Seven months since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, against evidence and common sense, media, elected officials and health experts continue peddling the panic that gripped them in March.
Almost daily, headlines in the first week of October announced new records in the number of COVID-19 cases. This is mostly happening in Laurentian Canada, which is why Patty Hajdu, the federal health minister, Teresa Tam, the chief medical officer, and Justin Trudeau, the prime minister, rang bells about a second COVID-19 wave and renewed calls for stricter measures short of another devastating lockdown. Despite the contradictory details, panic is what threads the inconsistencies in their messages.
This panic did not arrive with the first few COVID-19 deaths. Let’s recall that Hadju, Tam and Trudeau initially assured us the risk for Canada was very low. Rather, the panic followed the release of statistical models. They did not know better when dread replaced common sense. There were no reliable data. The WHO and Chinese numbers could not be trusted, and images from Spain and Italy painted a grim picture.
So, governments resorted to theoretical models. Using Neil Ferguson’s model that predicted tens of millions of deaths from COVID-19, lockdowns were imposed. Based on such models, the federal government’s predictions released on April 9th warned of 44,000 deaths across Canada. Two days earlier, Albertans heard about the possibility of as many as 6,600 deaths for the province, a figure only one digit shy of full apocalyptic symbolism.
The models were wrong (Ferguson has been abominably wrong almost every time), and so were most decisions issued from them. Let’s remind ourselves that governments chose to lock us down so that the health system would not be overwhelmed. That was then. With sorrowful hearts and without minimizing the losses, we know better now.
Fresh data roll in daily. These data tell a story that does not justify the continued panic, the restrictions trampling liberties, the orders killing businesses, the health directives making public health even worse. Even with the current case resurgence in mind, they do not justify the levels of hardship, suffering, and deaths (yes, deaths!) resulting from government lockdown policies.
By October 6, the worldwide number of infections continued to rise while the number of deaths decreased. Spain, one of the hardest-hit countries, has 88per cent less casualties during the second wave of infections than it experienced in March having similar numbers of cases. Belgium, the European country with the worst mortality rate per population, has now 95.5per cent less deaths on the average than at the Spring peak, even though the second infection wave is larger. The same pattern for Italy and many others. Canada’s second wave infections are now (October 6) more numerous than at the May peak, but with 80per cent less deaths. The trend of increased infections, in other words, will not overwhelm health systems. The overwhelming problem is moral panic among decision makers.
Sweden, which refused to panic and did not lockdown, is in even better shape. Indeed, it is also experiencing a resurgence in infection cases. But with only half the size of the peak numbers now than it had in June, deaths are 98per cent less than in the Spring. Overall, the fears of a worse second wave are unfounded. Furthermore, Sweden’s unique case demonstrates that the government-imposed lockdown experiments are largely irrelevant to the advance or slowdown of COVID-19 infections.
Let’s protect the people at risk, and let’s do it well. The Laurentian provinces that are driving the second wave in Canada, still have a good number of infections shamefully continuing in long term care facilities.
But the time has come to stop obsessing about the number of cases, even if they are rising, which is what media and government websites single-mindedly report. Cases do not equal hospitalizations and they do not equal deaths. The time has come to stop being led by panic.
Conversely, there is ample evidence that the lockdown policies governments imposed on Canadians have increased a host of social and economic evils that may be worse than the disease they sought to prevent: they are corrupting parliamentary traditions, undermining democratic practices, curtailing the powers of Parliament, undermining national health and the national economic interest. They have contributed to bankrupting businesses, killing jobs, heaping mountains of debt, vaporizing savings, fostering spikes in numbers of suicides, drug overdoses, family breakdowns, domestic violence, child abuses, and much more.
The continued but misplaced fear about case numbers does not justify fostering the growing litany of government-inflicted miseries.
Marco Navarro-Génie is a columnist for the Western Standard, a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and the President of the Haultain Research Institute. He is co-author, with Barry Cooper, of the upcoming COVID-19: The Politics of a Pandemic Moral Panic.
GEROW: Libertarians are the principled option in BC Election
Polls show the Liberals losing badly to the NDP. Principled small-government voters should stop holding their noses and do the principled thing. Vote Libertarian.
After British Columbia’s NDP received a significant bump in their polling support, rumors began to spread that John Horgan wanted to take advantage of the opportunity and call a snap election. The Libertarian Party of BC was quick to warn the sitting Premier that this action was not only unwanted, but might also be illegal. However, the Covid-19 pandemic had created the perfect conditions for political opportunism and John Horgan was not going to let it go to waste.
The BC Liberals are the acknowledged biggest threat to John Horgan’s NDP, but they are not the Chretien consensus Liberals of 2001 and it’s doubtful that past reputation will carry the day. Their brand as a coalition of red Tories and center-left liberals does little to attract the small government, fiscally responsible voter. The first thing you’ll notice on the BC Liberal website is that there is no quick and easy way to understand their election platform. With Covid-19 as the number one issue, Liberal leader Andrew Wilkinson has skillfully skirted the hard questions.
Don Wilson – Leader of the BC Libertarian Party – hasn’t shied away from criticizing the NDP or the Liberals complicity in what he calls “authoritarian policies.” The first link on the BC Libertarian party website is COVID-19: A Return to Normal: “The current crisis management is disproportionate to the harms of the virus and causes more damage than it helps cure”.
Although they’re the only political party in BC advocating for a return to normal – a move guaranteed to generate support – that is hardly their most successful platform item. Since 1986 the BC Libertarians have advocated an end ICBC’s monopoly on auto insurance. You won’t put on too many kilometers anywhere from Fernie to Fort St. John without seeing their iconic bumper sticker.
That type of success comes at a price. “Imitation is the greatest form of flattery” said Don Wilson on Tuesday, October 8,2020 after Andrew Wilkinson announced that if elected they were following the Libertarians lead and would end ICBC’s monopoly on auto insurance. Just like legalized cannabis and same-sex marriage, the Libertarians have once again been vindicated, and once against without much in the way of credit. It’s a shame that it only took 34 years. Now it looks like they will be proven right again by denouncing this election as illegal.
Libertarian omniscience has an ear to the ground for future policy in British Columbia. They are the only party authentically advocating for reducing the cost of living by repealing regressive tax laws which hurt low income working families the most and raising the base exemption rate. They say they’ll eliminate the carbon tax and other sin taxes like the ones on tobacco and liquor.
There is no good argument to make for the BC Liberals being conservative in any sense of the word, other than they are the party backed by the federal Tories. Their platitudes and obscure non-commitment to any real tax reform is a disappointment to their voter base. Yet, Andrew Wilkinson decided to run attack ads against an 8-candidate roster called the Conservative Party of BC on the accusation that by vote-splitting, they spoiled wins for the Liberals in two ridings in 2017. Rather than putting forward any original ideas or standing on the remnants of fiscally responsible liberalism, Andrew Wilkinson steals platform items from the Libertarians and attacks actual conservatives. In doing so, he has made it clear that this race will be the last one where his party enjoys a chance at success.
This is a race between two far-left parties and a weak centre-left party. The need for responsible governance in British Columbia has become unavoidable and the political climate is forcing the traditional parties to adjust course, but voters in BC should simply be voting for the real thing. The 25 Libertarians are the party of ideas and two Conservatives hold the balance of votes in key swing ridings. This enough to form actual opposition to big government and irresponsible policy.
Polls show the Liberals losing badly to the NDP. Principled small-government voters should stop holding their noses and do the principled thing. Vote Libertarian.
Darcy Gerow is a columnist for the Western Standard
WAGNER: This isn’t the first time the CBC has tried to silence its critics
Michael Wagner writes that in 1986, the CBC tried to silence a study about its ideological bias.
In June 1986, the University of Manitoba hosted a conference of academic societies where scholars presented papers. One of these societies was the Canadian Communications Association (CCA), headed at the time by a Carleton journalism professor named Peter A. Bruck. A presentation was made to the CCA by University of Calgary political scientist Barry Cooper. He shared the results of an unpublished report entitled Bias on the CBC? A study of network AM radio. The CBC was extremely unhappy about Cooper’s report and tried to get it suppressed.
The controversy over Cooper’s study and the CBC’s reaction was newsworthy, and it was featured as the cover story of the July 21, 1986 issue of Alberta Report magazine.
Anecdotal evidence had led Prof. Cooper to become concerned about the apparent left-wing bias of the CBC, and he decided to determine if such bias actually existed by having five students monitor four of its most well-known current affairs programs on AM radio, namely, As It Happens, Sunday Morning, Morningside, and The House. Generally speaking, stories that were pro-defence, pro-business, and anti-union were categorized as right-wing, whereas those that took an opposite stance were categorized as left-wing. The results demonstrated a distinct leftist and Eastern bias in the CBC’s coverage.
Among the more specific findings detailed by Alberta Report were that “72 per cent of the stories evaluating government policy did so negatively; 62 per cent criticized from a left-wing perspective; 27 per cent from the centre, and 12 per cent from the right.” Furthermore, “Of the stories for which an ideological focus could be ascertained, 50 per cent were oriented to the left, 34 per cent to the centre, 15 per cent to the right.”
Coverage of Cooper’s study had also appeared in the Globe and Mail, prompting the CBC’s Toronto-based vice-president of English radio, Margaret Lyons, to write a letter to the editor where she dismissed it as “virtually ridiculous.” Susan Freedman, CBC’s Edmonton director of radio said, “I think it’s junk.”
However, Colin MacLean, CBC Edmonton’s arts, culture and entertainment reporter told an interesting story. He had covered a meeting of the Western Canada Concept at the Jubilee Auditorium for the CBC. There were about 300 people at the meeting, which was quiet and orderly. MacLean told Alberta Report, though, that “When I filed the story, Toronto said ‘We don’t want this. We want rednecks running rampant in the streets.’”
The CBC did not take Cooper’s study sitting down. As an article in the July 28, 1986 issue of Alberta Report explained, the CBC threatened legal action. Barry Kiefl, the director of research for the CBC, wrote a letter to Prof. Bruck of the CCA stating: “I am writing to inform the CCA that the CBC wishes your association to renounce this research and retract the paper from the record of the conference and inform all who heard or received the results of this action. The study in question had several methodological flaws making the findings invalid and the conclusions not proven.”
Kiefl went on to state, “The CBC feels that its renowned reputation as Canada’s most pre-eminent journalistic organization has been damaged by the release of the paper and we sincerely hope that the CCA will formally withdraw it from the conference record, preventing the need for any further discussion or litigation.”
Ted Byfield’s column in the same issue of the magazine noted that Kiefl’s letter was six pages long. As Byfield explained, “Such a letter could only be written by a public body that has lost all touch with practical reality, and has long ago abandoned any remote notion that it is responsible to the people who pay for it.”
Nothing of significance appears to have resulted from this episode, except embarrassment for the CBC – embarrassment for its childish reaction to Prof. Cooper’s report, and embarrassment for threats to get the report retracted and denounced.
In 2020, it’s the Western Standard’s turn to receive threats of legal action, albeit on different legal grounds.
The case for privatizing the CBC was strong even before its latest antics. Canada does not need a state broadcaster that unfairly competes with the private sector. It’s coverage of news has been unbalanced for decades, as Cooper’s work has demonstrated. The consistent bias is irritating and unfair for the conservative and libertarian-minded taxpayers who are forced to pay for it. There is a solution: privatize the CBC.
Michael Wagner is a columnist for the Western Standard. He has a PhD in political science from the University of Alberta. His books include ‘Alberta: Separatism Then and Now’ and ‘True Right: Genuine Conservative Leaders of Western Canada.’
How the CBC presented a rosey view of the Soviet Union during the Cold War
“The CBC created a smokescreen for Marxists before the fall of the Soviet Union, the ultimate “progressive” state. But it’s important to realize that during the Cold War, Canada’s taxpayer-funded state broadcaster ran interference for the most powerful Marxist dictatorship in history.”
Some conservatives and libertarians like to joke that the acronym of Canada’s national broadcaster – the CBC – stands for “Communist Broadcasting Corporation.” But a post-Cold War study by University of Calgary political scientist Barry Cooper presents information and analysis that may leave people wondering how much of a joke it really is.
Cooper studied the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for several years, and the most significant result of his efforts was the book, Sins of Omission: Shaping the News at CBC TV which was published by the prestigious University of Toronto Press in 1994. From the evidence presented in this book, it is clear that CBC TV had an affinity for the old Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
To conduct this study, Cooper poured over a large number of transcripts from TV broadcasts and compared what was said with the political reality of the situation being portrayed. When he began this work in the 1980s, he decided to focus on coverage of foreign affairs, and in particular, issues related to the Cold War and the Soviet Union.
One part of the study looks at how the internal affairs of the USSR were portrayed, including the Soviet occupation and withdrawal from Afghanistan, which was a major issue at the time. The general tendency in the coverage was to make it appear that the Soviet Union was much like Canada. As Cooper puts it, “Obvious external or elemental differences, such as the absence of genuine elections, the existence of a secret police, the concentration camps, and restrictive emigration policy, were ignored, played down, or euphemized into innocuous variations of normalcy. In short, the substantive political and, indeed, cultural differences between the political regimes established by communism in the USSR and those set up by liberal democracy in the West were minimized.”
In reality, the political life of the Soviet Union was very different from Canada’s due to the brutal nature of the Marxist ideology that guided its regime. To some degree, the CBC turned a blind eye to the suffering of the people in that country, giving Canadians a misleading, sugar-coated view of the communist regime
A major feature of the Cold War, of course, was the relationship between the Soviet Union and the United States. During the period studied by Cooper, there were a couple of summit meetings between the leaders of these two countries – Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan – that received considerable media coverage. Officials from both countries presented the views of their respective governments, but the CBC did not treat these statements in the same way. As Cooper puts it, “the surface meaning of Soviet accounts was overwhelmingly accepted at face value. Accounts by U.S. officials, in contrast, were severely scrutinized, and alternative visualizations were presented.” The CBC was skeptical of American claims, but rarely of Soviet claims.
There is considerably more detail in Cooper’s study carefully documenting his conclusions, but the long and the short of it is this: “The visualization of the summit meetings was remarkably consistent: the USSR was seen as a progressive and dynamic actor, the United States as a source of resistance to peace initiatives.” The CBC, Cooper writes, “advanced the vision of a progressive USSR and a dangerous United States.”
In short, government-paid journalists in a free country – Canada – sided with one of the most oppressive regimes in history. As Cooper puts it, “CBC visualizations were ‘objectively’ in the service of Soviet propaganda.”
Cooper goes on to note that the philosophy guiding CBC coverage of US-Soviet relations was “moral equivalence.” Basically, this view assumes that the USA and Soviet Union – liberal democracy and Marxist totalitarianism – have similar virtues and vices, so one side should not be seen as morally superior to the other.
But the “moral equivalence” position was garbage, as Cooper explains.
“The doctrine of moral equivalence, which is the articulate conceptual statement that the CBC operationalized in its coverage of the Soviet Union, ignored the most fundamental distinction in political life, the distinction between tyrannical and non-tyrannical forms of government. This omission led to such otherwise inexplicable curiosities as equating or balancing U.S. support for the Afghan mujahedeen with the Soviet invasion of that country. Moreover, some stories did more than bend over backwards or forwards to excuse the actions of a tyranny.”
So there you have it. The CBC created a smokescreen for Marxists before the fall of the Soviet Union, the ultimate “progressive” state. But it’s important to realize that during the Cold War, Canada’s taxpayer-funded state broadcaster ran interference for the most powerful Marxist dictatorship in history.
30 years after the end of the Cold War we are left to consider: what is the CBC’s agenda for us now?
Michael Wagner is columnist for the Western Standard. He has a PhD in political science from the University of Alberta. His books include ‘Alberta: Separatism Then and Now’ and ‘True Right: Genuine Conservative Leaders of Western Canada.’
Kenney says Albertans may get ‘multi-issues’ referendum
RCMP able to save ice-bound calf in northern B.C.
O’Toole says party unity is the only way to beat Trudeau
EXCLUSIVE: CN Rail to send emergency propane shipments to Quebec
EXCLUSIVE: Teamsters union could block emergency propane shipment to Quebec
ANDRUS: Trudeau has bet double-or-nothing on Freeland to pacify with West
Sign up for the Western Standard Newsletter
News2 days ago
Western Standard responds to CBC legal threat: “No.”
Opinion4 days ago
Nenshi’s threat to annex surrounding communities is petty bullying
News3 days ago
NDP prop up Trudeau’s Liberals in confidence vote
News5 days ago
Liberals approve Alberta pipeline
News1 day ago
Edmonton NDP MP slammed for asking feds to stop health transfers to Alberta
News3 days ago
Trudeau gave $237-million contract benefiting Liberal buddy’s company
News5 days ago
B.C. premier sued for breaking election law
Watch1 day ago
CONTEST: Best CBC parody logo