The War on Distinctions is Nigh

« Version française ici »



For those paying attention, Québec as a distinct society or nation gets touted around here and there. Robert Bourassa said that Québec is a distinct society and Stephen Harper’s government recognized Québec as a nation within a united Canada. Such declarations might seem somewhat significant, it seemed to me that this empty rhetoric used by the Liberals and federalists is tossed out to merely pacify Québec nationalists. Besides, most anglophones don’t even know what a nation is – believing that “nation” is the same thing as “country” and then smugly declare that Québec is not a nation. Thus, the agenda of erasing real differences through multiculturalism is continued. 

In case you hadn’t noticed, there is a war on distinctions. Nonetheless, the use of Orwellian doublethink has got everyone confused. Look at how Canadian federalists use the word “diversity” as if it were a true array of distinct peoples promoting cultural and economic enrichment. Québec is the best example of real diversity in North America, though when Canada says “diversity”, what it means is just melting into the monocultural anglophone blob. 

Different civilizations generate distinct societies, which is an outcome of the soul of a people – and this is good. Real diversity is naturally good. However, in our post-modern era, the term “diversity” is the starting point of the doublethink doctrine with the aim of eliminating true diversity. We are told that we must evolve beyond distinctions and borders. 

From the Vatican-oriented geopolitical book, The Keys of This Blood, Malachi Martin talks about a faction of people that he calls the Mega-Religionists, those who work to persuade us that all religions and worldviews are fusing into a single globe-spanning mega-religion:

“…the so-called Mega-Religionists [are part of the] one great Temple of Human Understanding. The truly global home of all nations will all be harmonized into one. Chameleon-like, they are to be found basking at the height of power everywhere in the West – in Transnationalist boardrooms and Internationalist bureaucracies, in the hierarchies of the Roman, Orthodox and other Christian churches; in major Jewish and Islamic enclaves already dedicated to the total Westernization of culture and civilization.” (p. 38)

Martin lists some of the people among these Mega-Religionists, who “live their lives as though all political borders were already extinguished.” People like John Foster Dulles, Henry Luce, Queen Elizabeth II, the Duke of Edinburgh, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, John D. Rockefeller, and many more. The Mega-Religionist mind proposes, in contrast to the Humanist worldview, that human comfort is not merely a question of physical comfort. Religion, too, is essential to the comfort of human civilization. However, separate religions are neither necessary nor desirable. In fact, for the sake of peace, all religions must fuse into one great religion: 

“…the whole of Humanity shall remain a united people, where Muslim and Christian, Buddhist and Hindu shall stand together, bound by a common devotion, not to something [from the past], but to something ahead [in the future], not to a racial past or a geographical unit, but to a dream of a world society with a universal religion of which historical faiths are but branches… [while keeping] the more harmless folkloric and colorful elements of each religion, for these have a certain function in terms of appeasement and camouflage.” (p. 298)

Hmmmm, is this why Justin Trudeau plays dress up with every single ethnic group? Or why most people think multiculturalism just means going out for sushi or shish taouk after the traditional African dance performance?

How could such a thing as the monocultural mega-religion possibly be implemented? Through altering the perception of evil as something different from hurting others or the absence of goodness. In our day and age, the new and current definition of evil is found in the notions of separation and distinction. The idea of being separate in any way, whether it be philosophical, spiritual, political or economic – this is the new Satan. Being your own person or country, being male, being female, being Caucasian, being one type of tradition instead of another type, being Quebecer, being Mexican, being Russian – all of that must be classed and understood as the new description of evil. Martin goes on to say that: 

“since the expected Mega-Religion would contain elements of every religion, and would be universally acceptable, it would be called monodeism.” (p. 298)

The coming world religion will be total Monadism, which is also what Aldous Huxley discussed in his book The Perennial Philosophy. Anything and everything must be blended into one. Self-proclaimed “citizens of the world” can be whatever they want on an individual level, as long as they don’t claim that their identity or belief is exclusive or true, since the new definition of evil is distinction. Separateness is immoral. Today’s SJWs are but the beginning phases of this new cult. 

If I may use some “conspiratorial” language, the goal of something like Freemasonry is to create a revolutionary force for the installation of democratic republics. This has been discussed in several papal encyclicals from In eminenti to HumanumGenus as well as in the first Québec nationalist-themed novel Pour la patrie by Jules-Paul Tardivel. Now you might think that republics sound fair and good, that the removal of religion from the sphere public life is OK or even desirable (which always comes with the removal of tradition, as this falls into the same category as religion – this is laicism or secularism. 

But would the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson bring us to the kind of conservative traditionalism that some “natural-rights-theory-non-aggression-principle” libertarians would like to have? Are there any historical examples of an organic and healthy tradition and society that are also purely secular? No. All of those ideas are part of the (French, American and later world) revolution, leading to what Huxley called the Final Revolution, where the population is standardized and inconvenient human differences are ironed out for the emerging of mass produced models of human beings who love their servitude.

It seems to me that by eliminating distinction and demonizing the idea of separation and borders, one creates a simulacrum of a nation and an empty shell (isn’t this what Canada is?). It becomes an anti-metaphysical imperium, at war with all that is traditional, natural and organic. The modern world is characterized by relativism – which is the big lie – and we in Québec are not in any way spared from this. Of course Québec “separation” has to be portrayed as evil, as the isolation from people and from the world. Nothing could be further from the truth, but people are unaware that certain global interests have declared war on what is “distinct”, while they promote the world mega-religion (aka the monoculture).