Populism, patriotism, nationalism, defying political correctness and dissing the establishment and the elites that monitor PC are where it’s at. There are reasons for such populist rage…Put bluntly, the nation seems almost everywhere on an unsustainable path.

There are areas where the Sanders agenda overlaps that of Donald Trump and other Republican candidates. Bernie is an anti-interventionist, anti-nation-building, anti-empire leftist of a breed common in the Labor Party after World War II, when the British Empire was liquidated, Churchill notwithstanding.

Moreover, Sanders is no free-trade globalist of the Davos school. He opposed NAFTA, GATT and MFN for China. Like Trump, he backs a trade policy that puts American workers first.

On both trade and foreign policy, there is common ground between the rebellions in the Democratic and Republican parties, even as Clinton has ideological allies among the GOP free-traders and neocons of the Bush I and II presidencies.

Read Full Article

Gavin McInnes on fashionable politics and politics as fashion, ie, why there won’t be any LaVoy Finicum t-shirt industry:

Despite Occupy Oregon meeting all the criteria for an anarchist revolution, the reaction is still much more in the #YallQaeda #VanillaISIS camp. I’m seeing people focus on the fact that LaVoy’s wife lists “foster care provider” as her vocation. Where were these people when we discovered that Trayvon’s father was a gangbanger? They want you to know that LaVoy’s fellow occupier Ammon Bundy may have been drinking alcohol at the time of his arrest. The same side that chanted, “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!” is offended that Bundy may have threatened cops. They call the ranchers welfare moochers who are taking advantage of the poor, feeble state.

Apparently, allowing your cattle to graze outside government boundaries is some kind of aristocratic decadence. Anarchists wearing Guy Fawkes masks are all of a sudden concerned about the government not getting enough tax dollars. It’s willful ignorance.

Read more at Taki’s Magazine here.

The Green Party of Canada likes to think outside the box. They don’t want to be labelled or seen by Canadians as ‘conventional’. No, they are progressive. So progressive in fact, that they don’t actually know what they stand for.

While every other major political party in Canada uses the obvious emblem the maple leaf as part of their party logo, the Greens have chosen something else. One can’t be sure what it is though. Is it a carnation perhaps? Is it some kind of New Age cosmic wheel? Is it one of those 3D pictures you are supposed to stare at until you see the hypnotizing eyes of mother earth looking back at you?

What ever the logo may be, it is obviously perfect because it captures what the Green party of Canada is: Lost.
They are lost in the clouds of their confused minds.

What are they? What is their focus? What do they stand for? Are they an environmental movement as their party name would suggest? If so, why is their logo a swirling yellow space tunnel?

No Canadian in their right minds (or not) will ever vote for the Green Party of Canada because the Greens clearly don’t know what the Greens themselves stand for and their logo is proof.

A logo is a symbol. Symbols are humanities oldest form of language. They communicate thoughts and ideas to even the illiterate. A picture is worth a thousand words, as they say.

Canadian back packers around the world can be spotted by the maple leaf on their backs. This is to differentiate them from Americans.

A logo can also sum up a political party’s platform. The maple leaf is the universally understood symbol of Canada and the colour green has been deliberately associated with environmental issues because it is the colour of trees, grass and most plants.

If you can’t see that a GREEN maple leaf is the obvious choice of logo for the GREEN party of Canada, then you have no business running the country or having any position of leadership.

So before the Greens can ever hope to enter the House of Commons, they first need to open the door to the House of Common Sense.

When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, building on his presence at the historic Paris Conclave a few weeks ago (which saved the world) and presenting at the Davos summit this week (which will merely improve our rescued world), offered this rhetorical crackerjack: “My predecessor wanted you to know Canada for its resources. I want you to know Canadians for our resourcefulness.” (The Trudeau years are going to be great for the T-shirt and bumper-sticker scribes.)

So, does having great natural resources mean we do not need to use our powers of ingenuity, inventiveness and creativity in the development of those resources? No, the possession of natural resources does not contradict or suspend, as Trudeau’s semantic maneuvering would have it, the powers of resourcefulness in the people – engineers, farmers, loggers, miners, fishermen and oil workers — who exploit those resources.

Minerals do not just pop out of the ground on a wish, refine themselves and then walk to the nearest subsidized GM plant in southern Ontario. And — surprise, surprise — even windmills do not collect their own materials and build themselves. All require the resourcefulness of the people working in that particular industry.

Read Full Comment Here