Monday, August 7, 2017

The X-PHOBIA CATASTROPHE must be reversed

Opinion  /  Denis Rancourt

Beyond a simple political-correctness meltdown, North American society is in the midst of an X-phobia catastrophe.

North America is following a RECIPE FOR SOCIETAL DISASTER: Let governments, institutions, and special-interest lobbies make the definitions of racism, antisemitism, misogyny, X-phobia... as broad as possible and then prosecute everyone for expressed-opinion and inferred-belief violations and sentence them to economic and social exclusion in as many areas of activity as possible.

SOLUTION: Actual freedom of expression with strong protections against the punishing governments, institutions, and special-interest lobbies.

Racism of personal opinion is not a crime. Inferred individual character inadequacies must not be punished by governments and their enabled institutions and corporations.

Instead, concentrate on the physical racism-etc of governments and their enabled institutions and corporations, such as war, genocide, economic apartheid, class-based persecution... Work for more actual democracy, not more societal exclusion and apartheids.

ISRAEL: The whole "criticism of Israel is antisemitism" circus is a textbook example of how a powerful, stratified, funded, organized special-interest lobby (Israel lobby, promoting Israel as the main Middle East foreign-policy enforcer of the USA-allied system) generates propriety crimes to be used against political organizers (BDS) and opinion leaders.

Here in Canada, Ryerson University... [1]


[1] "Ryerson University Defines Anti-Semitism", By Ali Rosenblatt, The Louis D. Brandeis Centre, 2017-08-02,


Opinion  /  Denis Rancourt

The rule regarding employer information-mining of social media should be strict. None of it should be allowed.

Tenure or no tenure, full-time or part-time, boss or shop-floor... no one in any employment should ever lose his/her job for any views expressed as a person (as opposed to spokesperson).

The employer should have an onus to satisfy a high threshold that the employee failed in his/her work duties and has refused or was unable to correct the deficiency, without the employer being allowed any reliance on ideological or character inference from social-media communications. Period.

Otherwise, we live in a totalitarian state that can remove livelihood on the basis of political or personal thoughts and expressed views.

This is not complicated. There are no subtleties.

Corporate, government and private-company employers do not own the employees. Rather, they rent some services for specific tasks, whether physical or ideological tasks, and they are allowed to do so pursuant to government-enacted statutes. These statutes give the non-natural-person employer: legal rights, entity privileges, and responsibilities towards society. Their employees must be entitled to protection against use of personality-related information.

Sunday, August 6, 2017

Whether Trump or Obama: AIPAC houses (Congress, Senate) must be reined in

Opinion  /  Denis Rancourt

In the face of the reality of emerging Eurasia, seen on every front including the Middle East, the USA has two nonexclusive options:
  1. Act in a reasonable and responsible manner to avoid the next conflicts that could accelerate its downfall, or 
  2. Push ambitious civil-unrest and military campaigns for perceived regional gains or to satisfy rogue allies such as Israel. 

Nice to see option-1 showing the top of its bald head every once in a while [1].

This had to happen: war with Iran would be a gamble that could end USA dominance in the Middle East.

The big boys of the real deep state needed to show themselves and clear out some of the Israel ideologues and war mongers.

The AIPAC houses (Congress, Senate) need to be reined in or the whole hegemony thing could seriously go to hell.


[1] "McMaster solidifies power at NSC — and supports Iran deal, sees Israel as occupier", By Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, 2017-08-05,

When does "antifa" become pro-totalitarian?

Opinion / Denis Rancourt

I noticed some angry "antifa" activists advocating in favour of the recent "hate speech" criminal charges against social-media pundit Kevin Johnston. (See OCLA petition for background.)

Their stance does not strike me as a sterling example of logical consistency.

I'm against Fascism if this means opposing the evident and fast-pace government-corporate march towards totalitarian control over individuals and free associations of individuals, not if it means mobbing and attacking individuals that express views and sentiments.

I feel this way irrespective of the particular expression, irrespective of form and content.

Working with the state to suppress individuals for their ideas and organizing is not anti-Fascism. It is an actuation of totalitarianism.

Words are not bullets and arguments are not anything like (blood letting, bone-breaking) physical aggression. Otherwise, things become irrational very quickly and the resulting chaos serves powerful elites that love us to fight.

Imagine if, instead, we all wanted actual democratic control of the government and institutions. Antifa, Right, Left, whatever... unite.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

The worst enemy of a true civil rights movement

The worst enemy of a true civil rights movement is special interests override.

Too few people can clearly see the essential necessity of defending civil rights and liberties for ALL opinions and for ALL political stances, which is foundational to a stable and healthy democratic society.

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

Rainbows can be toxic

 "Goodness", "green thought" and rainbows can be toxic. Knee-jerk "progressiveness" is irresponsible and harmful.

  • Pinkwashing includes when Israel's on-going brutal war crimes (a la Geneva Conventions) are covered up by Israel's alleged queer friendliness.

  • Greenwashing includes when devastating exploitation by global finance structures is covered up by promotion of CO2 policy managed by the said structures.

  • Humanrightswashing includes when alleging to protect human rights is cover and the pretext for nation-annihilating war, from the repulsive "Responsability to Protect (R2P)" UN doctrine, to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya...

A message to Naomi Klein

A message to Naomi Klein about her recent garbage for the progressive mind "No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump’s Shock Politics and Winning the World We Need."

  1. Casting the mass criminal actions of the USA Industrial-military-security-finance-congressional-lobby-media complex as exacerbated by Trump serves the said complex.

  2. "Putting forward a credible alternate plan" is a (self-serving) recipe for ineffective civil engagement that neutralizes politicized individuals and serves the said complex.

  3. Your promoter Democracy Now has been exposed as the foundation-funded instrument of the said complex that it is, and so have you Naomi. Whether you want to know it or not, Naomi, you work for the man.

See articles about Naomi Klein in Wrong Kind of Green.

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Intl. Quds Day marks a global awakening leading to Palestine's liberation

This article is reprinted from its original publication at


Intl. Quds Day marks a global awakening leading to Palestine's liberation

Palestine is holding strong, and the world is changing. This year’s International Quds Day has a new global context. The people of the world are peace-loving in their great majority, and the people of the world are seeing more clearly, than ever before, the true face of the USA.

By Denis Rancourt* 

The steadfast perseverance of Palestinians (their legendary “Sumud”) is an inspiration and a grounding force for all people of the world who fight for their homes, their lands, their dignities, and for self-determination.

Unless one is disconnected from reality, it is impossible to image a more honourable and effective viable resistance. This resistance is against the brutal and ideological occupying regime of Israel, and Israel is given virtually unlimited resources by the ruthless global occupier that is the USA.

The USA thinks nothing of mass murders of entire nations (the list is a long one), of empowering local monsters on many continents (another long list), and of covert proxy wars where UN approval for “no fly” carpet bombing cannot be stomached.

Likewise, Israel thinks nothing of military campaigns against Gaza, of indefinite and inhumane occupation, of mass detentions, of killing civilians at will, of condoning extreme settler terrorism, of depriving the Gaza population of basic needs, and of sustained “cleansing” against villages, neighborhoods, and Jerusalem itself.

I hope that the Palestinian diaspora is not being entirely sucked into the illusions of the Western regimes, and into the dulling superficiality that is offered to the Western middle class. I hope that Israel can never coerce all the occupied Palestinians to be collaborators.

On the contrary, the recent hunger strike of prisoners driven to the brink of destruction is a testament that the Palestinian will is strong enough to achieve liberation despite the increasing stranglehold that Israel is applying.

Palestine is holding strong, and the world is changing. This year’s International Quds Day has a new global context. The people of the world are peace-loving in their great majority, and the people of the world are seeing more clearly, than ever before, the true face of the USA.

The world is finally seeing what the American aboriginals have seen, what all the victims of USA state terror have seen, and what Yemenis, Syrians, Afghans, Libyans, Iraqis, Latin Americans, Filipinos… are presently seeing. Many Europeans and citizens of allied countries are seeing that the USA has led their states towards a policy of global terror.

More and more people correctly perceive that the USA wants continuous instability and violence because global stability and respect for national sovereignty (the very basis of the UN Charter) imply the natural development and independence of Eurasia, Latin America, Africa... and the natural loss of USA hegemony.

Likewise, as its victims know well, Israel wants continuous war and conflict in the Middle East to assert its military and enforcement hegemony, which is otherwise naturally eroded by regional development.

In contrast, Russia and China want diplomacy and collaboration to avoid USA mayhem and economic predation. The more the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia bully nations with sanctions and military campaigns and support terrorist proxies, the more emerging nations collaborate and respond.

The USA military regime enforces and thrives from global economic predation. However, the power of the USA dollar, printed at will by the hegemon, is being eroded and will soon collapse. In the new era, stable development will be based on fair trading of national human and natural resources. This model of development is being applied by the competing blocks. Only USA and Israeli blockades, sanctions and elite coercion stand in the way.

The present period is a dangerous period because the failing USA system is frantic and disorganised. The USA economy is a military and predatory economy. The USA regime will continue to inflict damage to slow the inevitable, and for short-term and domestic “gains”. This will accelerate its crisis of international legitimacy. As the storm passes, both the USA and Israel (and their clients) will need to face the new reality of emerging sovereign nations having mutual interests in stability and respect.

This transformation is occurring because regionally powerful nations are refusing to accept the USA nightmare and insist on sovereignty: Russia, China, Venezuela, Iran … because of the dedication and self-preservation of committed home combatants in Palestine, Syria, South Lebanon (Hezbollah), Yemen … and because of both designed and circumstantial increasing collaboration between independent nations against USA hegemony.

It is the global reality that is causing popular awakening. The USA no longer can intimidate as effectively and no longer controls the narrative. In such a world: war, murder, and genocide carry the consequences of loss of legitimacy and isolation. Does the USA really want to become closed onto itself, with only Canada to exploit? Do client states really only want the privileges of buying overpriced USA weapons and of being paid in soon-to-be-worthless USA dollars for everything they have? Do USA “allies” really want to adopt Hollywood-made pseudo-culture and values?

The answers are no, no, and no. The world is freeing itself at a fast pace. The USA cannot nuke everyone like it did against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There are not enough bombs to destroy the emerging world.

This International Quds Day marks these profound changes and sits on the cusp of a global transformation that will include the liberation of Palestine, to the degree that occupied Palestinians will themselves mostly determine. All of this will make both Israel and the USA more humanistic, which is not difficult to imagine.

Occupied Palestinians constantly make brave contributions to humanity, literally with their lives. We celebrate their invaluable gifts to us and we reciprocate when we fight to secure our own self-respect and dignity.

*Denis G. Rancourt is a former tenured and Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. He is known for his applications in physics education research. Rancourt has published over 100 articles in leading scientific journals and has written several social commentary essays. He is the author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism. While he was at the University of Ottawa, he supported student activism and opposed the influence of the Israeli lobby at that institution, which fired him under false pretext in 2009.

The views, opinions and positions expressed on Op-Ed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions or positions of

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Culture revolution for aboriginal apartheid in Canada

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

Authentic culture trickles up not down...

Left progressives correctly reject the economic trickle down fantasy.

Why then do they accept the justice and equity trickle down model, in which state-increased access and advantages for collaborating professional class individuals ("role models") would solve the aboriginal apartheid by some unknown magic contrary to historical evidence?

The new campaigns of state-funded education of aboriginal culture and science will be a disaster, by design. 

Real economic independence or bust. 

Without economic empowerment as a basis, top-down provision of ancillary "knowledge" will only deepen the crisis: they don't have economic power, then let them eat state-provided restored "culture".

Multicultural Canada knows how to assimilate with "bilingualism" and neuter with "education". 

The new model of residential schools is to form an aboriginal cadre to feed the students approved culture that is an eminent part of the national multicultural curriculum. 

That is the real "cultural appropriation", irrespective of who is hired. It does not matter that the dancing Indians are actual Indians.


Other comments and articles by the author are HERE.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Geopolitical Trajectories

As I see it...

The USA wants continuous instability and violence because global stability and respect for national sovereignty (the very basis of the UN Charter) imply the natural development and independence of Eurasia, Latin America, Africa... and the natural loss of USA hegemony.

Likewise, Israel wants continuous war and conflict in the Middle East to assert its military and enforcement hegemony, which is otherwise naturally eroded by regional development.

Russia and China want diplomacy and collaboration to avoid USA mayhem and economic predation.

The more the USA and Israel support violence and bully nations with sanctions and military campaigns and support for terrorist proxies, the more emerging nations must collaborate and respond. Next the USA dollar will continue to be displaced.

The USA is losing its global bully status. The only question is how brutal it will be in its downfall. (Current examples: Syria, Philippines...) It may also find dignity, but historic examples of authentic USA dignity are rare. There is little choice other than firmly resisting USA madness.

A few relevant recent links:

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

UN legalistic final sanitization plan for the post-genocide phase of the global aboriginal problem

The real face of "cultural appropriation"

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

(Originally a status post on the Facebook page of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association.)

The latest United Nations (UN) Western-world-led globalist scam plan is upon us: Criminalization of "cultural appropriation":

<< Cultural appropriation: Make it illegal worldwide, Indigenous advocates say - Delegates in Geneva from 189 countries are looking at the issue, and some want UN to speed it up - CBC News, June 13, 2017. >>

My take on this travesty:

When the damn lawyers decide to make work for themselves and further exploit aboriginal peoples!

Intellectual Property is a euphemism for corporate and investor theft not unlike protection money and landlord exploitation.

You don't lose your culture when others use and transform or adopt it into their own.

Culture is not a limited resource that is consumed. It is constantly created or destroyed at every location, where it is rooted in economic and human activity. Its transfer is an influence, not a loss.
You lose it when they control, rob, imprison and kill you and your community and family members.

You lose your culture when you are suppressed to the point of not being independent and viable, and you can't muster the will to fight back. The said suppression involves invasion by the predatory system and its culture, and forceful dismantling of the local culture tied to the local original economy.

The occupying system is doing everything it can to separate culture from actual persons, economics and self-determination, so it can be "studied", "taught", "preserved" and "protected". Don't let them make you into a museum and an education curriculum.

The planned legalistic criminalization of "cultural appropriation" is not the way to make reparation or justice. The way to make reparation and justice is to make reparation and justice. Occupying-system laws and their managers, enforcers and collaborators are the opposite of justice. This legal apparatus will be part of the occupation and exploitation.

Another insane "goodness trap" that will benefit the occupying-system managers and collaborators and will lock-in the apartheid.

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Can't leave scientists alone with science

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

(This article was first published on my climate blog.)

If the generalized global warming fever and "climate change" hysteria has taught societal observers anything it is that you cannot leave scientists alone with science.

The scientific enterprise is embedded, and scientists are manufactured service intellectuals.

Two outcomes are possible.

In the first extreme scenario, those scientists that are mainly responsible to recruit young minds and to fabricate the illusion of research freedom are given freedom within the framework of professional advancement based solely on peer-reviewed publication output. The result is irrelevant gibberish, as any institutional analyst would predict.

In the other end-point scenario, research funding is tied to professional advancement and is determined by government agencies and corporate interests. The outcome is again precisely as would be predicted: the research output exactly satisfies the contractual conditions.

This is true whether one is patenting a genetically modified organism, or approving a new "non-addictive" pain medication, or developing a next-generation delivery system for nuclear warheads.

The on-going episode of global warming "science" has illustrated a structural flaw in this otherwise functioning state-science system: If scientists are given career-enhancing supra-national political instruments to create exaggerated relevance of their work in driving a globalist agenda, then they will take the opportunity and run.

Such runaway irrelevance is already known to occur on its own within a career-centered science network (the so-called Gold Effect). [1]. With the climate scare example, we see that the phenomenon is highly amplified when there is a strong corporate or institutional and propaganda-supported driver.

Usually, societal observers and ordinary citizens would not notice. In this case however, the shrill alarmism that has been generated, propagated by the mainstream media, and condoned by the science establishment, is stratospheric. The independent-thinking blogger can detect the tenuous nature of the claims of everything from imminent human species extinction to continental flooding to engulfing forest fires to unprecedented mega-storms to war-causing droughts, and so on. [2].

You can't leave scientists alone with science. Thankfully, in this case, the propaganda runaway has caused the insanity to be palpable, influential domestic forces are not buying in, and a large segment of the middle-class is not swallowing it; species extinction or no species extinction, bumblebee migration or no bumblebee migration.

The heroes in this story -- in this unique and historic example where a large segment of society has correctly perceived a widespread profiteering construct -- are the bloggers and vloggers, the domestic industrial interests that resist finance globalization, the USA political networks that reject global governance, and, of course, the exceptional scientists that refused to compromise intellectual integrity and publicly said so.

All of this, in circumstances where the relevant planetary physics is straightforward, if anybody cared. [3].


[1] See the description of the Gold Effect in:  Rancourt, D.G., Cancer arises from stress-induced breakdown of tissue homeostasis, Research Gate (December 2015), 25 pages. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1304.7129

[2] My critical review of the global-warming "science" of forest fires may be one of the best illustrations of how bad the science is, as I document the "runaway" recorded in the scientific literature: Rancourt, D.G., Anatomy of the false link between forest fires and anthropogenic CO2, Research Gate (May 2016), 18 pages. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2059.6087

[3] Rancourt, D.G., Radiation physics constraints on global warming: CO2 increase has little effect, my climate blog (June 2011),

Denis Rancourt's articles and interviews on climate are listed HERE.
Links to all my articles are HERE.

Sunday, June 4, 2017

Want to be oppressed fairly

Here is how I would put it:
Most of us want to be oppressed fairly more than we want freedom, and that explains a lot.

Monday, May 22, 2017


Trump is turning out to be a dangerous clown, one that has been a gift for climate and political-correctness critics, but a dangerous clown nonetheless.

The USA is truly frightening, no matter which clown it puts in the window. But the shift towards a more loving USA embrace of Saudi and Israel may well be a preparation for war against Iran, under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Meanwhile, ISIS is a USA creation funded by Saudi, aided by Israel, fought by Iran!

Israel wants a coalition war against Iran more than anything, and Clinton had promised it. Trump was elected to make American great at home... Now he may go along with the most murderous plan of all?

The prospect of war with Iran under Trump, is not just more clowning. It is the most horrific "next step" imaginable. Trump can't show that box of candy and then simply put it away on a high shelf without a real political fight. There is no evidence that Trump could mount or win such a political fight against the deep state and Israeli influence.

A war with Iran would be Trump's legacy of maniacal criminality. If he is using that prospect to leverage the creation of a Palestinian pseudo-state, then he is truly a nutcase. God help us.

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Does Israel teach a culture of love for murder?

There is some evidence that Israel may at times be teaching, not hate, but a culture of celebratory love for murder, as per the four quotes below.

<< On Thursday this week (18 May 2017, an Israeli settler distributed chocolates to “celebrate” the killing of a Palestinian youth, Muataz Shamsa (23). The Israeli settler can be seen, in a video posted online, saying: “We killed a Palestinian vandal today...I am distributing candy to celebrate the killing. I want to congratulate the Israeli people for the vandal’s death.” >>
-- BDS South Africa

<< Little kids throw mock grenades and pretend to shoot big guns; a boy crawls militant-style as gun-wielding adults cheer him on; a girl wearing a pink dress carries a rocket launcher twice her size. >>
-- Michael Kaplan

<< Peled-Elhanan examines 17 Israeli school textbooks on history, geography and civic studies. Her conclusions are an indictment of the Israeli system of indoctrination and its cultivation of anti-Arab racism from an early age: “The books studied here harness the past to the benefit of the … Israeli policy of expansion, whether they were published during leftist or right-wing [education] ministries”. >> 
-- Book review of "Palestine in Israeli School Books"

<< But religious fundamentalist, fanatic and violent indoctrination is not the only brainwashing going on in Israel. There is also the purely military violence.

Two days ago, the Israeli police did a demonstration in Ramat Hasharon for hundreds of 5th-graders, in how they ‘verify a kill’ of a suspected ‘terrorist’.

The mock-operation using blanks, featured policemen coming on motorcycles and riddling a terrorist with countless rounds, continuing to shoot at him long after he has fallen and is motionless – to ‘confirm the kill’.

This is a mock-theatre of an extra-judicial execution, with outrageously excessive violence. And we are not speaking about security forces ‘in the heat of battle’, as it were. They are performing a carefully tailored, and staged, operation. One must thus be in the conviction that they are demonstrating HOW IT IS DONE.

Some parents were upset with this demonstration of violence, whilst the police spokeswoman could not understand the issue: “The children clapped, they were happy”, she said.

Yet the upset Mayor of Ramat Hasharon Avi Gruber said something really worth noting. He told Haaretz that

“in light of the Elor Azaria incident, it can’t be that the Israel Police itself would show a situation in which a man is lying on the floor and is being shot this way.”

Bingo. Azarya was no aberration – he just got caught on film. And now the Israeli police also spilled the beans, in front of cameras and hundreds of children. >>
-- Jonathan Ofir on May 10, 2017, MONDOWEISS

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Distributed-Justice Solution for the Crisis in the Canadian Legal System

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

First published on Dissident Voice:

SUMMARY: The Canadian legal system is in crisis. I describe the circumstances of the crisis, its features, and its large-scale causes. I propose a radical and complete solution in the form of a “distributed justice” model. The model is a wiki approach for judicial decisions, using small teams of decision makers chosen from a large pool of non-legally-trained jury-like contract employees. Prerequisites of the model are: dissolutions of the lawyer and judge monopolies; and complete transparency and public access to recordings at every stage.

Canadian courts have gone to hell. The Chief Justice goes on and on about a crisis in “access to justice”, without expressing any concrete solutions whatsoever. The family courts are an obscene nightmare, shredding families faster than we can make them. Lawyer fees are through the ceiling and lawyers cling to their monopoly like flies to shit. No justice, justice delayed and justice way-over-priced are now the norm.

Beyond the economic and resources issues, the courts themselves are exceedingly class-status biased, where trial-court judges systematically give deference to the most highly-paid liars from the most “prestigious” law firms, while showing contempt for ground-floor lawyers, and outright hatred for self-represented litigants.

I’m not exaggerating. I’m stating reality as it is. That is why my words may sound excessive. Reality is far beyond what most of us would like to believe.

I have been intensely observing the courts and administrative tribunals, from the inside, now for more than a decade, up to all levels of courts in the country, mostly as a litigant (both represented and not represented) and recently as a researcher for the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (  Here is a report I made in 2014 [1].

Why do lawyers lie? First, because they are trained to lie. They are trained to present and defend a plausible “version” of the “truth” that best advantages the client. This is called “advocacy” or “trial advocacy”, and their work in doing so is concealed behind a wall of secrecy called “solicitor-client privilege”. Crown attorneys (state criminal lawyers) have a broader responsibility but they are nonetheless notorious hacks looking for convictions. Second, because they are handsomely rewarded for good lying. It’s that simple.

The judges never interfere with the lawyer lies. They guard themselves from vigorously testing these lies, or even from spelling them out clearly. That is called the “adversary system”, in which each side tells its best lies, which may or may not to be related to the truth. If the judges were to seek the truth, then they could be challenged as showing “bias” and as misbehaving. In fact, their real and systemic bias requires them to stay clear away from the truth.

Why are judges biased? First, because they were trained and practiced as lawyers. Second, they were named because of subservience to political and systemic interests, beyond any other criterion. Third, their first concern is their own social status, especially within the legal profession. Fourth, there are punishments for rulings that offend hierarchical dominance, and rewards for rulings that support society’s dominance structure. The punishments include everything from vigorous viable appeals to gala-event gossip. The rewards include conference keynote talks, favourable academic reviews of decisions, and political promotions to higher courts and to high positions within a court.

Naturally, the higher the court, the more political are its decisions, often reversing the rare fundamentally correct and well-reasoned lower court rulings that “err” towards decency for the individual (I’m making a list).

In addition to all this, and as supported by all this, these boys (judges working with lawyers) continuously act to degrade the constitutional protections of the individual, by contributing a constant jurisprudential creep towards less and less individual rights, not to mention their central role actually drafting laws and advising in the creation of new laws.

Dwelling on the latter institutional damage to the fabric of society would take us beyond the scope of the present article, but there are many Canadian examples of judicial creativity in concocting “tests” for increasing numbers of newly carved-out classes of circumstances… (Another list.)

The said jurisprudential creep away from allowing individual autonomy and influence was brilliantly exposed, for example, in the seminal critical works of Alexander Aleinikoff in the USA, who coined the phrase “familiarity breeds consent”. This known tendency has now been joined by runaway legal-system degradation that accompanies the on-going assault against the working and middle classes in Western countries, in favour of globalized interests.

The economic assault is accompanied by more and more totalitarian control over the individual. Thanks to independent sources such as Wikileaks and a thriving alternative media (social media) network, and no thanks to academics and foundation-funded NGOs, the increasing socio-political totalitarianism is correctly perceived as the multi-tentacular work of the recognizable military-industrial-finance-propaganda complex that Eisenhower described before the propaganda component was fully integrated [2]. The current rapid increases in totalitarianism are driven at the highest level by loss of USA hegemony and the emergence of Eurasia and competing trade structures such as BRICS.

The crisis in the legal system is a predictable consequence of this sudden global shift, since our constitutional legal system was designed to stabilize a domestic society having significant post-depression and post-war individual freedoms (in the absence of present levels of paramilitary policing, surveillance, and enforcement), and is thus maladapted to the new dystopic reality. However, if individual rights are not defended and preserved, then there will be a true melt-down of Western society. So far, the legal system has refused to play its originally intended safeguard role, and has essentially accompanied the new impositions at breakneck speed. There are only a few valiant resistors (“activist judges”?) who are exceptions that prove the rule [3][4].

The features of the crisis are unmistakable, and include: a myriad of statutes that attack hard-earned classic civil rights and liberties (speech, privacy, autonomy), that directly attack constitutional rights without being refuted by the judiciary, huge prison populations, overtly aggressive in-court judicial behaviour (Canada refuses to have in-court video cameras), unmanageable numbers of litigants, unprecedented trial delays, aggressive bail-judge practice, and increasing judicial bias (substituting for principled judicial discretion).

It is not an accident that the Chief Justice has made it a speaking-point fetish. The crisis is also causing cultural backlash that includes the “freemen on the land” phenomenon, a growing and visceral men’s rights movement led by influential men’s rights activists (MRAs) [5], and a growing number of incisive legal reform associations. The Lighthouse Project is emblematic and worthy of note [6].

Well, I have a practical domestic solution. In three words: Dissolve the monopolies.

In this day and age, there are more educated persons in Canada than ever before, and they are all computer and research savvy. There are more and more self-trained litigants who do outstanding work.

The only reason that judges do not allow self-represented litigants to call on whatever help they choose is because that would put a burden on the judge to actually think about the law, rather than simply gauge party-status, based on known quantities that are the certified lawyers with their canned arguments.

Everyone now has access to the powerful legal search engine “CanLII”, which is not behind a prohibitive pay wall. Everyone knows how to do a Google search. Everyone knows how to read, and can learn things on which their welfares depend.

There is no physical or technical reason that justice cannot now be distributed.

There are two monopolies that need to be broken.

The first anti-justice monopoly that needs to be removed is the lawyer monopoly. A litigant must bear the responsibility of his/her free choice of help or representation. Period. Then it is up to the judge to impartially impose standards of evidence, and to correctly rule on the evidence.

This means that a judge might not have both sides spoon feeding him/her the formulaic law, and it implies that a judge would need to know and research the law, in order to make a correct ruling that does not selectively ignore relevant law. What a concept heh?

That is more work for the judge, which brings me to the second anti-justice monopoly that needs to be abolished: judges. All judges could be replaced by a network, and the network individuals do not need to be highly (over) paid tenured servants. “Judge” network individuals could be drawn from the general public (as with juries) and let loose, to a large extent.

This follows the original Wikipedia model of how editors create Wikipedia articles and make editorial decisions, except that in the presently overrun Wikipedia there are large numbers of secretly paid editors and the organization has steadfastly refused to enact policy against paid editorship [7][8].

My idea is that “pool judges” would be impartially and transparently selected and transparently paid at a fair market price for the work. These pool judges would be selected at random from among general-population applicants, allowed to refuse to serve, and screened solely for overarching conflict of interest (such as financial or benefit “encouragement” from enthusiastic employers or special interest entities). As a result there would be retired and otherwise underemployed individuals, which is a good thing. Proportional rather than disproportionate social-status representation would thus be self-managed.

Working groups of small numbers of pool judges would make the decisions in individual cases. Their post-trial deliberations would be protected by privilege and made entirely public and accessible (we have the technology). The post-trial decision-conference would be recorded for the public and would have the judge team present the evidence and hash out their reasoning, all done transparently. Their draft written reasons and decisions would be allowed to be openly critiqued by all parties in the case and by interested observers prior to being finalized. Again, the entire process would be transparent and public.

The law is too important to leave it hijacked by career monopolies, but the prospects for change are dim. The reactionary legal establishment cares only about itself and vigorously opposes any movement towards a working and responsive model. This is clear even from the smallest efforts. For example, the lawyers vigorously fight against paralegals [9], and the judges will never voluntarily accept needed video cameras in the courtrooms [10].

The fact that we have the dinosaur that we have, where actual justice is entirely possible in our present technological society, proves that the systemic imperative is dominance imposition.

The legal system’s crass compliance with this imperative is causing it to come dangerously close to self-destruction. Will this proximity be enough? The history of the professional classes suggests not. The intelligentsia always goes along with even suicidal projects such as wars of global conquest.


[1] “Rogue Courts in Canada Trample Self-Represented Litigants”, by Denis Rancourt, September 29th, 2014, Dissident Voice.

[2] Dwight D. Eisenhower national television address of January 17, 1961.

[3] “Ottawa bail court a 'disgrace', justice of the peace alleges”, March 15th, 2016, Ottawa Citizen.

[4] “In challenge to Ottawa, judge refuses to impose mandatory sentence”, February 13th, 2012, The Globe and Mail.

[5] “The Red Pill: A Feminist’s Journey into the Men’s Rights Movement”, USA documentary film by Cassie Jaye, 2016, Jaye Bird Productions.

[6] “Feminism LOL”, YouTube channel of Diana Davison.

[7] “Wikipedia: Paid editing (essay)”, accessed on May 16th, 2017, Wikipedia, and links therein.

[8] “The Covert World of People Trying to Edit Wikipedia—for Pay”, August 11th, 2015, The Atlantic.

[9] “NSRLP Petition in support of the Bonkalo Report”, by Margarita Dvorkina, accessed on May 16th, 2017, Paralegal Society of Canada.

[10] “OCLA Petition ‘Allow Cameras in Ontario’s Courts’”, by Ontario Civil Liberties Association, April 11th, 2016,

Monday, May 15, 2017

Eurasia is coming

The regime-change empire has only one plan: To bully and exploit. It is headed for turbulence.

Meanwhile there is the steady and unstoppable emergence of Eurasia.

USA needs to find far better disruption tactics soon. It needs ISIS, murder and destruction to stay on top and to feed its operatives. Soon it will either come to the good side or be isolated and dry up.

Can't wait for the change. The militarily-enforced global exploitation model is over.

<< Putin: Russia Will Build New 'Silk Road' Together With China >>

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Beware White or Green Helmets

Too much spontaneous self-sacrifice in the service of war mongers

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

A powerful new propaganda model has emerged.

A Western globalist NGO scheme on steroids, with Hollywood Academy and humanitarian awards glitter... has been deployed in the latest covert regime-change operations, on two continents.

The new model is funded and embedded "white / green helmets" that masquerade as pure spontaneous expression of humanitarian goodness in a covert war of aggression, while operating solely on the USA-supported side of the aggression, such as in Syria (link) and now in Venezuela (link).

Fabricated domestic civil society heroism is the latest social-media-age propaganda instrument in the fake-news arsenal of USA maintenance operations.

You have been alerted. Get your fix from YouTube puppies and kittens but don't fall for the selfless helmets.

Same-day UPDATE: Just learned. White Helmet model going viral. They are now also in Indonesia: "White Helmets Indonesia" (link to their propaganda site). A model that works. You won't see them at aboriginal-rights protests or police-violence incidents in the USA.

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Manufactured ignorance is a primary function of public education (or, how the world economy really works)

And it works.

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

A main function of the public education enterprise, beyond destruction of the personality and individual thought and agency, is to ingrain a camouflaged ignorance that becomes a permanent fixture in the host brain.

One of the best examples of such manufactured ignorance is the widespread ingrained notion that the dominant global military-industrial-propaganda complex does or could allow a large measure of "free enterprise capitalism".

This false notion is one where individual motivation to maximize individual wealth accumulation is the first mechanistic organizational principle at work, which "explains" USA economic hegemony.

This myth of "the invisible hand" as being compatible with reality is so pervasive that it has even penetrated the reinforced stronghold of independent thought that is the Libertarian mind.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

USA economic dominance is imposed and enforced by projected military power, which ensures physical control of both energy resources and trade routes, and which imposes global extortion via control of the world currency and financial transactions (the US dollar printed at will by the boss, and direct control of global investment and transaction conditions).

Projected military power also installs direct corporate exploitation on territories, thus preventing any national emergence. Corporations themselves are not so much for directly making money, but more for directly controlling human and natural resources to prevent local emergence.

Projected military power is visible in military bases in every region, and in a fleet of aircraft carriers, each more powerful than the militaries of most nations.

Macroeconomic hegemony is visible in the existence and operation of global finance instruments (World Bank, International Monetary Found) and in the regular USA use of devastating "sanctions" and associated physical blockades.

That the organizing principle is military-CIA-etc-mediated dominance and exploitation rather than benign self-organization from individual motivation for individual benefit is true at all scales: from "health and safety" regulations that create controlled markets further occupying the mind, to the regulated industry of death, to urban building-zone battles for more isolating and sanitized cubicles, and so on.

The Libertarians detect and denounce personal-scale and nuclear-family-scale oppression but largely accept the myth that a mega-corporation is simply an expression of free will. Many find it impossible to distinguish a small private business from an entangled "public" mega-corporation.

Think of the efficiency of the public education enterprise when even the minds of Libertarians are contaminated to this degree.

Surprisingly, fragments of the actual societal organizing principles at work nonetheless occasionally emerge, even in the academic literature: "Preferences for group dominance track and mediate the effects of macro-level social inequality and violence across societies, by JR Kunst et al., doi: 10.1073/pnas.1616572114, PNAS, May 8, 2017."

Tuesday, May 2, 2017



I'm sorry, but that is bullshit. The first, dominant, and overpowering oppression is violent class dominance, class segregation and class discrimination. Race and gender are side shows that correlate: They are not the driver.

"Intersectionality" is a pseudo-academic service-intellectual cover for professional-class managers who benefit from race and gender-rights posturing, while supporting class-dominance violence.


[Taking some heat on social media for this one. Like I glared at a sacred cow or something.]

On-going mass crime against Yemen

The Saudi war against Yemen is a grotesque violation of the lives and dignity of innocent women, children, and civilians who seek nothing more than peaceful lives under democratic rule of their own choice.

This vile Saudi mass-crime, and the associated inhuman blockade, condoned and supported by the USA, Canada, and the silent Western world, is presently the worst on-going genocidal attack on the planet.

By such behaviour, the West and Saudi show themselves to be hypocritical, vicious, and murderous. I cannot condemn my own government (Canada) enough, which sells arms for profit to the Saudi thugs.

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Africa and USA global dominance

AFRICA ::: The US-global elite is losing Africa to China and BRICS. The increasing backlash will include more propaganda pressure to commit more US-led efforts to bring more "democracy" and "human rights" to the continent, including saving women, preventing environmental destruction, fighting terrorism, and managing against global warming... all the usual propaganda scams to justify massive CIA, NGO, and military presence -- for local regime control to the benefit of globalist finance and corporate (extraction) interests.

(See an example of the said propaganda here: “U.S. cutbacks undermine efforts to keep Africa’s population in check”, Globe and Mail, April 17, 2017. Too easy to be critical of this one as solely racist, rather than as tentative propaganda in the service of USA globalism, IMO.)

Thursday, April 27, 2017

The Real Red Pill

I recently watched the 2-hour documentary film by feminist film-maker Cassie Jaye entitled "The Red Pill - A Feminist's Journey Into the Men's Rights Movement".

At the end of her documentary, after her 1-year journey making the film, she states: "I don't know where I am headed but I know what I am leaving behind. I no longer call myself a feminist."

My main thought throughout -- which is not mentioned once in the film -- is how the gender war has totally served the dominance hierarchy; how the grievances on both sides are really predominantly about class; and how an industry of professionals benefits from and manages the gender war.

The real "N-word" is the word you can't even think of saying, the "C-word".

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

The USA does not tolerate chemical weapons?

The USA used nuclear bombs against two civilian cities in Japan, firebombed surrendered German soldiers after the war was over, uses depleted uranium on country-wide murdering fields, used chemical weapons in Vietnam on the scale of the whole country, supports chemical-weapon attacks against guerilla resister-supporting populations in Latin America, allows Israel to use white phosphorous against the Gazan population, ... and used economic sanctions (blockade) to kill a million civilians in Iraq. 

These are just the incidents that come immediately to mind.

And now, the USA has such a high intolerance of chemical weapons that is does not even need evidence of their use before it bombs and sanctions a nation to death. 

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Not George Orwell


During times of universal deceit... telling the truth has no effect whatsoever. Unless it is defamatory of powerful interests of course.

Saturday, April 15, 2017

On Syria - Peggy Mason is a dog of war dressed as a human rights defender

Canadian dogs of war dressed as human rights defenders, from Trudeau to NGOs. A very tired trick that must be exposed. Thank you Ken Stone.


<< Ken Stone challenges Peggy Mason to a public debate.

Based on her attribution of the recent chemical attack at Khan Sheikhoun on the government of Bashar-Al-Assad, I wish to challenge Peggy Mason to a public debate. She is not fit to lead a peace organization in Canada.

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Peggy Mason <> wrote on the "peace-listserve":

"Dear Folks,

We should be calling for an independent UN investigation, with full access, so we have the evidence needed to hold Assad to account, whenever that might be. Because he cannot be prosecuted now, does not in any way mean that it can never be prosecuted. There is no immunity for war crimes.
But the starting point is independent, credible evidence. BTW Putin has said he will agree to an independent investigation. Tillerson should nail this down.


Peggy Mason is president of the Rideau Institute and a leader of Ceasefire, the Institute’s main public outreach and advocacy arm.

I am available to debate Ms. Mason publicly at a time and place which can be negotiated between the two of us.

Ken Stone
Treasurer, Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War >>

2017-04-15 UPDATE:

<< Dear Peggy,

Thank you for your prompt reply and your admission that you were wrong to to conclude, before an investigation took place, that President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the April 4th gas attack at Khan Sheikhoun, Syria.

It’s unfortunate that you don’t wish to debate the widely different attitudes within the peace movement towards the US missile strike on the Shayat Airbase in Syria. Nonetheless, the Canadian peace movement still has to consider the issues you don’t want to debate.

In your reply, you touched on the key issue of investigation and judgment before any consequential action should take place. However, in your original e-mail message to the “peace listserver”, you wrote that “Putin has said he will agree to an independent investigation. Tillerson should nail this down.”

I think you have got things backwards. US Secretary of State Tillerson did not wait for (or even call for) an independent investigation of the April 4 incident. Rather, on his watch, his country rushed to engage in an act of war on the sovereign country of Syria which killed several civilians and pushed us towards a wider war in the Middle East, while Putin (as you noted) did call for an independent investigation.

So, here is where we have a difference. In my opinion and that of our Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War, the peace movement in Canada needs to be clear and consistent about international law. No country is above that law. The USA and its coalition partners, including Canada, are violating international law by overflying and stationing military forces in the sovereign country of Syria without the permission of the Syrian government. They are also violating international law by inserting, funding, and arming proxy armies of terrorist mercenaries to achieve regime change in Syria. They have levelled onerous economic sanctions upon Syria, causing great distress to the Syrian people, without the approval of the UN Security Council. The US-led coalition used military force against the Syrian government in its attack on Sharyat Airbase on April 7, 2017.

Where we have another difference with the Rideau Institute and Ceasefire is that you have decided to put pressure on the wrong parties. You seem to want to hold the Russian government to account when it appears that it had no hand in the incident and although its military forces are legally stationed in Syria at the invitation of the Syrian government. Moreover, you seem to be deeply invested in the campaign to delegitimize the Syrian government and to demonize its elected president.

Neither of your approaches is helpful. And these are very important matters which should be aired in public.

Another important point: what have you, the Rideau Institute, and Ceasefire said about the performance of Prime Minister Trudeau in the context of Khan Sheikhoun? Trudeau initially called for an investigation into the claims of a gas attack. Then, less than 24 hours later, he endorsed the USA cruise missile strike on Syria's Sharyat airbase. Now, his Minister of Global Affairs, Chrystia Freeland, imposes new unilateral sanctions on Syria, which are illegal under international law, because they lack the approval of the United Nations Security Council. Your comments would be appreciated by our Coalition members.

Finally my parting comment on your parting comment that (you) are “paying your dues every day” in the peace movement. As far as I know, you are paid a salary. Am I wrong?

Ken Stone
Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War

From: Peggy Mason
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 8:44 AM
To: ernie yacub
Cc: Robin Collins ; Ken Stone ; peace list
Subject: Re: [Peace-l] CW and cruise missiles - I wish to challenge Peggy Mason to a public debate

Sorry to disappoint but I have no intention whatsoever of wasting my time on such a ridiculous debate.

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:34 PM, <> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Robin Collins <> wrote:

Ken S,
If you read closer you will see that Peggy refers to war crimes committed by Assad, and those may include his alleged use of chemical weapons on April 4.

if you read much closer, you will see the bias in her statement...
"We should be calling for an independent UN investigation, with full access, so we have the evidence needed to hold Assad to account, whenever that might be."

i would very much like to see a debate between pm and ks - what do you say peggy?
ey >>

Friday, April 14, 2017

Until Death

It is not my prison. It is my liberation.

Depression and despair versus action and agency. Starts and is maintained in the head and heart, no matter the circumstances.

Friday, April 7, 2017

Ontological anxiety

My today's attempt at clever:

Ontological anxiety is the defining psychic luxury of privileged existence.

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Who is Daniel J. Levitin?

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

Who is Daniel J. Levitin, and why is he saying false things about me?

Mr. Levitin is a university professor, a psychologist, and the author of the 2016 book "Weaponized Lies: How to Think Critically in the Post-truth Era".

Wikipedia states the following about Mr. Levitin's book: "His interest in writing the guide [was] to help people develop techniques to distinguish factual information from that which may be distorted, out-of-date, unscientific or in error".

Therefore, Mr. Levitin presents a goal of wanting to be factual and accurate, and of not misleading.

In an article he penned on April 4, 2017, entitled "It’s time to stop letting so-called “experts” comment on subjects they know nothing about", Mr. Levitin had this to say about me:

Scientists like myself are partly to blame here. When one of our own goes on TV or in front of the press and starts making false claims, we don’t stand up and denounce them. We figure it’s not our personal problem. But it is. In this age of overwhelming untruth, pseudo-expertise is a problem that has to become every individual’s responsibility.

Nowhere is this more clear than among the climate-change deniers—almost entirely pseudo-experts—who contradict ample scientific evidence and lend support to devastating public policies. The list of leading climate-change deniers includes Denis Rancourt, who holds a PhD in physics and is an expert in magnetic field theory; Freeman Dyson, another physicist; Harrison Schmitt, a geologist; and Myron Ebell, who has a master’s in political theory and no advanced research degree. What about the people who hold PhD’s in—you know—climate science? Among this group, according to a number of studies published in peer-reviewed journals, 97% agree or more that climate change is real and man-made.

Thus, Mr. Levitin makes false statements and misleads by omission, as follows.

I will mostly leave aside Mr. Levitin's device of casting scientific questioning of CO2-alarmism as "climate-change denial" because that is simply wrong for an intellectual alleging to be concerned with truth. Everyone agrees that there are transitions beween different regional and global climate regimes in the history of our planet. Here is proof that I certainly do: "Anatomy of the false link between forest fires and anthropogenic CO2".

Mr. Levitin states that I am "an expert in magnetic field theory" (sic). I know what a "magnetic field" is. I know what a "theory" is. But I don't know what "magnetic field theory" is. There are "field theories" in several areas of physics, but "magnetic" is not one of them. If it is, then I don't know about it, so I could not possibly be an expert in it as asserted by Mr. Levitin.

If Mr. Levitin had taken the care to examine my public Google Scholar page, he would have immediately noticed that my most cited paper is in an area of theoretical spectroscopy, which is evidence of my ability to understand resonant scattering of infrared radiation from so-called greenhouse gases. He would have noticed that my second most cited paper is in environmental science "Nanogoethite is the dominant reactive oxyhydroxide phase in lake and marine sediments", in which I was the research director. And he would have noticed that many of my most cited papers are in environmental science, including carbon cycling in sediments and soils, related to aquatic sediments, soil evolution, environmental bacterial reactions, hydrothermal fluid input into sea water, and so on.

Alas, Mr. Levitin did not see or chose not to mention any of that, but instead characterizes me as a "physicist" (solely on the basis of my 1984 PhD) in the fictitious area of "magnetic field theory". In contrast, Mr. Levitin characterizes himself on his website as a "scientist, musician, author and record producer", quite a universal man despite having obtained his PhD in one specialized field.

I think that Mr. Levitin was trying to make the incorrect point that I am not qualified to comment about climate, and that I should not be a "leading climate-change denier". Well, the only way to establish whether I am qualified to comment about climate is to examine the substance and scientific value of my actual work about climate.

But wait. Is Mr. Levitin qualified to judge my calculations about the physics of radiation balance applied to the planet earth? Did Mr. Levitin dismiss my calculations on the basis that they were made public and discussed openly with leading climate scientists rather than published in a scientific journal: "Radiation physics constraints on global warming: CO2 increase has little effect"?

If Mr. Levitin dismisses scientific work by an appeal to authority (of scientific journals), or by an appeal to majority view (his quoting of the "97% consensus"), is that not in opposition to his book about the need for independent thought?

An equally interesting question, which Mr. Levitin might consider pondering moving forward, is "How many in the alleged '97%' understand and can practice the physics of planetary radiation balance?" Although, my evidence is anecdotal, I would confidently assert "not many".

More importantly, Mr. Levitin misleads his readers by omission. He concentrates on climate "deniers" that he incorrectly implies are not qualified to comment, but he leaves out any mention of the many "deniers" who are well-established formally-trained climate scientists. Here are examples of a few from many he could have mentioned:

I would suggest to Mr. Levitin that he reset his ability to seek and communicate truth. If he has some time, he could practice by analyzing the arguments recently (March 29, 2017) presented to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology:

Denis Rancourt is a former tenured full professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. He has published over 100 articles in leading scientific journals, on physics and environmental science, and writes social theory articles. He is the author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism, and a regular contributor to Dissident Voice. His articles and interviews about the science and politics of climate linked here.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Academic Freedom? - Michael Ignatieff is pathetic

Failed politicians never die. They become embassy ambassadors and university presidents. After Michael Ignatieff crashed the Liberal Party of Canada he returned to Harvard University, was given an Order of Canada by Trudeau, and became president of the Soros-funded Central European University in Hungary. Hungary wants the Soros cancer out but globalist Ignatieff is screaming "academic freedom".

What many commentators fail to understand is that: (1) "institutional independence" of universities is a myth, and (2) even ideal "institutional independence" is a distinct concept from "academic freedom". "Institutional independence" is falsely cast as "academic freedom" by university bosses but is really just an argument to be free of public oversight. Whereas "academic freedom" is the individual freedom of expression and inquiry of students and academics, which needs to be protected against both institutional and state controls so that the individual researcher can pursue uncomfortable truths and social influence.

At the perverse highest level "academic freedom" itself is a myth and is really just a legalistic device to prevent meaningful political or social engagement of professors (see the history of academic freedom, as surveyed by Schrecker in her book "No Ivory Tower").

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Latest development in my academic freedom case: Supreme Court refuses to fix administrative tribunal law

By Denis G. Rancourt

SUMMARY: The Supreme Court of Canada today refused to clarify and fix the Canadian common law of affidavits needed to remedy an absence of transcripts in administrative tribunal hearings.

I was fired under a false pretext in 2009, at the University of Ottawa where I was a tenured Full Professor of Physics. [1][2][3]

Following a lengthy legal process, in 2014 a labour arbitrator upheld the dismissal. [4]

My union immediately filed for a judicial review (appeal) of the arbitrator's decision, on many grounds, including violation of my natural justice rights. [5]

The arbitrator's decision incorrectly relied on a report prepared by a student who was hired by the university to covertly spy on me, on and off campus, including using elaborate false cyber identities and misrepresentations to third parties. The student spy did not testify at arbitration and her report was not accepted as evidence.

The problem arises because there is no transcript or recording of the arbitration. The arbitrator ruled from his chair that the report would be used solely as a memory aid regarding witness questioning, but then incorrectly relied on and quoted from the report in his decision.

Therefore, my union filed an affidavit by one of its layers in attendance to tell the appellate court what had occurred at arbitration; again, since there is no transcript or recording of the arbitration.

The university, which has used every possible delay tactic over the years, did a motion seeking to strike the affidavit. My union squarely won that motion and the affidavit was allowed. The motion judge had this to say about the student spy [6]:


[15] The circumstances of Maureen Robinson's involvement in this entire matter is troubling at best. Throughout the relevant portion of the Award by Arbitrator Foisy, Ms. Robinson's written notes were referred to "the report on Professor Rancourt's address prepared by a University of Ottawa student"

[16] Pursuant to the Udell Affidavit, and based on evidence from the hearing, the student being Maureen Robinson was the editor of the student newspaper who had been hired by the University in what the University described as in a clerical capacity to assist Professor Rancourt in his office, without his input on her hiring.

[17] Either in consultation with her employer, the University, or on her own, she monitored the activities of Professor Rancourt both on and off campus and reported her finding back to the University. In an email to Dean Lalonde, she admitted to having a "personal grudge" against Professor Rancourt and went so far as to liken her monitoring of Professor Rancourt as "posing as a young girl to catch a pedophile". Ms. Robinson was not called as a witness at the hearing and, the parties agreed that her "report" would be considered as an "aide memoire" only.

[18] The University referred to the "report" thereafter as a transcript which such description was objected to by the APUO. Similarly, Arbitrator Foisy made certain findings which appear to be based solely on the report which was not evidence.

[19] Given the unique circumstances, paragraphs 3 - 13 are necessary and in keeping with Keeprite and Kingston Utilities, this affidavit evidence should be admitted on the judicial review to "show an absence of evidence on an essential point".


[20] It is difficult to separate the input of the evidence or lack of evidence of Ms. Robinson and the circumstances of her somewhat bizarre involvement in this matter, from the other areas of concern identified by the Applicant, APUO. [...]

The university appealed that decision by the appellate court's motion judge to a panel of three judges of the same appellate court.

The panel overturned the first judge's decision and completely struck the affidavit. The panel decision was wrong in that the panel quoted from a document it erroneously said corroborated content of the spy report. In fact, the quoted words were from the spy report itself. Furthermore, the panel relied on Ontario common law (the so-called Keeprite test) that puts an unjust burden on litigants needing to bring affidavits to remedy an absence of transcripts of the proceedings being reviewed.

My union therefore sought leave to appeal to the highest appellate court in the province (Court of Appeal for Ontario). Even though the common law for affidavits filed to remedy an absence of transcripts is both unjust and arguably unclear, and even though the panel made obvious and substantial errors, the Court of Appeal can simply refuse to hear an appeal, without giving any reasons.

In fact, errors of law themselves are not a consideration when the Court of Appeal decides whether to grant leave in such circumstances, no matter how egregious those errors may be.

The Court of Appeal refused to grant leave to appeal, and did not provide any reasons.

Therefore, my union sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, on the grounds that the Canadian common law of affidavits to remedy an absence of transcripts is unclear and unjust. It also pointed out the egregious error of the panel that struck the affidavit, of finding corroborating evidence where there was none.

The Supreme Court's decision was released today. The Court refused to grant leave for an appeal (no reasons are provided, as usual) and it ordered my union to pay the university's costs in opposing the leave application.

Thus, the Supreme Court of Canada today refused to clarify and fix the Canadian common law of affidavits needed to remedy an absence of transcripts. This is significant because absence of transcripts is the norm in virtually all administrative tribunals in Canada, whether they are labour arbitrations or human rights tribunal hearings.

Just like that, the Supreme Court of Canada can decide not to fix a common law that is at odds with principles of fundamental justice and with international norms of fair judicial processes, such as those prescribed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Canada has signed.

Here are the Supreme Court of Canada documents about its today's decision:


[1] Statement By Denis Rancourt Regarding His Dismissal By The University Of Ottawa, ZCommunications, 2009-04-16.

[2] Dismissing critical pedagogy: Denis Rancourt vs. University of Ottawa, by Jesse Freeston,, 2009-01-12.

[3]  Ottawa's Dismissal of Denis Rancourt, by Kenneth Westhues, University of Waterloo, 2009-08.

[4] University of Ottawa v Association of Professors of The University of Ottawa, 2014 CanLII 100735 (ON LA), 2014-01-27, <>

[5] APUO statement, 2014-03-10.

[6] University of Ottawa v Association of Professors of The University of Ottawa, Endorsement of Justice Robert Scott, Divisional Court for Ontario, 2015-10-26.

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Pernicious effects of political correctness

"Were third-party bugging a prevalent practice, it might well smother that spontaneity—reflected in frivolous, impetuous, sacrilegious, and defiant discourse—that liberates daily life."
-- Justice Harlan, dissenting (Supreme Court of the US), United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745 (1971).

The presumed harmful effects against people of both state surveillance and political correctness are of the same character. 

Most Liberals opposes surveillance but participate in political correctness. Many Conservatives reject both, which is at least consistent. 

I believe that language intolerance, regarding both form and content, is a major liability against freedom, democracy, and personal emancipation.

Monday, March 6, 2017

One simple rule to improve Western "representative" democracy

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

Representative democracy is designed to limit popular interference with elite rule, while providing a nurtured illusion of community and justice.

However, if the system goes too far in dissociating itself from the popular will, then the entire society is at risk of destabilization.

My recommendation especially applies to the Western states Canada and the USA, which incidentally both shun proportional representation. Canada shuns proportional representation because the managerial elite can get away with it, while continuing to sell off the country. The USA shuns any improvement because it is already the freest and greatest nation in the history of the universe.

Nonetheless, purely out of academic interest, I make the following considered suggestion.

In order to create and improve democracy in the USA and Canada, I would implement this simple rule:

Voter registration for each election requires attending one all-candidates debate or presentation in person in a riding for the upcoming election, whether federal, provincial, or municipal, from beginning to the end of the debate or presentation part, at least; in which all candidates are invited to and accommodated in the said debate or presentation.

If you don't care to attend at least one such session in the 4 years between elections, then it is presumed that you don't care to vote and the collective prefers that you not vote.

The simple rule:
  • ensures that sufficient such events are held
  • brings the focus onto representation rather than blinded leader selection
  • increases so-called transparency and accountability
  • reduces the chance of over-influence from payed-for or manipulated propaganda
  • gets you meeting the candidates and trusting your live impressions
  • gets you into the community meeting your neighbours who care to vote
  • makes for better all-candidates events
  • invigorates the democratic process
  • informs you like nothing else can
  • gives you a chance to ask questions and communicate your views directly to the candidates ...

I would add "parliamentary privilege" for all attendees, so one can say what one wants to say without the societal cost of prosecution or litigation.

Bring back the town hall meeting, as a first step. Then we can talk about proportional representation, referendum mechanisms, independence of government watchdogs, actual whistle-blower protection, rules against moneyed interest groups, campaign donations, and, eventually, even participatory democracy.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Islamic Republic of Iran

Tehran, Iran

Now THAT is "hate speech"::: The USA criminal regime (always aided by the so-called “white supremacist terrorist” Trudeau of the moment in Canada) openly threatens a mass war of murder and destruction against Iran, a modern state that it has attacked with aggressive sanctions during four decades, for daring in 1979 to oust a 1953 CIA-installed puppet administration.

Iran is a unique and diverse modern society that wants security and sovereignty, two forbidden commodities in the USA-dominated Middle East. Iran has 83 million citizens. 

Iran lost approximately 200,000 lives in the 1980s, during the USA-sponsored Iran-Iraq war. Iran supports the Palestinian struggle, and the independence of Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen, which are viciously attacked by the USA-et-al war enterprise for the "crime" of wanting independence from USA domination. 

The on-going war crimes perpetrated by USA-supported terrorists in Syria and USA-Canada-supported Saudi military in Yemen are off-scale, comparable only to USA atrocities in Latin America, Asia...

Stop the USA criminal regime from making more war and from supporting more terrorists and exploiters on every habitable continent.

Force the USA by public opinion to follow international law and to respect national sovereignty. We owe it to ourselves in the West to stop the USA's mass criminality.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

My today's list of Trump PROS AND CONS

I get a lot of heat for seeing positive signs in Trump. But I do. It's what I honestly see. I may be totally wrong. If his actual acts contradict the positive indicators after we have had time to see statistics, then I will certainly admit my error.

Why does Trump-hate have to be a religion that we all follow? (I reserve the emotions of love and hate for the people I know personally.)

I like Trump's consistent spoken messages about:

1. Wanting to get along with the emerging powers Russia and China. (link)
2. Wanting to move away from regime-change wars and globalist interventions (except to negotiate new deals to advantage the domestic economy). I like that he wants other countries to pay for NATO, because that will weaken NATO, etc.
3. Letting go of (accepting the resignation of) his anti-Iran maniac. (Trump keeps saying nonsense about Iran but hopefully reality will prevent an actual military intervention.)
4. Trashing of the CO2 nonsense and the drive for a carbon economy for the globalists. (link)
5. Constant and correct criticism of the corporate media.
6. Intention to economically and infrastructure enable the inner cities, to solve the social ills, he says. (However, this may well be just a scam...? link)
7. Disregard for political correctness. Much needed in the spiraling madness of "words that wound".
8. The fact that Washington DC hates him and all these insiders work against him.

I worry about:

a. His possible approach to Syria and Iran. But I think reality will prevent military escalation.
b. His treatment of Mexican immigration (and will it actually be worst than what Obama was doing? link).
c. What his dealings with Israel will actually be. (link)
d. His apparent lack of respect for international law! (torture, assassinations, whistle-blowers, economic sanctions, etc.) (and will it actually be worst than what Obama has done?)

But he has not actually done much yet. And good that his stupid blanket travel ban against 7 countries has been reversed by the courts.