Trudeau Thinks Western Civilization Is The Enemy

This explains why he is unwilling to criticize Islamist terrorism, bows down to China, and is so weak on dictatorships like Iran.

Despite the elites trying to hide this truth, Canada is a nation that is heavily based upon Western Civilization.

Our political system, legal system, even our economic system, is based upon a legacy passed down through history from what is now known as the Western World.

While imperfect in many ways, the Western World has made immense contributions to prosperity, freedom, and justice. It is certainly something to be proud of, and Canada should be proud of the history that made our great nation possible.

You would think that any leader of Canada – regardless of their party – would see Western Civilization as something to be defended and praised.

Unfortunately, Justin Trudeau doesn’t see it that way.

Instead, Justin Trudeau sees Western Civilization as the enemy.

It’s the same ideology we see on many university campuses, where every problem in the world is blamed on the West, while foreign civilizations and ideologies are praised endlessly as either better than the West, or are seen as ‘victims’ of the West.

This leads to a mindset that is opposed to our country and the ideas that give our country strength. Of course, if a leader doesn’t believe in the ideas of their own nation, they won’t be willing to defend the nation.

Justin Trudeau has said that Canada should become a ‘Post-National State,’ which would mean the elimination of any unifying Canadian identity based upon our national values.

Because he sees the Western World as a negative force, he submits to all other ideologies. Look at how he professed admiration for China’s ‘basic dictatorship,’ or his total inability to confront Islamist violence.

After a terror attack in Edmonton where an ISIS-inspired Islamist stabbed a police officer and tried to run over pedestrians, Justin Trudeau posted a photo about confronting white supremacy, while refusing to denounce Islamist terrorism.

His weakness on the Iran protests – continuing his terrible plan to deepen ties between Canada and the Iranian regime even as Iranians fight for their freedom – shows his disturbing unwillingness to defend Canada’s values and principles, or even acknowledge that those values exist in the first place.

As much as some may not want to believe it, we must acknowledge that it’s now beyond clear that Trudeau sees Western Civilization as the enemy, and is not willing to stand up for our country in any meaningful way.

Spencer Fernando

Photo – YouTube

You can support by becoming a monthly contributor through Patreon, or making a contribution through PayPal.
17 comments Add yours
    1. My thoughts exactly. All of this “we must stop junior!”…

      I agree, but… how?

      Write letters? To whom?

      Chant with cardboard signs on sticks (he won’t care as he eats caviar or stewed monkey brains or whatever his aga khan buddy prefers)?

      Donate to a political party that “promises” to oppose him? They’re all in the same bed, some just rise on the left side and some on the right!

      What would you have us do, that will be effective at getting him gone?

      1. He has broken criminal Conflict of Interest LAWS!!! A formal criminal charge should be levied against him by the Canadian people, through legal channels!!! At the very least, a civil lawsuit against him for breaking criminal conflict of interest laws…

  1. My Canada is not a “post-national” state. Trudeau is a globalist whose sole interest is his own welfare, and certainly does not speak for most Canadians as only 39% voted for him.
    Hopefully his popularity will decrease much more than it already has before the 2019 election

  2. so how in hell did Canadians elect a student ( not one of the brightest ones either ) to run the country , a student who does not embrace Canadian values ?????? just proves that voters are totally misinformed and UNinformed

    1. Even when asked to respond with a simple Yes or No, he and his fawning grovelling Caucus members reply with typical Liberal aural diarrhea. They rarely actually provide an intelligent response and have no hesitation in displaying their contempt for Government, contempt for the Opposition, contempt for the Speaker, deep contempt for Canadians and voters, and extreme contempt for Canada.

      He violated the Criminal Code of Canada yet nothing is or has been done. We have our own “Deep State” here in Canada and our own swamp that must be drained. It seems Canadians can have little trust with our security organizations or Courts. Do we have to start enforcing the Laws of Canada by ourselves? It seems so.

  3. ” that made our great nation possible.” With IQ 80 at the helm this will soon read, that made our ONCE great nation possible,

  4. Spencer, I have no respect for that nasty man in gov who has sown his oath to the devil and not to us his employers. He may sound tough but is weak and a coward who needs the protection of his media. UNLIKE those Iranian women and Yazidis who would rather fight for their rights to the death rather than submit themselves to the whims of evil.

  5. How did a Trust-Fund Bottle-Fed Baby become so worldly?
    He didn’t.
    Trudeau is given a script and any deviation and what do you get?
    Well, Rosie Barton asking him about his ethics breaches. Nothing but a bunch of stammering and “let me reorder my thoughts”.

  6. I wrote this letter today to journalist Gordan Hoekstra from the Vancouver Sun regarding his story about Site C contractors. I don’t expect this letter to “move mountains” but every bit counts.

    Dear Mr. Hoekstra,

    Why would you state that the Aecon Group Inc. is a Canadian-based company without also mentioning that Aecon is in the final stages of being sold (100%) to the Chinese state-controlled, China Communications Construction Co. Ltd. (CCCC)? (see Aecon news release and the Star article below)?

    Why would you leave out this vital information to the story. I’m not a journalist and it took me only 10 seconds with an internet search and brief scan of an article of interest to find out this important detail.

    Also, you stated that “the AFDE Partnership committed to prioritize hiring locally and within B.C.”. However, this statement does not preclude the possibility that the Partnership will not also hire temporary foreign workers (TFWs) as construction ramps up. Is this potentiality not something that piques your interest as a journalist who “presumably” would consider BC’s and Canada’s national interests when reporting on and investigating such a story?

    After all, there is evidence suggesting TFWs are being considered for Site C construction:

    “…one of [BC] Hydro’s major contractors on the dam project withdrew a job ad seeking a human-resources manager to assist with processing and tracking temporary foreign workers.” (see Globe and Mail, March 25, 2017 article below).

    Overall, your story is focused on only positive aspects of the story. You failed to include vital information regarding contractor ownership and did not bother to mention the important TFW national interest angle which has been reported on previously by the G&M.

    I would expect much better reporting from such a prominent news agency, but this level of bias and style of writing (i.e., leaving out vital information and not connecting dots between important pieces of data) is becoming more and more common with the MSM.

    Time will tell how much longer readers will bother checking in with news agencies such as yours when readership of quality independent news sites is growing exponentially and whose values are aligned with mine (and Canadians by and large), rather than those with apparent globalist interests.

    “Court Approves Aecon Plan of Arrangement”
    “Why China’s bid for Canada’s Aecon makes sense”
    “BC Hydro is obscuring data on temporary foreign workers”

  7. Here’s how the so-called “soft” sciences aka “humanities” (anthropology, psychology, sociology, and even criminology) really work: They all started off by examining the various symptoms and EFFECTS of human behavior, thinking, group-thinking behavior, and of criminal free-will CHOICES, respectively, but then self-invalidated by looking for hidden mysterious predestined and predetermined inevitable force “CAUSES” of it all, which degraded them all into only one criminal, excuse-making alibi topic: “VICTIMOLOGY!”

    So we get these two, permanently opposed philosophical poles:

    Law-abiding Conservatives: “Criminal behavior is an effect of free-will choice!”

    Criminal libertines: “But what CAUSED that choice? There’s always a cause!”

    Their implication is that there are no crimes nor criminals because we’re all “victims.”

    In short: they went from studying HOW people CHOOSE to act, to focusing on WHY (ruling out free will choice entirely)!

    And that “why” PRESUMES a fear of pain will ALWAYS trump rationality! “So” we are all really ever only helpless victims! Asking “why” people (‘always’) give in to the fear of pain, presumes that: “SINCE anything CAN go wrong, SO it WILL always go wrong, SO we MUST forgive everyone for their mistakes, as being helpless victims!”

    But in reality, the only reason WHY people commit crimes, is that they still think they can have rights without responsibilities, and so they weigh all the risks and rewards in different situational circumstances first!

    And they only try to do so in each and every separate circumstantial situation, because they haven’t learned that rights ALWAYS only come with responsibilities, causes with effects, and effects with causes, and so they either remain ignorant of, or choose to ignore, the simple Golden Rule of Law moral Principle:
    “Do Not Attack First.”


    These days, PITYING the victims (and the criminals AS “fellow victims,”) is held up as the highest moral virtue, while being ANGRY at, (or “hateful” towards) criminals and crime is deemed to be the most vile sin.

    But what is more useful in solving problems and remedying crime: being angry at criminals for their predatory choices, or encouraging them to commit more crimes, by pitying them as helpless victims too?

    The answer is obvious.

    So it’s high time to educate these higher-learning “educators” of their mistakes!

    In always asking “But WHY?” like perverse little children bedevilling their parents, they can always step back any given answer and exploit it into a whole new and lucrative “specialized” academic field of study! But the focus they pretend to thereby gain in minutae actually loses the focus on the big picture or “unified field” of science itself – by deliberately reducing everything they become absurd, or “reducio ad absurdum,” to the Latins.

    And, while the simple answer IS obvious to us, unfortunately so is their own criminally negligent desire to “fail upwards” by ignoring the simple easy and permanent solutions to any and all problems, in favor of exploiting and selling the almost infinite number of mere symptoms and effects of unsolved problems as causes in them selves, as eternal crises for which only temporary band-aid therapy reliefs can ever be applied.

    After all, the motto of all responsibility-averse and willfully delinquent libertine “liberal” criminals must be: “There’s No Money In Solutions, so Please Give Generously – AGAIN!”

    So their final message these days seems to be:
    “Anyone who doesn’t automatically pity all criminals as fellow victims should be hated!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *