The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Saturday, October 26, 2019

The Greta Syndrome – A Diagnosis

It is sad to see what has become of the Kingdom of Sweden. At some point in the twentieth century, I think around the time of the Second World War, their political class developed a naïve and superstitious faith in the ability of social scientists to improve their customs and mores through radical experimentation. Perhaps the Nazis slipped some mind-altering substance into their water supply during the war that has been producing this lingering effect. Whatever the cause, the result has been that they have taken progressive social engineering to an extreme beyond what can be found in most other Western countries. This is most obvious when it comes to their policies and laws with regards to gender identity and the raising of children.

Sweden boasts of the fact that she was the first country to pass a total ban on corporal punishment. This happened back in the 1960s and about sixty countries have followed their example. Many other countries have passed partial bans, prohibiting it in schools but not in the home. From the über-progressive Swedish perspective this is something in which their country can take pride – they were ahead of the times, trend-setting, fashionable and forward-thinking. From the proper perspective, that is to say, my own, their being ahead of the times, trend-setting, fashionable, and forward-thinking is something of which they ought to be deeply ashamed. What it really means is that they have gone stark, börking, mad.

King Solomon, who was a far more trustworthy authority than some wacko sociologist or psychologist, wrote “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” (Proverbs 13:24)

Everywhere you look today you will find evidence that Solomon knew what he was talking about and that progressive social engineers are full of a nasty-smelling natural fertilizer. A few decades ago they took the strap out of the schools and now, at least in large urban centres, it has become necessary to go through airport-style security checks in order to enter them. At approximately the same time, quacks purporting to be experts on child-raising began peddling the message of permissiveness in cheap books and on bad television shows. They condemned methods that have been tested and proven over the course of centuries as barbaric and cruel. Spanking in particular, they likened to child abuse. As parents – and legislators – began listening to them and taking them seriously, authority in the home collapsed.

The anti-corporal punishment message caught on due to its superficial appeal to the feelings of parents. Parents love their children, people do not want those they love to suffer pain, corporal punishment inflicts pain, and therein lies the temptation to believe those who preach against spanking. Note carefully, however, the wording of King Solomon’s proverb quoted above. True love is not the empty, sentimental, feeling that is so often called by that name in the age in which we live. It also includes a commitment to meet one’s obligations towards those one loves. At the very minimum, parents have an obligation to their children to raise them – to instruct them in the right path and correct them when they go wrong. What the progressive and liberal theory of child raising really amounts to is the idea that parents should let children raise themselves. While this is certainly in keeping with the liberal ideal which makes complete individual self-determination out to be the highest good it is not consistent with genuine parental love.

It can hardly be surprising, therefore, that the country that took the first step down this path of utter madness is also the country that produced the most celebrated case of juvenile delinquency in the world today. There are many who would object to this description of Swedish enfant terrible Greta Thunberg but consider the actions that made her famous and then tell me that the träsko doesn’t fit.

After bullying her parents into depriving themselves of essential nutrients by going vegan she launched her career as a youthful rabble-rouser by encouraging children to play hooky from school in order to attend protest rallies demanding that governments ruin the lives of all the families that depend upon the petroleum industry – or raising livestock – for their livelihood. Her justification for all of this horrendously bad behaviour is her fear of climate change. Not real climate change but the bugbear of the eco-socialists.

Real climate change is a matter of long cyclical patterns of warming and cooling that have been going on since the beginning of time and will continue until the end of time. A multitude of factors, most if not all of which are beyond human control, contribute to it. It is not a bad thing, it is a part of the way things are. Periods of warming are nothing to be feared. People thrive in warmer periods. One thousand years ago, Thunberg’s Viking ancestors were able to farm Greenland thanks to one.

The eco-socialist version is a fictional horror story in which carbon emissions produced by human industry are the principle driving factor in climate change which threatens all life on the planet with extinction. It was thought up to serve the libido dominandi of men like George Soros and the late Maurice Strong who seem to have taken the supervillains in the movies based on Ian Fleming’s James Bond novels as their role models.

A lot of people have been duped into believing this nonsense, of course, but they do not all go around encouraging truancy and rebellion, throwing temper tantrums before assemblies of world leaders, and stirring up strife in other countries. Some would try to explain Thunberg’s aberrant behaviour by pointing to her having Asperger’s Syndrome and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder but I think that it is unfair to lump all who suffer from these conditions in with peace disturbing troublemakers like Greta.

No, I think the explanation is to be found in Sweden’s spanking laws. Had Sweden allowed Greta’s parents to discipline her properly, she may still have been taken in by the eco-socialist propaganda, but they would have been able to exert their authority to prevent her from acting on her fears in such an inappropriate, socially destructive manner.

We have not yet banned corporal punishment entirely in the Dominion of Canada, although it is probably on the Liberals’ agenda. Only parents are allowed to exercise this kind of discipline, however.

That is, perhaps, a pity. Had it been otherwise, when Greta recently travelled to Alberta to demand the total destruction of the province’s economy, their premier Jason Kenney could have turned her over his knee and publicly given her a lesson that would have done her a world of good.

5 comments:

  1. I'm glad she was turned down for the Nobel Peace Prize!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm of two minds on that myself. It depends upon whether we regard the Nobel Peace Prize as a true honour or not. If we consider the Nobel Peace Prize to be a genuine honour awarded for real accomplishments then yes, it is a good thing she was turned down. If, however, we look at the rogues gallery of past recipients - terrorists Menachem Begin, Yasser Arafat, and Nelson Mandela, frauds and charlatans like Rigoberta Menchu and Martin Luther King Jr., and miscellaneous unworthies like Barack Obama and Kofi Annan to name just a few - and reason that the prize has lost whatever real value it may once have had and perhaps become a mark of dishonor and infamy, then it is possible to conclude that she might actually deserve it. As I understand it, the Nobel committee ruled her out because her activism has nothing to do with war and peace. While I would say that based on that criteria they made the right decision it would be interesting to hear them, in the same context, justify their previous decision to award the prize to Barack Obama at the very beginning of his American presidency, before he had had the opportunity to accomplish anything, good or bad, related to war and peace or otherwise.

      Delete
  2. U.N. agenda through the cult of the petulant (& perpetual) child.

    By GRETA
    Global Rich End Traditional Allegiances.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Interesting article in the Financial Post about American interference in the Canadian election:'Vivian Krause: Obama wasn't the only American interfering in the Canadian election'

    https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/vivian-krause-obama-wasnt-the-only-american-interfering-in-the-canadian-election

    To quote,"By scaring investors away from Canada, activism is diverting billions of investment dollars into the U.S. where the oil industry is booming."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That virtually the entire anti-pipeline protest industry has been funded all along by American energy interests is something that Ezra Levant used to talk about on Sun News all the time. Perhaps he still does on Rebel Media, although I don't recall the subject coming up much in any of the material I have seen there. It is a subject that deserves much broader attention than it has received.

      In Sir John A. Macdonald's day American industrial interests, determined to see Confederation fail, attempted to thwart his efforts to build the railway. The same forces - Liberal Party domestic, American industry foreign - are aligned against Canadian Confederation today as they were back then. The difference is that the party that bears the name of the one Macdonald led, is no longer vigilantly bearing the old standard against those foes.

      Delete