The plight of Frances Widdowson and the ensuing discussions especially this op ed by Kathleen Lowrey, poses one of the most contradictory dilemmas for me.
I definitely agree with Frances re Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry and have been labelled a racist as a result. I have tried to reason with others on this subject but no one can see past the veil of residential schools. I agree with them that abhorrent things may have taken place but that holds only a small percentage of the current aboriginal attempts to live in the past while thwarting their progress now and for the future. No one seems to recognize the scam that is bleeding taxpayer money.
I also agree that it was narrow minded and myopic for MRU to oust Frances given her research and first hand knowledge of aboriginal people.
Then the trucker convoy comes up and blows all your credibility by continuing to see a mob taking over our capital city for 3 weeks causing mayhem to be seen by some of the Widdowson camp to be ‘a bit of fun’. I wonder if it had been a convoy of aboriginal peoples if you see it the same way. And suddenly we have ‘big bad pm Trudeau’!
So here’s the dilemma! Trudeau walks a very tight rope trying to lead our country out of a pandemic, a climate crisis, colonial errors and oversights etc etc. and suddenly those who understand the aboriginal situation and the MRU catastrophe have gone all right wing on me!
Dear Phyllis [“… poses one of the most contradictory dilemmas for me.”]:-
Dilemmas are not contradictory. They are either false dichotomies [both of a pair of choices are “bad” or objectionable] or contrary choices. If you know anything of logic, contraries may both be false sorts of “things”. I say “things”, because contraries come in several varieties. There can be contrary propositions. e.g. “Every Canadian is Indigenous!” (indigenous is capitalized in “honour” of Renae Watchman) or, on the contrary, “No Canadian is Indigenous!” Those are false contrary propositions. Both have true contradictions, to wit:- “Some Canadian is Indigenous.” [True. e.g. Murray Sinclair], which contradicts “No Canadian is Indigenous (False).” and “Some Canadian is NOT Indigenous (True e.g. Phyllis and Frances).”, which contradicts “Every Canadian is Indigenous.” which is an equally false contrary proposition. All 4 propositions are what Aristotle’s students and disciples described as a “Square” of logical opposition.
There are also contrary qualities, in existential objects, whether or not any person makes assertions or denials via propositions concerning those qualities. The fact that snow is cold and steam is hot, demonstrate contrary qualities in the physical substance known as water. All substances may admit or exhibit contrary qualities at different times. And neither heat, nor cold are anything remotely resembling either “false” or “true” qualities. They are simply physical qualities about which anyone may make true or false statements.
Finally, there are also contrary qualities in human beings called virtues and vices. For example Frances Widdowson has the virtue of academic courage. That courageous academic virtue has 2 opposed and contrary vices, to wit, Academic cowardice, as exemplified by most so-called Academic administrators. e.g. The UofL person named Mahon who “caved” to a mob who wanted Frances’ talk at the UofL cancelled. He is an academic coward. The contrary Academic vice is called Academic “rashness”, which is epitomized in persons like Niigan Sinclair and Renae Watchman, as well as someone named Carolyn Hodes [if memory serves] who lauded Frances being “cancelled” at the UofL.
Rash people have an excess of confidence and a defect in prudence. In short they are stupidly “fearless”, because they are either confident in their own invincibility or in the dubious “support” of a mob of generally ignorant persons. However, if that mob ever realizes “it” has been “fooled”, that “mob” will turn on-a-dime against those they’ve previously supported. Noted that you support Frances’ academic freedom and courage.
Then, Phyllis, you bring up the convoy, as did Kathleen Lowrey [ LOWREY: “Between the Kamloops story in May 2021 and Widdowson’s February 2023 anathematizing there was an important intermediary event: the anti-vaccine-mandate trucker convoy that occupied downtown Ottawa and inspired similar protests in many Canadian cities during January and February 2022. The Freedom Convoy was cheerily diverse, featuring bouncy castles by day and bhangra dance parties by night.” from COMPACT https://compactmag.com/article/canada-s-convenient-victims%5D, with the assertion that, quote: PHYLLIS: “Then the trucker convoy comes up and blows all your credibility by continuing to see a mob taking over our capital city for 3 weeks causing mayhem…”
It’s not really fair to say that either Kathleen Lowrey or a “convoy (protesting against vaccine mandates or mandated vaccines)” could “blow” Frances Widdowson’s “credibility”. Widdowson is about academic freedom. The convoy was about the physical freedom to accept or refuse a vaccination and how the Canadian government tied their own pro-vaccination position to the economic freedom/ability of truckers to work. After all, when there were no vaccines and no places open at which truckers could eat or go to the washroom, they were risking their health and safety to deliver groceries to the Canadian public, while arguably risking even their lives.
So those (academic vs personal/physical) are two differently “credible” freedoms. Lowrey’s point was that the same “elites” are against both Widdowson’s academic freedom and the truckers’ personal freedoms [to work; to bank; to be vaccinated or not; and do with their money as they like] with the simple bogus “excuse” that both Widdowson and the convoy are manifestations of “white supremacy”, when the reference to “bhangra dancing” indicates South-Asian/Indian participation in the trucker convoy, given that Sikh Canadians tend to be employed in the trucking and taxi industries — the kind of work that “elites” look down upon.
Thus I think you missed Lowrey’s point, which is nothing like “right wing”. Her thesis was about a crumbling imperial order [Lowrey: “What is amazing is that the people most eager to declare themselves ‘de-colonizers’ are doing the final dirty work of a crumbling imperial order.], which is entirely suitable for publishing in a “Radical” Think Tank, like COMPACT, which seems to be a decidedly anti-liberal (small “L” liberal) publication featuring criticisms of “elites” by both right wing and left wing thinkers. You, in contrast, Phyllis, seem to be in favour of Mr. “elite” himself.
PHYLLIS: So here’s the dilemma! Trudeau walks a very tight rope trying to lead our country out of a pandemic, a climate crisis, colonial errors and oversights etc etc. and suddenly those who understand the aboriginal situation and the MRU catastrophe have gone all right wing on me!
TO THE CONTRARY, Phyllis! We are all left-liberal wing [Frances] and, on the contrary, true-liberal wing [Jordan Peterson who worked for Rachel Notley’s father, Grant, on one NDP campaign as a youngster] “on you”. Trudeau is a counterfeit politician and an actual counterfeiter. He’s been throwing away money at everything and everybody ever since he took office, while “cancelling” everyone who gets in his way [e.g. Jody Wilson-Reybould]. That’s why your grocery costs are going up at an 11% per annum rate lately. MRU is no more a “catastrophe” than Moscow State University. The STEM disciplines are neither left nor right, just as hot and cold are neither left nor right. Trudeau does have a nice face, nice hair, nice socks and says he has “your back”! But he doesn’t really have your back. He has what he thinks to be an unlimited personal budget, consisting almost entirely of your bank account [if it has any money in it] and a good credit rating (after all a right to steal money as a taxation point-of-law helps one’s credit rating)— but not for long, leave alone “forever”.
But you are entirely “free” to admire him and the “tight-rope” you think he walks. I don’t think you are prudent to either admire or trust him, but I don’t think that it is “contradictory” to admire, support and to trust one’s own prime minister. Good luck with that trust and trust that there is nothing essentially “contradictory” about contradicting contrary falsehoods.
Hey Kev, mind explaining how Justin Trudeau is responsible for global inflation? Seems like a rather “rash” statement made by someone with exceeds confidence and little evidence to support their ideology. I understand disagreeing about policy, or simply not liking the guy, but you’re giving him way too much credit…who did JT cancel in the UK that led to the “cost-push” inflation they’ve been experiencing? Justin almost must have done something to recently force The EU with a 10.1% inflation rate. Here’s the thing, Kev. You can’t have it both ways. Either Trudeau is as mastermind controlling global economics, and he is a “counterfeiter” that doesn’t accomplish anything. Contradictions, contradictory falsehoods…and a love for the convoy? Ps. Loving Canada and loving the convoy is about as contradictory as one can get…Kev’s response has it all!
The plight of Frances Widdowson and the ensuing discussions especially this op ed by Kathleen Lowrey, poses one of the most contradictory dilemmas for me.
I definitely agree with Frances re Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry and have been labelled a racist as a result. I have tried to reason with others on this subject but no one can see past the veil of residential schools. I agree with them that abhorrent things may have taken place but that holds only a small percentage of the current aboriginal attempts to live in the past while thwarting their progress now and for the future. No one seems to recognize the scam that is bleeding taxpayer money.
I also agree that it was narrow minded and myopic for MRU to oust Frances given her research and first hand knowledge of aboriginal people.
Then the trucker convoy comes up and blows all your credibility by continuing to see a mob taking over our capital city for 3 weeks causing mayhem to be seen by some of the Widdowson camp to be ‘a bit of fun’. I wonder if it had been a convoy of aboriginal peoples if you see it the same way. And suddenly we have ‘big bad pm Trudeau’!
So here’s the dilemma! Trudeau walks a very tight rope trying to lead our country out of a pandemic, a climate crisis, colonial errors and oversights etc etc. and suddenly those who understand the aboriginal situation and the MRU catastrophe have gone all right wing on me!
Dear Phyllis [“… poses one of the most contradictory dilemmas for me.”]:-
Dilemmas are not contradictory. They are either false dichotomies [both of a pair of choices are “bad” or objectionable] or contrary choices. If you know anything of logic, contraries may both be false sorts of “things”. I say “things”, because contraries come in several varieties. There can be contrary propositions. e.g. “Every Canadian is Indigenous!” (indigenous is capitalized in “honour” of Renae Watchman) or, on the contrary, “No Canadian is Indigenous!” Those are false contrary propositions. Both have true contradictions, to wit:- “Some Canadian is Indigenous.” [True. e.g. Murray Sinclair], which contradicts “No Canadian is Indigenous (False).” and “Some Canadian is NOT Indigenous (True e.g. Phyllis and Frances).”, which contradicts “Every Canadian is Indigenous.” which is an equally false contrary proposition. All 4 propositions are what Aristotle’s students and disciples described as a “Square” of logical opposition.
There are also contrary qualities, in existential objects, whether or not any person makes assertions or denials via propositions concerning those qualities. The fact that snow is cold and steam is hot, demonstrate contrary qualities in the physical substance known as water. All substances may admit or exhibit contrary qualities at different times. And neither heat, nor cold are anything remotely resembling either “false” or “true” qualities. They are simply physical qualities about which anyone may make true or false statements.
Finally, there are also contrary qualities in human beings called virtues and vices. For example Frances Widdowson has the virtue of academic courage. That courageous academic virtue has 2 opposed and contrary vices, to wit, Academic cowardice, as exemplified by most so-called Academic administrators. e.g. The UofL person named Mahon who “caved” to a mob who wanted Frances’ talk at the UofL cancelled. He is an academic coward. The contrary Academic vice is called Academic “rashness”, which is epitomized in persons like Niigan Sinclair and Renae Watchman, as well as someone named Carolyn Hodes [if memory serves] who lauded Frances being “cancelled” at the UofL.
Rash people have an excess of confidence and a defect in prudence. In short they are stupidly “fearless”, because they are either confident in their own invincibility or in the dubious “support” of a mob of generally ignorant persons. However, if that mob ever realizes “it” has been “fooled”, that “mob” will turn on-a-dime against those they’ve previously supported. Noted that you support Frances’ academic freedom and courage.
Then, Phyllis, you bring up the convoy, as did Kathleen Lowrey [ LOWREY: “Between the Kamloops story in May 2021 and Widdowson’s February 2023 anathematizing there was an important intermediary event: the anti-vaccine-mandate trucker convoy that occupied downtown Ottawa and inspired similar protests in many Canadian cities during January and February 2022. The Freedom Convoy was cheerily diverse, featuring bouncy castles by day and bhangra dance parties by night.” from COMPACT https://compactmag.com/article/canada-s-convenient-victims%5D, with the assertion that, quote: PHYLLIS: “Then the trucker convoy comes up and blows all your credibility by continuing to see a mob taking over our capital city for 3 weeks causing mayhem…”
It’s not really fair to say that either Kathleen Lowrey or a “convoy (protesting against vaccine mandates or mandated vaccines)” could “blow” Frances Widdowson’s “credibility”. Widdowson is about academic freedom. The convoy was about the physical freedom to accept or refuse a vaccination and how the Canadian government tied their own pro-vaccination position to the economic freedom/ability of truckers to work. After all, when there were no vaccines and no places open at which truckers could eat or go to the washroom, they were risking their health and safety to deliver groceries to the Canadian public, while arguably risking even their lives.
So those (academic vs personal/physical) are two differently “credible” freedoms. Lowrey’s point was that the same “elites” are against both Widdowson’s academic freedom and the truckers’ personal freedoms [to work; to bank; to be vaccinated or not; and do with their money as they like] with the simple bogus “excuse” that both Widdowson and the convoy are manifestations of “white supremacy”, when the reference to “bhangra dancing” indicates South-Asian/Indian participation in the trucker convoy, given that Sikh Canadians tend to be employed in the trucking and taxi industries — the kind of work that “elites” look down upon.
Thus I think you missed Lowrey’s point, which is nothing like “right wing”. Her thesis was about a crumbling imperial order [Lowrey: “What is amazing is that the people most eager to declare themselves ‘de-colonizers’ are doing the final dirty work of a crumbling imperial order.], which is entirely suitable for publishing in a “Radical” Think Tank, like COMPACT, which seems to be a decidedly anti-liberal (small “L” liberal) publication featuring criticisms of “elites” by both right wing and left wing thinkers. You, in contrast, Phyllis, seem to be in favour of Mr. “elite” himself.
PHYLLIS: So here’s the dilemma! Trudeau walks a very tight rope trying to lead our country out of a pandemic, a climate crisis, colonial errors and oversights etc etc. and suddenly those who understand the aboriginal situation and the MRU catastrophe have gone all right wing on me!
TO THE CONTRARY, Phyllis! We are all left-liberal wing [Frances] and, on the contrary, true-liberal wing [Jordan Peterson who worked for Rachel Notley’s father, Grant, on one NDP campaign as a youngster] “on you”. Trudeau is a counterfeit politician and an actual counterfeiter. He’s been throwing away money at everything and everybody ever since he took office, while “cancelling” everyone who gets in his way [e.g. Jody Wilson-Reybould]. That’s why your grocery costs are going up at an 11% per annum rate lately. MRU is no more a “catastrophe” than Moscow State University. The STEM disciplines are neither left nor right, just as hot and cold are neither left nor right. Trudeau does have a nice face, nice hair, nice socks and says he has “your back”! But he doesn’t really have your back. He has what he thinks to be an unlimited personal budget, consisting almost entirely of your bank account [if it has any money in it] and a good credit rating (after all a right to steal money as a taxation point-of-law helps one’s credit rating)— but not for long, leave alone “forever”.
But you are entirely “free” to admire him and the “tight-rope” you think he walks. I don’t think you are prudent to either admire or trust him, but I don’t think that it is “contradictory” to admire, support and to trust one’s own prime minister. Good luck with that trust and trust that there is nothing essentially “contradictory” about contradicting contrary falsehoods.
Kevin James “Joseph” Byrne
Hey Kev, mind explaining how Justin Trudeau is responsible for global inflation? Seems like a rather “rash” statement made by someone with exceeds confidence and little evidence to support their ideology. I understand disagreeing about policy, or simply not liking the guy, but you’re giving him way too much credit…who did JT cancel in the UK that led to the “cost-push” inflation they’ve been experiencing? Justin almost must have done something to recently force The EU with a 10.1% inflation rate. Here’s the thing, Kev. You can’t have it both ways. Either Trudeau is as mastermind controlling global economics, and he is a “counterfeiter” that doesn’t accomplish anything. Contradictions, contradictory falsehoods…and a love for the convoy? Ps. Loving Canada and loving the convoy is about as contradictory as one can get…Kev’s response has it all!
The link to COMPACT, in the post above, produces “an unexpected server error”.
If you remove the %5d at the end of the link, it seems to work as a link to Lowrey’s article.