• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canada doesn’t matter to the rest of the world - and it’s our own fault

Haggis said:
Reading your post with a woke lens, I can see that you are clearly part of the problem. :cool:
Click to expand...
appreciate the amendment but what should it say: we person a ship or staff or crew? What would be acceptable? he asked sarcastically
 
YZT580 said:
appreciate the amendment but what should it say: we person a ship or staff or crew? What would be acceptable? he asked sarcastically
Click to expand...
Given that some members of the human society self-identify as non-human, "person" would be discriminatory. Your suggestion of "Crew" is pretty non- specific and is used by all three main elements. Crew served weapon, aircrew and ships crew.

"Staff" has too much HQ baggage attached to it.
 
I wonder if Leigh Spanner visited the MFRC and spoke to clients and staff.
 

CAF attacked by its own journal - National Post - 10 Jan 2024 - Tristin hopper Comment​

The Canadian Military Journal is the official, peer-reviewed academic journal of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Published quarterly since 2000, it has the stated mission “to enhance the continuing development of the profession of arms in Canada.”

Its inaugural issue discussed the expansion of NATO. In 2005, it devoted an entire issue to Arctic sovereignty. As recently as 2020, it was considering the implications of filling the RCAF with unmanned drones.

But the latest edition contains little mention of strategy, geopolitics or its avalanche of contemporary problems. There’s not a single reference to the recruiting crisis. No mention of plummeting maintenance standards. No discussion of why Canada is slashing its military budget.

Instead — in a signal of just how far the Canadian Armed Forces has embraced far-left “anti-racist” ideology — the entire issue is devoted to how the Canadian military is a racist, patriarchal, anti-transgender den of colonialist oppression that needs to be torn down and remade from scratch.

“With this special issue we provide readers with insights and recommendations for meaningful military culture change,” reads an introduction.

The issue lacks the journal’s typical sections devoted to strategy or military history. Instead, it’s a series of 13 essays all devoted to what an introduction describes as a “feminist intersectional trauma-informed approach to reimagine and transform CAF culture.”

The issue’s central essay is co-written by Maya Eichler, a professor of political and Canadian studies and women’s studies at Halifax’s Mount Saint Vincent University.
Eichler paints a picture of a “problematic military culture” that is shot through with “patriarchy, colonialism, white supremacy, heteronormativity, ableism, and classism.”

After devoting extended paragraphs to each cultural infraction, Eichler concludes that the Armed Forces must be remade via an “anti-oppression framework” of “feminist, decolonial, critical race, queer, critical disability, and critical political economy theories.”

Eichler notes this is “not an easy task, but a necessary one if DND/CAF wants to move the yardstick on culture change.”

Another feature, by York University psychotherapist Tammy George, frames the Forces as being poisoned by “institutional whiteness.”

“In order for meaningful, sustained culture change to occur, there must be a recognition by the white majority of the way in which whiteness organizes lives,” she writes.

Leigh Spanner, a feminist post-doctoral research fellow, wrote that the CAF’S system of supporting military families was anti-feminist and patriarchal.
Ash Grover, a researcher in “feminist anti-militarism,” argues that the military might have fewer instances of post-traumatic stress disorder if it paid closer attention to “anti-oppressive theory” and how “acts of ‘othering’ can result in responses typically associated with post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Alan Okros, a professor at Royal Military College, writes that the military will never escape its harmful practices unless it can move beyond an identity that prioritizes “violence and aggression, institutional unity and hierarchy.”

On the whole, the issue’s contributors are open about the fact that they are adherents of “critical race theory” — a term that appears in the text five times.
“Critical race theory,” sometimes called “anti-racism” or “diversity, equity and inclusion” is very different than traditional Canadian notions of tolerance or racial sensitivity.

Developed in the United States, it holds that the entire institutional structure of the West is irredeemably racist, and that “equity” can only be achieved by prescribing special treatment for “equity-seeking groups.”

Anti-racism doctrine holds that mere neutrality on someone’s ethnicity or background is itself racist, since it inevitably results in disparate outcomes.
In just the last few years, the Trudeau government has leaned hard into anti-racism ideology. In 2021, the Privy Council issued an order that the federal public service would be informed by “anti-racist” tenets.

In 2023 the Trudeau government founded the Federal Anti-racism Secretariat with the explicit goal of overseeing funding, data-collection and policy that would be specifically directed along racial lines.

Throughout, the military has been one of the more conspicuous targets of this anti-racist makeover.

In 2020, the federal government stated publicly that the Department of National Defence was replete with “systemic racism and discrimination” and commissioned an audit on how it could be eliminated.

The audit’s final report — which included detailed research into the precise ethnic backgrounds of every Canadian Armed Forces member — would end up concluding that the military and the country it served were agents of white supremacy.

“Racism in Canada is not a glitch in the system; it is the system. Colonialism and intersecting systems such as patriarchy, heteronormativity and ableism constitute the root causes of inequality within Canada,” it read.

Ever since, senior military leadership has been open about stating that they are now an “anti-racist” organization committed to implementing the various prescriptions of critical race theory.

“The Defence Team is dedicated to becoming an anti-racist organization,” reads the introduction to a February “anti-racism tool kit” that was circulated to serving members.
 
You have to love this from an RMC Prof:
Alan Okros, a professor at Royal Military College, writes that the military will never escape its harmful practices unless it can move beyond an identity that prioritizes “violence and aggression, institutional unity and hierarchy.”
Click to expand...
WTF is a MILITARY that doesn't require the use of "violence and aggression" and how the hell do you have an effective military without "institutional unity and hierarchy"???
 
GR66 said:
You have to love this from an RMC Prof:

WTF is a MILITARY that doesn't require the use of "violence and aggression" and how the hell do you have an effective military without "institutional unity and hierarchy"???
Click to expand...
I think there needs to be a rather large pushback on people of this nature.

Has the prof ever served other than on staff of RMC? Has he faced armed aggression from others not friendly to Canada - and Canadians?

Maybe his contract should be terminated.

Add: harmful practices? Like making people accountable for their actions or inactions?
Upholding a standard of fitness? Upholding personal responsibility? Upholding loyalty to the nation??

Adding again- loyalty to your fellow soldiers- which is paramount.

Loyalty is something many politicians lack. And it appears university professors
 
Last edited:
There is no other explanation than that this is information warfare to degrade our institutions from within.

It is so obvious. But Canadians have been conditioned to react a certain way to horrendous allegations such as racism.

Imagine, considering all the countries in the world, one would state this about Canada: "Racism in Canada is not a glitch in the system; it is the system. Colonialism and intersecting systems such as patriarchy, heteronormativity and ableism constitute the root causes of inequality within Canada,”
 
OldSolduer said:
I think there needs to be a rather large pushback on people of this nature.

Has the prof ever served other than on staff of RMC? Has he faced armed aggression from others not friendly to Canada - and Canadians?

Maybe his contract should be terminated.

Add: harmful practices? Like making people accountable for their actions or inactions?
Upholding a standard of fitness? Upholding personal responsibility? Upholding loyalty to the nation??

Adding again- loyalty to your fellow soldiers- which is paramount.

Loyalty is something many politicians lack. And it appears university professors
Click to expand...
to me the bigger question is the degree to which his way of thinking is present throughout RMC (think Harvard and WOKE concepts) and its resultant contamination of your new officer corps. Trees rot from within and it isn't always evident until a bit of wind causes it to snap.
 
Rifleman62 said:

CAF attacked by its own journal - National Post - 10 Jan 2024 - Tristin hopper Comment​

The Canadian Military Journal is the official, peer-reviewed academic journal of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Published quarterly since 2000, it has the stated mission “to enhance the continuing development of the profession of arms in Canada.”

Its inaugural issue discussed the expansion of NATO. In 2005, it devoted an entire issue to Arctic sovereignty. As recently as 2020, it was considering the implications of filling the RCAF with unmanned drones.

But the latest edition contains little mention of strategy, geopolitics or its avalanche of contemporary problems. There’s not a single reference to the recruiting crisis. No mention of plummeting maintenance standards. No discussion of why Canada is slashing its military budget.

Instead — in a signal of just how far the Canadian Armed Forces has embraced far-left “anti-racist” ideology — the entire issue is devoted to how the Canadian military is a racist, patriarchal, anti-transgender den of colonialist oppression that needs to be torn down and remade from scratch.

“With this special issue we provide readers with insights and recommendations for meaningful military culture change,” reads an introduction.

The issue lacks the journal’s typical sections devoted to strategy or military history. Instead, it’s a series of 13 essays all devoted to what an introduction describes as a “feminist intersectional trauma-informed approach to reimagine and transform CAF culture.”

The issue’s central essay is co-written by Maya Eichler, a professor of political and Canadian studies and women’s studies at Halifax’s Mount Saint Vincent University.
Eichler paints a picture of a “problematic military culture” that is shot through with “patriarchy, colonialism, white supremacy, heteronormativity, ableism, and classism.”

After devoting extended paragraphs to each cultural infraction, Eichler concludes that the Armed Forces must be remade via an “anti-oppression framework” of “feminist, decolonial, critical race, queer, critical disability, and critical political economy theories.”

Eichler notes this is “not an easy task, but a necessary one if DND/CAF wants to move the yardstick on culture change.”

Another feature, by York University psychotherapist Tammy George, frames the Forces as being poisoned by “institutional whiteness.”

“In order for meaningful, sustained culture change to occur, there must be a recognition by the white majority of the way in which whiteness organizes lives,” she writes.

Leigh Spanner, a feminist post-doctoral research fellow, wrote that the CAF’S system of supporting military families was anti-feminist and patriarchal.
Ash Grover, a researcher in “feminist anti-militarism,” argues that the military might have fewer instances of post-traumatic stress disorder if it paid closer attention to “anti-oppressive theory” and how “acts of ‘othering’ can result in responses typically associated with post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Alan Okros, a professor at Royal Military College, writes that the military will never escape its harmful practices unless it can move beyond an identity that prioritizes “violence and aggression, institutional unity and hierarchy.”

On the whole, the issue’s contributors are open about the fact that they are adherents of “critical race theory” — a term that appears in the text five times.
“Critical race theory,” sometimes called “anti-racism” or “diversity, equity and inclusion” is very different than traditional Canadian notions of tolerance or racial sensitivity.

Developed in the United States, it holds that the entire institutional structure of the West is irredeemably racist, and that “equity” can only be achieved by prescribing special treatment for “equity-seeking groups.”

Anti-racism doctrine holds that mere neutrality on someone’s ethnicity or background is itself racist, since it inevitably results in disparate outcomes.
In just the last few years, the Trudeau government has leaned hard into anti-racism ideology. In 2021, the Privy Council issued an order that the federal public service would be informed by “anti-racist” tenets.

In 2023 the Trudeau government founded the Federal Anti-racism Secretariat with the explicit goal of overseeing funding, data-collection and policy that would be specifically directed along racial lines.

Throughout, the military has been one of the more conspicuous targets of this anti-racist makeover.

In 2020, the federal government stated publicly that the Department of National Defence was replete with “systemic racism and discrimination” and commissioned an audit on how it could be eliminated.

The audit’s final report — which included detailed research into the precise ethnic backgrounds of every Canadian Armed Forces member — would end up concluding that the military and the country it served were agents of white supremacy.

“Racism in Canada is not a glitch in the system; it is the system. Colonialism and intersecting systems such as patriarchy, heteronormativity and ableism constitute the root causes of inequality within Canada,” it read.

Ever since, senior military leadership has been open about stating that they are now an “anti-racist” organization committed to implementing the various prescriptions of critical race theory.

“The Defence Team is dedicated to becoming an anti-racist organization,” reads the introduction to a February “anti-racism tool kit” that was circulated to serving members.
Click to expand...
And that, dear reader, is a reflection of what is teaching our kids today.
 
Rifleman62 said:

CAF attacked by its own journal - National Post - 10 Jan 2024 - Tristin hopper Comment​

The Canadian Military Journal is the official, peer-reviewed academic journal of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Published quarterly since 2000, it has the stated mission “to enhance the continuing development of the profession of arms in Canada.”

Its inaugural issue discussed the expansion of NATO. In 2005, it devoted an entire issue to Arctic sovereignty. As recently as 2020, it was considering the implications of filling the RCAF with unmanned drones.

But the latest edition contains little mention of strategy, geopolitics or its avalanche of contemporary problems. There’s not a single reference to the recruiting crisis. No mention of plummeting maintenance standards. No discussion of why Canada is slashing its military budget.

Instead — in a signal of just how far the Canadian Armed Forces has embraced far-left “anti-racist” ideology — the entire issue is devoted to how the Canadian military is a racist, patriarchal, anti-transgender den of colonialist oppression that needs to be torn down and remade from scratch.

“With this special issue we provide readers with insights and recommendations for meaningful military culture change,” reads an introduction.

The issue lacks the journal’s typical sections devoted to strategy or military history. Instead, it’s a series of 13 essays all devoted to what an introduction describes as a “feminist intersectional trauma-informed approach to reimagine and transform CAF culture.”

The issue’s central essay is co-written by Maya Eichler, a professor of political and Canadian studies and women’s studies at Halifax’s Mount Saint Vincent University.
Eichler paints a picture of a “problematic military culture” that is shot through with “patriarchy, colonialism, white supremacy, heteronormativity, ableism, and classism.”

After devoting extended paragraphs to each cultural infraction, Eichler concludes that the Armed Forces must be remade via an “anti-oppression framework” of “feminist, decolonial, critical race, queer, critical disability, and critical political economy theories.”

Eichler notes this is “not an easy task, but a necessary one if DND/CAF wants to move the yardstick on culture change.”

Another feature, by York University psychotherapist Tammy George, frames the Forces as being poisoned by “institutional whiteness.”

“In order for meaningful, sustained culture change to occur, there must be a recognition by the white majority of the way in which whiteness organizes lives,” she writes.

Leigh Spanner, a feminist post-doctoral research fellow, wrote that the CAF’S system of supporting military families was anti-feminist and patriarchal.
Ash Grover, a researcher in “feminist anti-militarism,” argues that the military might have fewer instances of post-traumatic stress disorder if it paid closer attention to “anti-oppressive theory” and how “acts of ‘othering’ can result in responses typically associated with post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Alan Okros, a professor at Royal Military College, writes that the military will never escape its harmful practices unless it can move beyond an identity that prioritizes “violence and aggression, institutional unity and hierarchy.”

On the whole, the issue’s contributors are open about the fact that they are adherents of “critical race theory” — a term that appears in the text five times.
“Critical race theory,” sometimes called “anti-racism” or “diversity, equity and inclusion” is very different than traditional Canadian notions of tolerance or racial sensitivity.

Developed in the United States, it holds that the entire institutional structure of the West is irredeemably racist, and that “equity” can only be achieved by prescribing special treatment for “equity-seeking groups.”

Anti-racism doctrine holds that mere neutrality on someone’s ethnicity or background is itself racist, since it inevitably results in disparate outcomes.
In just the last few years, the Trudeau government has leaned hard into anti-racism ideology. In 2021, the Privy Council issued an order that the federal public service would be informed by “anti-racist” tenets.

In 2023 the Trudeau government founded the Federal Anti-racism Secretariat with the explicit goal of overseeing funding, data-collection and policy that would be specifically directed along racial lines.

Throughout, the military has been one of the more conspicuous targets of this anti-racist makeover.

In 2020, the federal government stated publicly that the Department of National Defence was replete with “systemic racism and discrimination” and commissioned an audit on how it could be eliminated.

The audit’s final report — which included detailed research into the precise ethnic backgrounds of every Canadian Armed Forces member — would end up concluding that the military and the country it served were agents of white supremacy.

“Racism in Canada is not a glitch in the system; it is the system. Colonialism and intersecting systems such as patriarchy, heteronormativity and ableism constitute the root causes of inequality within Canada,” it read.

Ever since, senior military leadership has been open about stating that they are now an “anti-racist” organization committed to implementing the various prescriptions of critical race theory.

“The Defence Team is dedicated to becoming an anti-racist organization,” reads the introduction to a February “anti-racism tool kit” that was circulated to serving members.
Click to expand...
nationalpost.com

FIRST READING: The Canadian militaryâs all-in embrace of far-left 'anti-oppression' dogma

The official position of the Canadian Armed Forces is that they – and the country they serve – are irredeemably racist
nationalpost.com nationalpost.com

The new edition features this photo of a CAF member conferring with a soldier from the People’s Republic of China during the Canadian deployment to Mali in 2019. China easily ranks as Canada’s leading military and strategic rival, and the Royal Canadian Navy regularly deploys to the South China Sea as part of a standing check against Chinese expansionism. However, this innocuous photo is the only time that China is mentioned in the entire journal
 
Brad Sallows said:
I can only wonder what kind of "fuck it; we got this" conversation took place among the journal's head shed when they decided to move forward with turning their "military journal" into a platform for dogmatic social babble.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the knowledge that budget cuts are in bound had anything to do with it?

"You can't cut us, we're leading the government's top priority, culture change!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

daftandbarmy
    • Like
Why Success Doesn’t Lead to Satisfaction
Replies
7
Views
8K
Brad Sallows
Brad Sallows
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
Optimism
Replies
2
Views
5K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
daftandbarmy
‘Defence’ doesn’t fit the job of Canada’s military any more. Let’s create a Department of National Safety instead
2 3
Replies
46
Views
73K
foresterab
F
shawn5o
Can Scotland make it on its own, or does it need Westminster?
Replies
1
Views
9K
Brad Sallows
Brad Sallows
Retired AF Guy
Over 1000 criminals arrested in major sting operation
Replies
6
Views
12K
Good2Golf
Good2Golf
Back
Top