of the effects of the end of the Cold War was that the West, the United States, essentially took over the entire EU, UN, Secretariat. Previously, during the Cold War, there'd been a kind of balance. And you had UN

Secretary Generals who strove to remain even-handed between the blocks. But after the Cold War, the UN Secretary was taken over entirely by the West. And that became even more the case after Kofi Annan stopped being UN Secretary General. The U.N., the neoliberal, the globalists, the neocom people in the U.S., determined afterwards that they would not allow an independent UN secretary out to emerge again. And they were successful. Russell Hall says socialists are always making excuses for the failures of socialism and its sacred cows.

Roosevelt broke America to raise it. as the diabolical machine? Well, a lot of people in America think that. I think my own view about Roosevelt is very complicated, very brilliant person. I think he did succeed in leading the United States out of the Depression. I think that a lot of what he did in the 1930s is not applicable any longer today.

I think he's a figure that belongs to history, and I think we should not think of him as a contemporary person or judge him according to our contemporary abuse. And of course, he always, always insisted that he was no sort of socialist, just saying. Sparky says, Alexander, get some butter, rum, flavored, lifesavers candy. They'll bring your voice back within 20 minutes. Only butter, rum, flavor works. The other flavors don't work at all. I will try it. I didn't know that. Okay, that's one thing I haven't tried. Okay. Sparky also says, I discovered. butter, rum, lifesavers, astonishing effect on a hoarse voice of laryngitis by accident decades ago.

Okay, gosh. Thank you, Sparky. Life of Brian says, what is the one piece of concrete information unknown to you, an organizational structure, redacted name, bank account, etc. That would shed the most light for you on how the global system operates. Well, I'll tell you what I would like to know, actually, because an awful lot of things, happen in the media which happen in unison. We get identical articles or almost identical articles

appearing right across the media here in Brisbane whenever a big topic comes up. Now there must be, and it's the only explanation I can think of, there must be some coordinating central place where all this is worked out from. And I'd love to know where it is, Exactly. There must be a room. There must be somewhere that this is all worked out from. And I'd love to know where it is and who the people are who do it and how it's done. That really does interest me, I have to say. That would be interesting to find out. People that work in this room, this department. All right. Stan Tall says Canada has three mining companies in a trench coat wearing a stupid hat and carrying a gun from the article Canada is fake by Alex Green.

Yeah, I know. I know that is a widespread view of Canada, and there's an awful lot that's happened in the last 30 years that bears that out. It wasn't always so. I mean, I will say that. I mean, there were a lot of things that Canada did in the past, which did distinguish it from other countries. But today, I accept that there is a lot of truth in that. Miguel Cruz, welcome to the dread community. Flying Boar says Trump has a soft spot for Britain because his mother was Scottish-born. Yeah. Sparky says, but leadership is in Justin's blood. What about his dad's long rule of Cuba despite constant adversity? Very well pointed out. Life of Brian says, behaviorists.

What do you mean? Well, I'm sure. Jeff Bickford, thank you for that super sticker. O.G. Wall. Welcome to the Bradd Community, O.G. Wall. from life of Brian what advance

would it take to make the life of Justin Trudeau a biography by Alexander a reality by Alexander McCurice a reality

I don't think I'd get beyond the first page I think I'd probably fall ill before I before I got many permits

to be honest I cannot imagine myself writing a biography of Justin Trude that I mean I really can't

Russell Hall A biography of Hillary Clinton would be an easier one to write than of Justin Trudeau. Russell Hall says The world would work perfectly if only all of the bad folks would go away, then we'd have utopia

and everything would function as planned. Well, humanity is made up in many different types of people and maybe we shouldn't aspire too much to utopia because whenever people have tried to create, It hasn't turned out very well. Deborah Kral says,

Who I wish the US would partner with China to rebuild our infrastructure. Well, absolutely. I mean, there's so much. I think if the great powers, if I could call them that, were to work together, if we would find a much happier

and stable a world. But for the moment, that's perhaps too much to expect. Let's get them to sort of ease tensions with each other. And then we can see where we go. from that. Patrick, thank you for that super chat. Sparky says, Matt, fascinating, great work. Russell Hall says maybe we should, let me rephrase this a bit, maybe we should take all the bad

people away, remove all the bad people. Thank you for that, Russell. RBG Alyn, welcome to the Dran community. Sancho Waxo asks Alexander, rent a car in Edmonton, drive through Jasper to Vancouver and get into the big island, best part of Canada. Right. Arcane Eclectic says Canadians have no desire to be incorporated into

a Judeo-evangelical Christian, Zionist, American, fascist state. Please pass along the memo. Yeah. Well, let me pass it on to who, pass it on how and to whom. I mean, we're not in touch with anybody like that.

But anyway, Point noted. Mitchell LeBlanc says, with Europe being the obstructionists that they are, could you see U.S. relations getting to the point where the U.S. entertains an attempt to join Bricks? Yes, absolutely. I think that it's perfectly possible,

but not soon. I mean, give it a couple of years if we do see a stabilization in the international system. And it might come. But at the moment, all of the, you know, the inertia, if you like, works against it. And of course, there's enormous amount of problems still to sort out. Huffman Aviation says the Duran, the Five Eyes rapid response unit coordinates the narrative.

And we have a link. Yes, I've heard about this. But as I said, I would still be interested to know exactly how it's done. I mean, do they phone up the editors? did they call them into a particular room? Our memo sent out. How is it done exactly? Via chat, via signal,

signal chat. Nico says, I just feel that the slow approach worked for 2020 2023, 2004, but with strikes in Russia becoming more frequent and the EU sends troops,

they'll need to do something fast. Also, does it show that I get paid? the thing I will say about the Russians is that they they have shown consistently throughout this conflict an incredible level of discipline I mean in light of what we now know from that New York Times article the degree of discipline that the Russian leadership has been able to impose upon itself is absolutely extraordinary and we ought to be grateful for that, not critical of it. Because if they'd been goaded into the kind of reaction that most other countries would have been, well, we probably wouldn't be having this program because we might

not be here, just to say. So let's be grateful for their discipline and their self-restraint in the face of a war that they were fighting. They had been winning that war. The most dangerous moment for them it's clear reading that article was the autumn of 2022 when the there was this army group that was beyond the nipa it was the americans wanted to destroy it then crossed the nipa and march on crimea that didn't work from that moment on the balance of advantage has shifted every month and every year further and further in russia's favor and you mentioned o're By the way, just with your previous question. Alex and I here received some information,

which we're not going to discuss because it's from a source, but it's provided some very, very interesting information about the very large-scale production of these things. Just a second. Zareal says Stormer and Micron look like idiots with no sensor. I think that's absolutely right. I think if we get, go to that post that Alex did on X, and you can understand why these people think as they do.

The whole article on X is imbued with a patronising arrogance and condescension towards the Russians, this idea that they're completely incompetent, that they're all over the place, that they never win. It's just that you, because of the Ukraine, things just don't, that we try to do, just don't go right. But these people clearly assume that any single Western soldier is worth at least 100 Russians. And that's the inflexible beliefs that they have and will continue to have until they're proved wrong. Sparky says Australia has so many relatively recent immigrants from the UK,

pushed by incentives imposed World War II austerity. No wonder as a whole, it may be more in sync with the British. It's true also. But I mean, the political class in Australia and the British political class, I happen to know, is bound with a knot. I mean, they're very, very close to each other. To give an example, the Australian High Court is the only foreign courts that the London High Court takes precedence from. And finally, from Sparky, remember, it's crucial that the lifesavers are butter rum. Other flavors or brands don't work at all.

I will certainly remember. All right. Alexander, that's everything. Your final thoughts as I just do a quick check to make sure we're all questions. Well, you know, I'll just say this. It was a wonderful program that we did with Matt Erich. And I do hope that Canada gets itself together one day. You know, Canada for me is like this sort of gigantic jigsaw puzzle, all the different pieces of there.

All that it needs is for it all to come together and it will boom. I mean, it will become an enormous, it has the potential to be a really strong and vibrant country. But it just seems to lack that verb, that sense of self-confidence that you have in the US, for example, but the Canadians lack it. And if they ever find it, you will see dramatic things happen there. And maybe one day it will come. I hope it does.

All right. Thank you once again to Matthew Erritt. I will have his links in the description box down below. And as it pinned comment, thank you, Tower moderator, Zareel, Valley, S.T. Jordan, Harry, and who else? I think that's everybody, right? Yeah, I think we're our moderators for today. Thank you so much for moderating the chat on YT.

And thank you to everybody that joined us on YouTube, on Rumble, Rockfin, and Odyssey, and, of course, our locals, community, the durand. That locals.com. Alexander, tomorrow, you have your live stream. You want to give a quick plug? Absolutely. At 1,400 hours, EDT, and it'll be not. 1900 hours, London time.

The clocks in Europe have now adjusted, so we're back, you know, the usual pattern. But, you know, we're going to have a huge amount to discuss. Lavrov has just sent a whole list of Ukrainian violations of the ceasefire. There's another American-Russian meeting being prepared, apparently. Wangyi is in Moscow. He's going to meet Putin. He's there for three days. That's a very long meeting.

So lots is going on, all the, you know, the pieces are moving on the board. And the military situation is also beginning to move and move interestingly. So lots of discuss tomorrow and obviously lots of other things going on, Le Pen, the arrest of Le Pen, we're not arrest, but I'm doing it, the conviction of Le Pen in France. A terrible day for France, a terrible day for Europe. But it is an awful lot to discuss. And of course, tomorrow, 2nd of April, Liberation Day. Liberation Day.

That's right. Happy Liberation Day, everybody. So we'll see what it amounts to. We'll be talking all about that at 1,400 hours, Eastern Standard time, 1900 hours, London time on locals. And Sparky says, yep, and Sparky says in my research of mid-19th century maps, I found many railroad lines on the maps as established, which turned out to be only proposed one, which never came to pass.

People were optimistic about railroads. Absolutely. Very true. And one final comment, Ronald, I found your questions for Matthew in the comments and locals. I will pass them on to Matthew because they're very specific to Matthew, and I'm sure he will answer those questions. So I will definitely email them to Matthew.

So thank you for those three questions for him. All right, Alexander. That's it. We will wrap it up. Take care, everybody. Take care. Thank you.