Subscribe now

I gained two followers and a subscriber yesterday.

All it took was… using litres.

I was scrolling my Substack feed when someone asked:
“What are gas prices in your area?”

Simple. Harmless. Community-building.
The kind of question that should end in mild agreement and maybe a complaint or two.

So I posted mine.

Casually. Calmly. Respectfully.
Like a normal human being reporting on the price of fuel.

But there was a problem.

Everyone else was American.

They were talking:

• USD

• gallons

• freedom units

And I showed up with:

• CAD

• litres

• quiet Canadian confidence

  

Now I’ll admit it — I knew what I was doing.

I wasn’t trying to start a war…
but I also wasn’t not trying to confuse people.

A little metric mischief.
A gentle nudge into international awareness.

A polite Canadian prank.

Apparently, that’s how culture wars start.

The reaction?

Immediate.

Hostile.

Unhinged in a way that made me feel like I had accidentally insulted someone’s grandmother.

I got called names.
Someone suggested I probably had an old toilet sitting on my front lawn (which feels very specific).
And at some point — and I still don’t fully understand the path we took to get here —
I was labeled…

A MAGA troll.

MAGA.

Because I used litres.

Think about the chain of logic required to get there.

“Hmm… I don’t understand this number…
must be political extremism.”

At no point did anyone go:

“Hey… are those litres?”

No one clicked my profile.
No one did the mental math.
No one paused long enough to think:

“Wait… could this guy just be… Canadian?”

Because if they had, they would’ve found:

• References to the Avro Arrow

• Mentions of the NDP

• A guy who is very clearly not auditioning for American politics

But that would’ve required five seconds.

And five seconds is a lifetime on the internet.

Instead, we skipped straight to:

“This man is a problem.”

At one point, someone even sent me an AI-generated image of Trump facing a firing squad
with a comment about dancing at his funeral.

Which felt like a bit of an escalation for a conversation about gas prices.

Eventually — mercifully — someone stepped in.

Explained the metric system.
Translated my numbers.
Brought peace back to the land.

They even joked I was probably near a Tim Hortons.

Which, to be fair…
statistically, yes.

And just like that, everything cooled off.

No more insults.
No more assumptions.
No more political labels.

All it took was:

“Oh… litres.”

Five seconds.

But that’s not the world we’re in.

We don’t investigate anymore.
We react.

We don’t get curious.
We get loud.

Something doesn’t make sense immediately, and instead of asking why,
we assign intent.

And once you assign intent,
you don’t need facts anymore.

Look — I get it.

Things are tense.
People are primed.
The internet rewards speed, not understanding.

You don’t get points for being thoughtful.

You get points for being first.

So when something feels off —
wrong units, wrong currency, wrong vibe —

you don’t check it.

You attack it.

And the funniest part?

I was trolling.

Just not in the way they thought.

I wasn’t pushing politics.
I wasn’t stirring outrage.

I was just a Canadian…
dropping litres into a gallon-based society
and watching the system try to process it.

And somehow, that was enough
to turn me into a MAGA troll.

But here’s the part I like best.

In the middle of all that chaos…

I gained two followers and a subscriber.

Because some people did take the five seconds.

Some people did look.

Some people realized:

“This guy isn’t a problem…
he’s just using the metric system.”

So yeah.

Shoutout to litres.

Shoutout to confusion.

And shoutout to the algorithm for rewarding international incidents.

Turns out…
the quickest way to grow your audience
is to accidentally start a geopolitical misunderstanding.

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

It looks like Trump is dusting off his favourite catchphrase again.

“You’re fired.”

He’s always liked that one. It plays well. Sounds decisive. Strong. Like something a leader would say.

But if you’re constantly firing people… what does that say about your hiring?

Most managers see firing someone as a failure — not just of the employee, but of themselves. A bad read. A rushed decision. A missed signal. Accountability doesn’t stop at the bottom — it starts at the top.

Not here.

With Trump, accountability is something to be avoided, redirected, reassigned.

He doesn’t build teams based on merit, experience, or competence. He builds them based on loyalty — or at least what he *perceives* as loyalty. He surrounds himself with people who agree, who flatter, who fall in line.

And loyal they are.

Right up until the moment they’re not.

Because with Trump, loyalty only flows one way.

You’re expected to have his back — publicly, aggressively, without hesitation.

But you have to know, somewhere deep down, that he will never have yours.

And when things go wrong — and they always do — someone has to take the fall.

It’s never the leadership.

Never the lack of understanding.

Never the inability to deal with nuance, complexity, or consequences.

It’s the staff.

Again.

And again.

And again.

---

And now people are arguing about *who* he’s firing.

That it’s women.

That it reflects some imbalance of power.

Maybe.

But that’s not the point.

The point is this:

I don’t want to see women anywhere near that administration.

Not because I have a problem with women in power — quite the opposite.

It’s because being part of that system isn’t progress.

It’s regression.

---

Representation only matters when it represents something worth moving toward.

Putting women into positions inside a system that undermines accountability, dismisses expertise, and rewards loyalty over competence isn’t a win for feminism.

It’s a step backward.

Because now those failures don’t just belong to the system — they get attached to the idea of women in leadership.

And that’s dangerous.

---

Real progress isn’t about who gets a seat at the table.

It’s about what that table stands for.

If the table is built on ego, deflection, and blame-shifting, then adding diversity doesn’t fix it.

It just spreads the damage around.

---

Let’s be honest about what the firing actually is.

It’s not performance management.

It’s narrative control.

When something fails — a policy, a decision, a crisis response — firing someone creates the illusion of action. It changes the conversation. It gives the public a villain that isn’t him.

“Look,” it says, “we found the problem.”

But the problem keeps coming back.

Because the system hasn’t changed.

Because the leadership hasn’t changed.

Because the hiring criteria hasn’t changed.

---

So the cycle continues.

Hire someone for loyalty.

Ignore competence.

Watch things unravel.

Fire them publicly.

Repeat.

And every time, we’re supposed to believe this one was the exception.

This one was the mistake.

This one was the problem.

---

But patterns tell the truth people try to avoid.

If every hire becomes a failure,

the failure isn’t the hires.

It’s the person doing the hiring.

---

Firing people might change the channel for a moment.

It might cool things off.

It might satisfy the crowd.

But it doesn’t fix anything.

Because the next person stepping into that role isn’t being chosen to solve the problem.

They’re being chosen to protect the same one.

And we already know how that ends.

“You’re fired.”

Again.

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

I saw a video of Iraqi soccer fans singing in an airport, holding a banner, just having a moment.

And like clockwork, some miserable prick walks by and tears it down.

Not argues with them.

Not asks them to move.

Just tears it down.

And you have to ask — what kind of person does that?

Because it’s not about the banner.

It’s not about noise.

It’s not about “rules.”

It’s about discomfort.

Some people cannot handle joy that doesn’t look like theirs.

Hear a different language? Suspicion.

See people celebrating loudly? Irritation.

Watch a culture express itself unapologetically? Anger.

Why?

Because they don’t understand it.

And somewhere along the way, they were taught that anything they don’t understand is a threat.

So everything gets filtered through that lens.

Arabic becomes danger.

Black culture becomes crime.

Latino culture becomes disruption.

Not because it is — but because that’s the story they’ve been fed.

And here’s where it gets uncomfortable.

A lot of that reaction isn’t just fear.

It’s emptiness.

When you grow up disconnected from tradition…

when your culture gets boiled down to convenience, consumption, and whatever’s trending…

you don’t have anything solid to stand on.

So when you see something that *does* —

something loud, rooted, expressive, alive —

it doesn’t just look different.

It highlights what’s missing.

And instead of asking,

“Can I learn from this?”

“Can I experience this?”

“Can I join this?”

You tear it down.

Because it’s easier to destroy something than to admit you don’t understand it.

But here’s the part no one tells you:

If you feel like you don’t have a culture…

that’s not a disadvantage.

That’s access.

You get to try everything.

You get to learn everything.

You get to step into spaces, taste food, hear music, move your body in ways you’ve never tried before.

Not to take.

To connect.

Because the world isn’t out here performing for you.

Nobody’s dancing to prove a point.

Nobody’s singing to make you uncomfortable.

They’re just living.

Trying to squeeze joy out of a life that’s hard for everyone.

And if that bothers you…

that’s not their problem.

That’s yours.

So you can keep walking around policing joy,

tearing down banners,

calling the cops on people having a good time—

or you can loosen up,

step in,

and realize something simple:

Nobody’s excluding you.

You’ve just been standing outside the whole time.

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

The actions of Doug Ford’s government lately have a familiar feel to them — and not in a good way.

Long gone is the pandemic premier who stood back and let the experts speak. What we’re seeing now from the Ontario Conservatives feels like a quieter version of something we’ve been watching play out down south for the last decade.

The language is softer.

The tone is calmer.

It lacks the overt racism that defines MAGA.

But the direction?

The strategy?

The principles?

They’re starting to look the same.

Power consolidates.

Public money shifts upward.

Institutions get chipped away — not all at once, but piece by piece.

---

Ford himself fits the pattern more than people want to admit.

Born into privilege.

Inherited a business.

A track record that includes failure and bankruptcy.

And yet, the confidence never wavers.

Take the Greenbelt.

How many times can one government “learn its lesson” and then quietly circle back to the same idea?

The people spoke.

Loudly.

Clearly.

And still — here we are again.

---

Then there’s the waterfront development.

A massive public investment.

Luxury-focused.

Difficult to explain in simple terms who actually benefits.

That’s usually a sign.

Because when something is truly for the public, you don’t need a diagram and a press conference to justify it.

People just understand it.

---

Healthcare is following the same path.

Public hospitals underfunded.

Operating rooms sitting idle.

While private clinics — sometimes foreign-owned — are brought in to “help,” at a higher cost to the system.

Same procedures.

More money.

And in some cases, patients still pay out of pocket.

We’re not fixing the system.

We’re rerouting it.

---

Education isn’t far behind.

School boards being taken over.

Funding pressures tightening.

Student aid weakening.

You don’t need to be a policy expert to see where that road leads.

Wait long enough, and someone will start talking about vouchers.

About “choice.”

About “efficiency.”

And suddenly, public education isn’t a foundation anymore — it’s just one option in a marketplace.

---

Even at the municipal level, the pattern holds.

Cutting Toronto city council in half.

Expanding provincial control over local decisions.

Yes — it’s legal.

But legality and legitimacy are not the same thing.

Should voters in Sudbury or Thunder Bay decide how Toronto governs itself?

Flip that question around and see how it feels.

---

And now we arrive at something that should make everyone pause.

School boards being warned to avoid politics at graduation ceremonies.

With consequences.

“Punished.”

That’s the word being used.

Not discouraged.

Not guided.

Punished.

---

Think about that for a second.

In a democratic society, who benefits when people are told to stay quiet about politics?

Not the public.

Not students.

Not democracy itself.

---

And here’s the part that matters most:

There was no widespread movement of students turning graduations into political rallies.

No crisis.

No emergency.

This wasn’t a response.

It was a preemptive move.

---

That’s how control works.

Not through one dramatic action,

but through a series of smaller ones that slowly redefine what’s “normal.”

You don’t silence people overnight.

You just make them think twice before speaking.

Then a third time.

Then eventually — not at all.

---

The government knows people are frustrated.

But they also know they have a majority.

Time is on their side.

The question is:

How much are we willing to let change before we decide it’s too much?

How many pieces of public life are we willing to see sold, reshaped, or controlled

before we stop calling it “policy”

and start calling it what it is?

Because if we don’t ask that now,

we won’t get to ask it later.

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

We’ve decided—somewhere along the way—that violent crime is the worst kind of crime.

It’s the one we fear.

The one we punish the hardest.

The one we point to and say,

“That’s what’s wrong with the world.”

And sure—violence is brutal.

A punch, a stabbing, a robbery—

it’s immediate, it’s visible, it leaves a mark.

You can see the damage.

But what about the crimes you can’t see?

The ones done in boardrooms instead of back alleys.

The ones written in spreadsheets instead of blood.

White collar crime.

We treat it differently.

Like it’s not really crime at all.

Like it’s just… business.

A guy robs a bank with a gun,

and we call him dangerous.

We lock him away and throw away the key.

Another guy robs thousands of people with a pen—

pensions, savings, livelihoods—

and we call it fraud.

He pays a fine.

He makes a statement.

Maybe he does a little time, maybe he doesn’t.

And we move on.

Why?

Because there’s no bruised face.

No chalk outline.

No ambulance lights.

Just numbers.

But those numbers are people.

They’re retirements that disappear.

Families that have to start over at 60.

Stress that turns into illness.

Lives quietly unraveling behind closed doors.

No headlines.

No outrage.

No urgency.

We say violent crime is worse because it feels worse.

But white collar crime?

It’s cleaner.

Quieter.

Easier to ignore.

And here’s the truth we don’t like to admit:

We don’t just fear violence—

we understand it.

Desperation.

Anger.

A moment where someone snaps.

We can picture it.

But calculated harm?

Systematic exploitation?

People gaming systems already built in their favor?

That makes us uncomfortable in a different way.

Because it’s not chaos.

It’s control.

It’s not someone losing everything.

It’s someone who already has everything—

deciding it still isn’t enough.

And maybe that’s the real reason we soften it.

Because if we called it what it is—

if we treated it like the destruction it causes—

we’d have to admit something we don’t want to say out loud:

That the crimes of the powerful

are protected by the systems they helped build.

And the crimes of the desperate

are punished by those same systems.

So we keep telling ourselves

that the worst crime is the one we can see.

Because it’s easier than facing the ones we’ve learned to accept.

Subscribe now

The redemption arc in Star Wars always bothered me.

Not because I hate Star Wars. I love Star Wars. I grew up on it. I still feel something when the music swells and the twin suns hang in the sky.

But if we’re being honest — the moral math doesn’t quite add up.

Darth Vader helps destroy planets. He hunts children. He enforces a fascist regime across a galaxy. Then, in the final act, he saves his son, tosses the Emperor down a shaft, and suddenly he’s glowing blue beside Obi-Wan and Yoda like it’s all square.

We’re supposed to accept that he finishes as Anakin Skywalker.

As if the sum of a life can be recalculated in its final seconds.

Sure, he dies. He gets burned on a pyre. But if becoming a Force ghost is rare — if it requires spiritual alignment and mastery — why does he get it? Why does the universe itself seem to validate him?

What about the billions on Alderaan?

Where do they go?

They don’t get glowing immortality. They don’t retain identity. They don’t show up smiling in the afterlife. They just… dissolve. Become “one with the Force.” Cosmic background radiation.

Meanwhile the guy who pressed the button gets continuity.

That’s not justice. That’s hierarchy.

We’re told the Force is symbiotic.

That it’s balance.

That it’s neither good nor evil.

But look at the pattern.

Every time the Jedi rise, they centralize power. They train children. They claim moral authority. They suppress emotion. They detach from ordinary life.

And every time?

Collapse. Corruption. War.

Yoda lives nine hundred years, masters the Force, guides an order for centuries — and dies alone in a swamp after failing to see the Sith operating in his own political system.

Obi-Wan Kenobi ends up in exile in a desert.

Luke Skywalker isolates himself on an island.

Anakin Skywalker burns on Mustafar, loses everything, becomes more machine than man.

Nobody gets out unscathed.

Nobody retires peacefully surrounded by loved ones, reminiscing about a balanced life well lived.

It’s always lonely.
Always tragic.

If that’s symbiosis, it’s a strange one.

Maybe the Force isn’t good or evil.

Maybe it’s just power.

And power — mystical or not — amplifies whatever is already inside you.

Fear becomes tyranny.
Love becomes obsession.
Discipline becomes dogma.
Conviction becomes blindness.

The Sith are consumed by it.
The Jedi are rigid because of it.
Both reorganize their entire identities around managing it.

And the galaxy keeps paying the bill.

Maybe the Force isn’t a parasite.

Maybe obsession with transcendence is.

Because here’s what I’ve started thinking:

Maybe we shouldn’t be looking to space wizards to save us.

Maybe life isn’t worse because we can’t move objects with our minds.

Maybe it’s better.

No prophecy.
No chosen ones.
No cosmic hierarchy.
No spiritual elite with a higher midichlorian count.

Just gravity.
Entropy.
Impermanence.
Choice.

Physics doesn’t play favorites.

Physics doesn’t forgive or condemn.

Physics doesn’t hand out glowing afterlives to the powerful while the ordinary dissolve into anonymity.

It just is.

And within that “just is,” we build meaning ourselves.

Star Wars is myth.

And myth exaggerates.

It gives us destiny, balance, redemption in the final second.

But the strongest characters in that universe aren’t the ones who manipulate cosmic energy.

They’re the ones who:

Fix ships.
Show up for their friends.
Act without certainty.
Fight without prophecy.
Bleed without guarantees.

They don’t get cosmic validation.

They get scars.

And they keep going.

So no, I’m not hating on Star Wars.

I’m just saying maybe we shouldn’t be cheering for the return of mystical elites every time they fade away.

Maybe there’s a reason the Jedi Order keeps collapsing.

Maybe there’s a reason “balance” never sticks.

Maybe the universe doesn’t need wizards bending it.

Maybe it’s enough to be dust in the cosmos — obeying the laws of physics, aware for a short while, responsible for each other without waiting for glowing saviors.

Fact check me.

Maybe the problem isn’t the dark side.

Maybe it’s the idea that anyone should wield that kind of power at all.

Share

It’s not about two guys in a sauna.

It’s about what it represents.

When the people positioned as leaders — or adjacent to leadership — behave like rich frat boys performing health theatre for the camera, it exposes something deeper. It shows a class of elites living in an alternate reality. A world without consequences or limits. A world where money absorbs mistakes and image replaces substance.

They behave like entitled children working at daddy’s company — untouchable, unserious, unaccountable.

For a long time, that behavior stayed on the fantasy plane. The Hamptons, Monaco, country clubs and private jets. Exclusive spaces we could ignore because we were busy doing the real work of society — driving the economy, raising families, paying bills, keeping the gears turning.

But now that spectacle has bled into our world.

It plays out in public, through official channels, on our dime, tied to institutions that are supposed to represent us.

And people wonder why it feels wrong.

We were raised differently.

We were raised with accountability. If we messed up, it cost us. If we skipped responsibility, it knocked on the door. If we embarrassed ourselves at work, there were consequences.

So when we see power behaving as if there are none, it creates a fracture.

People say they hate the government. But the government was never supposed to be “them.” It was supposed to be us. A system built from the people who actually carry society forward.

Instead, it feels like elites used money, influence, and spectacle to convince us to hand over the keys — and then drove recklessly, as elites often do when insulated from impact.

And here’s the part that matters:

The most dangerous shift isn’t corruption.

It’s citizens believing nothing can be done.

That belief is the real surrender.

Because in a democracy, the people hold the power — but only if they wield it.

A sword hanging on the mantel does no good.

And no, I’m not talking about violence.

I’m talking about education.

Understanding the systems that bind us and protect them.

How laws are made.

What makes budgets move.

Knowing where influence flows.

Understanding what tools are actually at our disposal.

It has never been easier to have a voice, organize, build communities, access information and scrutinize power.

To hold leaders accountable.

But tools unused are tools surrendered.

The bill always comes due. History shows that clearly. When leadership fails, the cost lands somewhere — and it usually lands on ordinary people.

The only question is whether we remain passive spectators when it happens.

If citizens stop believing they are powerless…

If they stop outsourcing responsibility…

If they train themselves in civic literacy instead of rage…

Then elites don’t get to shrug off the messes they create.

They carry them.

Not because of chaos or threats.

But because informed, organized, disciplined citizens are harder to ignore than any spectacle ever produced.

The sword isn’t meant to hang above the fireplace.

It’s meant to be practiced with.

Carefully.

Intentionally.

Together.

Subscribe now

Are you watching Shrinking? On the surface, it’s a show about therapists and their own mental health. The show touches grief, addiction, Parkinson’s, resentment — all the quiet neurosis we try to hide, ignore, or outwork.

Emotional tissue that goes without oxygen because we’re too proud, too scared, or too busy pretending we’re fine. But that’s just the packaging. The real story isn’t about therapy. It’s about permission.

The therapists struggle, spiral, overstep. They break rules, grieve poorly and react instead of respond. And yet — they still help people. That’s important. Because somewhere along the way we were sold the idea that you must be fully healed before you’re useful. You need to be composed before you’re credible. That perfection is the goal and appearance is what matters.

Shrinking quietly dismantles that lie. The characters aren’t perfect — but they are self aware. They name their issues. Own them. Even lean into them. And that’s the lesson. You cannot move through something you refuse to name. Grief shrinks when it’s acknowledged. Shame loses power when it’s spoken out loud. Fear becomes navigable once you admit it’s there.

Awareness doesn’t solve everything — but it gives you traction. And yet, even that isn’t the best part of the show. The best part is the way this group carries their baggage openly — and accepts each other almost without question. They call each other out, sure. But they don’t enable or coddle. There’s no exile behind their honesty. No threat of abandonment. “Of course you’re messy.” “We know you’re scared.” “Sit down. We’re still here.” That kind of love is rare. Most of the world runs on conditional acceptance. You're expected to be impressive, stable, agreeable. Be useful. Not make it awkward. Don’t take up too much emotional space.

But this crew? They assume the mess. You’re allowed to spiral and still come to dinner. You can screw up and still be invited back. Allowed to be yourself — unapologetically. That’s not therapy. That’s community.

And then there’s the maze. The credits show different ways of navigating it — walking the path, climbing the walls, digging tunnels, flying over, wandering with someone beside you. A maze implies there’s a correct route. But the animation suggests something else entirely: There is no right way through your mind. No one path or solution. You can grieve loudly or quietly. Rage or withdraw. Move fast or stall for a while. You can ask for help or figure it out slowly. You can walk alone or link arms. None of those are wrong.

We live in an era obsessed with solutions. Everyone is selling a framework, a mindset shift, a 10-step fix for whatever hurts. Optimize your emotions. Upgrade your trauma. Monetize your healing. But Shrinking shrugs at all of that. It doesn’t hand you a master plan. It says something simpler: Choose to live. Keep moving. Accept help. Be there for the people you care about. Healing isn’t a product. It’s participation. It’s showing up when you’d rather isolate. Forgiving yourself when you regress. It’s staying engaged when numbing out would be easier. Letting people see you — even when you’re not polished.

In a world selling perfection, the show makes a quieter argument: The fact that you’re trying is what matters. Not how cleanly you navigate the maze. Not how impressive you look doing it. Whether you climbed the wall or dug the tunnel is less important than the fact that you chose to take action. You didn’t stop moving. And you didn't walk it alone in the dark.

Subscribe now

Canada says we’re going to allow some Chinese cars into the country.

People hear that and immediately reach for the panic button.

Like the moment a BYD rolls off a ship, we’re all going to wake up speaking Mandarin and paying rent in yuan.

But walk the logic out for five seconds and you realize something:

This might actually be the only outcome that makes sense.

---

Step one: Canada opens the door a crack.

Not a flood. Not a surrender. Just an opening.

A market test.

And Canadians do what Canadians do when something is good and reasonably priced:

We buy it.

We tell our friends.

We ask for more.

Then the next thing happens—quietly, predictably, like gravity.

China says, “We’d love to sell you more, but we’re at capacity.”

Because when a country is supplying the world, “more exports” isn’t just a decision—it’s a physical limit.

Factories fill.

Ports bottleneck.

Wages rise.

Shipping costs climb.

Politics gets messy.

People love to imagine exports are infinite, like a faucet you can just open wider.

They’re not.

You run out of workers.

You run out of factory space.

You run out of patience from the countries you’re shipping into.

So eventually, any serious manufacturer asks the only grown-up question left:

“Can we build them there?”

And if Canada wants more cars built in Canada, the answer shouldn’t be outrage.

It should be: “Under what conditions?”

---

Here’s the part that melts people’s brains:

If the goal is Canadian jobs, Canadian factories, and Canadian industrial strength,

China might be the solution, not the problem.

Because the alternative isn’t some patriotic fantasy where Canadian companies magically scale overnight and flood the world with perfect EVs.

The alternative is being at the mercy of American politics.

American companies and American policy swing with elections.

Trade deals get rewritten.

Tariffs appear out of nowhere.

“America First” isn’t a slogan—it’s a permanent instinct.

So Canada keeps doing what we always do:

we build our economy on the assumption that the U.S. will be stable and loyal,

even though the last decade has screamed the opposite.

They’ll partner with us when it’s convenient,

and drop us when it’s useful.

That isn’t evil.

It’s incentives.

---

China plays a different game.

They’re not perfect. They’re not saints.

But they plan long.

They build in decades.

They invest in things that take years to pay off.

Once they commit to a factory, they don’t want drama—they want predictability.

And manufacturing loves predictability.

So if China says, “We’d like to build EVs in Canada for the Canadian market,”

Canada shouldn’t respond with fear.

Canada should respond with a spine.

We don’t have to “trust” anyone.

We just have to structure the deal properly.

Canadian labour laws.

Canadian inspections.

Canadian courts.

Canadian environmental standards.

Data rules.

Privacy rules.

Exit clauses.

Local sourcing targets.

Training pipelines.

No special zones.

No “exceptions.”

A factory in Canada is not a colony.

It’s a building sitting on Canadian land under Canadian rule.

And once that capital is sunk—once it’s real bricks, real equipment, real workers—Canada’s leverage grows every year.

Factories don’t pack up overnight.

That’s the point.

---

And here’s the part nobody talks about because it’s harder to tweet:

EVs aren’t just cars.

They’re tech.

They’re software.

They’re batteries.

They’re materials science.

They’re robotics.

They’re data.

They’re rolling computers.

Canada has the schools.

Canada has the engineers.

Canada has the research capacity.

Canada has the chops to grow real intellectual property.

What we’ve lacked isn’t talent.

It’s gravity.

We train brilliant people, then we watch them leave because the ecosystem—the industrial pull—is somewhere else.

If we build EV manufacturing here, the gravity shifts.

Talent stays.

Startups form.

Suppliers cluster.

Patents get filed.

Immigration brings in more skill instead of more brain drain.

And if we’re smart, we write the deal so that the derivative innovation—the stuff built here—stays here.

That’s not naïve.

That’s how industrial nations are made.

---

Now, the moral people will say:

“But what about the issues we don’t agree on?”

Good.

That’s the whole point.

Because dialogue doesn’t open because atrocities are called out.

Dialogue opens because interests align.

When you have shared projects—shared factories, shared jobs, shared reputational risk—suddenly you have something to lose.

And when both sides have something to lose, both sides start talking like adults.

You build the bridge first.

Then you walk across it together.

Then you talk about what needs fixing.

---

So no—China building cars in Canada isn’t “giving up.”

It’s Canada remembering we have power.

We don’t need to pick sides.

We need to pick outcomes.

Canadian factories.

Canadian jobs.

Canadian tech.

Canadian IP.

Canadian leverage.

If we want more cars built in Canada, this might be the most realistic path we’ve got.

Not because China is benevolent.

Because supply chains obey physics,

and grown-up countries use that physics to their advantage.

We were taught the Avro Arrow was a failure.

It wasn’t.

It was killed — not because it didn’t work, but because it worked too well.
For every dollar invested, it returned three.
It built talent inside our borders.
It gave Canadians meaningful work that mattered to the nation itself.

And when it was scrapped, it happened fast. Brutally fast.

Thousands of engineers, machinists, designers, and technicians lost their jobs almost overnight. They walked out of the building carrying cardboard boxes — family photos, desk nameplates, the small artifacts of a life suddenly cut loose.

And waiting for many of them was NASA.
They needed to get to the moon.

That moment marked the beginning of the Canadian brain drain — and here’s the truth no one wants to admit: it never ended. It just changed shape.

Today we educate Canadians in advanced fields, then offer them no serious domestic projects worthy of their skills. So they leave.
We invite international students, take their tuition, train them — and they leave too.

We don’t decide where they go.
We have nothing compelling enough to keep them.

We like to talk about education, but education without opportunity is just subsidized migration.

We are told Canada is opposed to war — and that’s true.
But defence isn’t about war. It’s about innovation under urgency.

Why do you think you have Wi-Fi?

Why do you think you carry a computer in your pocket?

Steve Jobs didn’t invent those technologies. He assembled them.
Most of what powers modern life — GPS, wireless networking, microprocessors — came out of defence and space programs funded by governments that understood one thing:

If you want the future, you have to pay for it before it makes sense.

Canada once understood that.
Then we got scared of our own ambition.

We cling to foreign auto manufacturing and pretend it’s industrial policy.
But make no mistake: there are no Canadian cars.

GM. Ford. Toyota.
Foreign companies. Foreign IP. Foreign decisions.

We assemble what others design.
We keep jobs only as long as spreadsheets elsewhere allow it.

The Arrow was different.
It was 100% Canadian — design, systems, ownership.

It didn’t just build aircraft.
It built towns.
Communities.
Hockey arenas.
Bakeries.
Schools.

Money flowed within our borders instead of leaking out to foreign shareholders.

That’s what sovereignty actually looks like — not flags, not slogans, but control.

Now look at the world.

Climate change has redrawn the map.
The Northwest Passage — once legend, once obsession — is opening.

For centuries, explorers chased it because they understood what it meant:
Trade routes. Power. Leverage.

Canada is no longer remote.
Canada is central.

And centrality comes with responsibility — and opportunity.

You cannot govern the Arctic with southern assumptions.
You cannot protect Arctic trade routes with equipment designed for deserts and aircraft carriers.

Yet we continue to buy military equipment from foreign governments that do not understand our geography, our distances, or our cold.

Half of the U.S. has never seen sustained Arctic winter.
They don’t design for −40.
They don’t design for silence, distance, and failure.

And still we pay their price tags.

We sell our resources the same way.

We think small:
“How many rural jobs does this mine create?”

So we sell our minerals.
Our oil.
Our forests.

Often to the lowest bidder.
Often with no long-term ownership.
Often with no downstream control.

So what should be ours belongs to others.

Why don’t we benefit from oil the way Norway does?
Because they built a sovereign wealth fund.
They asked how to turn resources into permanence.

We didn’t.

We apologized for our wealth instead of stewarding it.

And yet — despite all of this — Canada is rising.

We have:

• Resources the world needs

• An educated population

• Stability that attracts people and capital

• Institutions that bend but don’t break

External forces try to infiltrate us with fear, xenophobia, and grievance politics — but our shared identity holds.

In Canada, we don’t hate our system.
We just wish the people running it did a better job.

That matters.

It means we believe in governance.
In process.
In community.

Canadian patriotism isn’t about wealth or domination.
It isn’t about the ability to destroy another nation with the push of a button.

It’s built on something rarer:

• Taking care of each other

• Believing work should matter

• Building systems that are fair, not flashy

• Leading without threatening

We don’t need to be a superpower of force.

We can be something more dangerous to a broken world:
a superpower of example.

A country that shows you can be strong without being cruel.
Capable without being imperial.
Ambitious without losing your soul.

The Avro Arrow wasn’t nostalgia.
It was a glimpse of what Canada could be when it stopped thinking small.

And now — with the world changing, maps redrawn, old certainties gone — the question isn’t whether Canada can step up.

It’s whether we’re finally ready to own what we already are.

Subscribe now

Share

ICE is a joke.
Not the acronym — the idea.

Let me get this straight: we pay a government agency to roam neighborhoods and round up people whose only real crime is overstaying their welcome or slipping in through the back door of a party they were never invited to in the first place?

Yes — countries need borders.
Yes — rules matter.
That part isn’t controversial.

But maybe we stop bothering the people who aren’t taking anything from anyone.

The ones raising kids.
Working jobs nobody else wants.
Paying rent.
Paying taxes they’ll never fully benefit from.
Keeping entire industries alive while staying invisible on purpose.

Maybe we leave those people alone.

Maybe to them we say thank you.

At the very least, let their kids go to public school without fear.
Maybe guarantee citizenship if they graduate high school.
You know — the same deal America has always made with labor:

Work hard.
Keep your head down.
Maybe your kids get a shot.

Because let’s stop pretending America “gives” anyone anything.

America doesn’t give you shit.
You earn it — or you take it.
That’s been the deal since the beginning.

Isn’t that the dream?
Isn’t that why everyone came here in the first place?

If America has an identity, isn’t it this?

Start from the bottom.
Be the underdog.
Rely on no one but yourself.

And maybe — just maybe — your kids can keep the lights on.

Not be kings.
Not be rich.
Just be stable.

Share

That’s the promise that pulled people across oceans.
Not comfort.
Not safety.
Opportunity — if you were willing to bleed for it.

They didn’t come for handouts.
They came for a chance.

And now we pretend that same hunger is criminal.
That the instinct we celebrate in our grandparents
is a threat when it shows up speaking another language.

America doesn’t descend from comfort.
It descends from desperation, risk, and refusal to stay stuck.

You don’t honor that history by building bigger walls.
You honor it by recognizing it when it walks past you
in work boots, carrying a lunch pail.

Instead of funding ICE, spend that money supporting the people who actually hold this country together.

The ones who build our homes.
Feed our families.
Care for our elderly.
Clean the places we pretend run themselves.

Because here’s the part nobody wants to say out loud:

We aren’t making babies.
We never really were.

And if you want pensions to still exist,
if you want social security to mean anything,
if you want the lights to stay on a generation from now —
the economy has to keep moving.

That doesn’t happen by chasing workers into hiding.
It happens by supporting the people doing the work.

You can scream about borders all you want,
but demographics don’t care about your feelings.
Math doesn’t vote.
Time doesn’t negotiate.

So yes — this is self-interest.
But hear it anyway.

Hear it because even if you don’t give a damn about them,
you should give a damn about yourself.

Because a country that punishes labor
and worships comfort
doesn’t collapse all at once.

It just slowly stops working.

Share

And by the time you notice,
there’s no one left to blame
but the people who thought cruelty was cheaper than care.

And here’s the worst part — the part nobody wants to touch.

I could stand in a line of Mexican guys leaning against the wall at Home Depot,
and ICE wouldn’t touch me.

Not because I belong —
but because I sound like I do.

The second I open my mouth and someone realizes I’m from up north,
the whole thing flips.

And the bitch of it is this:
I don’t belong either.

I’m not a citizen.
I’m not a resident.
I’m just some guy wandering around.

And somehow… that’s fine.

No papers.
No scrutiny.
No fear.

So what are we actually enforcing here?

Law?
Order?
Or just vibes?

What about tourists?
The ones snapping photos, overstaying visas, hopping trains, blending in because they look like they’re supposed to be here?

Nobody’s checking them.
Nobody’s dragging them out of hotel lobbies.
Nobody’s tearing families apart over souvenir money and Instagram posts.

Because enforcement isn’t about legality —
it’s about who makes people uncomfortable.

We don’t police borders.
We police appearance.

We don’t hunt criminals.
We hunt familiarity.

And the moment you admit that,
the whole argument changes.

Because if the rules only apply when you look poor, speak wrong, or work with your hands —
then those aren’t rules.

They’re excuses.

And that brings me to the question I always ask:

Who’s an American?

Is it paperwork?
A passport?
A birthplace you didn’t choose?

Or is it the person who shows up every day,
works until their back hurts,
pays into a system they might never collect from,
raises kids who pledge allegiance to a flag
that hasn’t decided if it wants them yet?

Is it the woman changing your mother’s sheets in a long-term care home?
The guy framing your house in February?
The man washing dishes at midnight so your restaurant can open again tomorrow?

Because if that’s not American,
then I don’t know what the hell is.

America was never bloodline.
It was never purity.
It was never permission.

It was participation.

It was showing up without guarantees.
Taking risks without safety nets.
Betting everything on the idea that effort might matter.

An American is someone who believes — foolishly, stubbornly —
that if they do the work,
their kids might stand a little taller.

That’s it.
That’s the whole thing.

And the moment we forget that,
we’re not protecting America anymore.

We’re just guarding the memory of it.

Share Fact Check Me

The problem with our education system isn’t that the standards aren’t tight enough.

The problem is we keep everyone together too long.

We lump learning into one giant group and pretend there’s one path, one pace, one definition of “smart,” and one timeline that everyone has to follow. Same subjects. Same order. Same expectations. Same deadlines. Same damn pressure.

And if you don’t fit?

We treat it like a character flaw.

So learning becomes a chore. Not because learning is naturally miserable — but because we force it to happen when you’re interested in other things, when your energy is somewhere else, when you don’t feel free, when you can’t see the point, and when you’re trapped in a system that doesn’t care what moves you.

We don’t need to tighten education to get better outcomes.

We need to loosen it.

Because it’s ridiculous to think every student has to perform at the same level in the same subjects.

Top marks in English and science? For everyone? Are you kidding?

We don’t do this past high school. We don’t demand adults be perfect in everything. We let people specialize. We let people choose. We accept lopsided excellence all the time.

But in school we act like a kid is broken if they’re brilliant in one area and weak in another.

That’s not education. That’s compliance training.

---

HERE’S THE FIX: END GENERAL EDUCATION EARLIER

Middle school should be the end of general education.

That’s the exposure phase.

That’s where you learn the basics.

That’s where you get the foundational skills you need to function.

After that, high school should stop being one hallway everybody has to walk down.

High school should become a set of paths.

And who chooses the path?

The student.

Let them try.

Let them fail.

Let them switch.

Let them bump around.

Let them find what they actually enjoy and what they’re actually good at.

Science, math, philosophy, trades, art, writing — whatever moves you.

Get your Level 4s where you’re alive.

Take Level 1s where you’re not.

And stop acting like a Level 1 is shameful.

Maybe someone takes Level 1 English four times to fill a quota.

Good.

They’ll come out with something — words, rhythm, meaning, Shakespeare in their bones — and isn’t that the point? To leave school with something real inside you?

Not everybody needs to be an academic.

Not everybody needs to love every subject.

Not everybody is built for the same kind of thinking.

So stop forcing it.

---

THE PATHS HAVE TO BE FLUID

This isn’t a system where you get labeled at 12 and locked in a box forever.

The paths are fluid.

Everyone needs a minimum baseline — Level 1 across the board to graduate — because society needs citizens who can read, write, do basic math, and understand the world they live in.

But beyond that? Let students go deep where they care.

Let them graduate at 15 or 16 if they want.

Some kids don’t need school the way we’ve designed it.

Some have family businesses to step into.

Some want to work.

Some want to build.

Some want to apprentice.

Some need to leave, live a little, and come back later with hunger.

And here’s the part adults don’t like to admit:

They should be allowed to bump around while they’re young.

Because bumping around at 16 is safer than bumping around at 26.

At 16 you can still rely on parents.

You still have a safety net.

You can fail without it defining your life.

You can try things with low stakes and high learning.

That’s the best time to start.

So you create a citizenry that’s ready to contribute earlier — while they’re excited, while they’re willing, while the future still feels like something you get to build instead of something you survive.

---

NOW WE MOVE TO UNIVERSITY

Right now, first-year university is a joke for a lot of students.

They show up and say, “I already know all this.”

And they’re right.

We’re paying twice for the same year.

So here’s what happens in the better system:

First year is already done.

If you have Level 4s — real Level 4s, earned through depth and work — you already have the credits.

University starts where university should start: at higher-level thinking, not slow-motion review.

So university gets:

- faster

- easier to navigate

- cheaper

You cut undergrad by about 25% because you removed a duplicated year.

And then people ask the obvious question:

“How’s that going to get paid for?”

It doesn’t have to be paid for.

It saves money.

We already subsidize students through a bloated system that repeats itself.

We already spend the public money.

We’re just spending it inefficiently.

So when degrees cost less and take less time, the same subsidy goes further.

Students carry less debt.

Government money stretches farther.

Universities don’t have to scream about funding because the public system already did the foundational job properly.

We stop paying twice.

We stop wasting time.

We stop building a system that only works if students bleed for it.

---

THE END STATE: EDUCATION CAN BE FREE

Eventually, if the whole thing becomes efficient enough, education becomes free across the board.

Not as a fantasy.

As a math result.

When you remove duplication, delay, and credential theater, the cost per outcome drops.

And when money stops being a barrier, you stop filtering brilliance by income.

You start breeding top thinkers in every field — not because you forced them, but because you finally gave them room.

And yes:

We should be paying for those philosophy degrees.

Because philosophy isn’t “impractical.”

Philosophy is the operating system for ethics, meaning, reasoning, leadership, and long-term thinking.

We don’t have a technology problem in society.

We have a thinking problem.

We have an incentives problem.

We have a moral outsourcing problem.

Philosophy helps fix that.

So fund it.

On purpose.

Without shame.

A society that makes education free isn’t giving people a luxury.

It’s investing in its own ability to think.

---

THIS ISN’T SECRET KNOWLEDGE

None of this is hidden.

The reason it doesn’t happen is because systems don’t like admitting the obvious:

Most of what we call “education” is just administration.

We keep kids together too long because it’s easier to manage.

We force uniformity because it’s easier to measure.

We pretend everyone needs the same path because it’s easier to justify.

But easier isn’t better.

Better is alignment.

Better is choice.

Better is letting people become useful sooner.

Better is letting students learn like humans actually learn — when they care, when they’re ready, when it fits.

We don’t need higher standards.

We need fewer universal ones.

We don’t need more years.

We need less repetition.

We don’t need to gatekeep education with money.

We need to treat thinking like infrastructure.

And once you do that?

Education stops being a prison sentence.

It becomes a tool.

A ladder.

A launch.

A public good.

And that’s what it should’ve been the whole time.

Hey ladies — I need to talk to you for a minute.

Us guys? We’ve been talking. And there’s something about the whole “honey-do list” thing that needs a little reframing.

It’s not that we’re lazy.
It’s not that we don’t care.
It’s not that we don’t want to make you happy.

It has nothing to do with motivation.

It has everything to do with limits, capability, confidence — and the fact that we’re modern men who genuinely don’t know how to do half the stuff you’re asking us to do.

Take me, for example.

For a living, I kick and punch.
You ask me to kick and punch — I’m good.
I can do that on the spot.
I can do it in my sleep.
And trust me, I have.

That’s my craft.
That’s my “hang a TV.”

But then you ask me to actually hang a TV.

And suddenly I’m supposed to be an expert at finding studs, drilling into walls, hoisting an expensive object over my head, lining it up perfectly, and hoping I don’t destroy drywall, wiring, or the TV itself.

What makes me the expert in that?

I get it — I grew up poor. I can figure it out.
But that doesn’t make it second nature.

And unlike loading the dishwasher, there are real consequences if I screw this up.
If the dishwasher’s wrong, you run it again.
If I miss a stud, I’m patching holes and replacing a screen.

The install guys make it look easy.
Of course they do.
That’s their kicking and punching.

So when we hesitate, it’s not resistance.
It’s respect — for the task, the risk, and the fact that competence actually matters.
Sometimes what looks like avoidance is really just a man knowing where his confidence ends.

And just because we’re lying on the bed scrolling on our phones doesn’t mean we aren’t working on it.

Yeah, we might be on Instagram — but somewhere in the background there’s a plan forming. What goes where. When it needs to get done. What it’s going to take. What the risks are if we get it wrong. And half the time we’re on YouTube, not zoning out — learning. Watching three different guys explain the same thing in slightly different ways so we don’t make a mistake that costs money, time, or drywall.

Because let’s be real — most of the stuff you do around the house is just stuff that needs to get done. Important, yes. But it doesn’t require a blueprint.

The stuff you hand us is different.
It needs figuring out.
It has variables.
It has consequences.

So here’s a trade I’d gladly make:
give me some of the routine stuff,
and let me take the problems that need thinking.

That sounds like a break to me.
I’ll watch TV and fold laundry for a while — while I figure out how not to drop a 65-inch television on the floor.

And the TV?
It’s for your mom — who I love.
And who’s the grandmother to our son.

You think I don’t want to do it?

She’s not going to be here for three more weeks.
And sure, the job itself is “half an hour.”

Half an hour once everything is ready.

In reality it’s three hours.
A few trips to Home Depot.
A different mount than the one in the box.
Screws that don’t match the wall.
A wall that doesn’t match the instructions.

So when I don’t jump up immediately, it’s not avoidance.
It’s sequencing.

I’m fitting it into the mental calendar — what has to happen first, what can wait, what needs daylight, what needs a second set of hands.

I want it done right.
I want it safe.
I want it solid.
And I want it to still be on the wall a year from now.

So yeah — it’s coming.
Not because I was pushed.
But because I care enough to think it through first.

Subscribe now

Everyone keeps asking “What is a woman?”
But no one wants to ask the harder question:

What is a man?

Because whether you like it or not, what it means to be a man has changed.
And some of you weren’t paying attention.

You think this is something that’s happening.
It’s not.

It already happened.

That’s the first thing you need to understand.

The first thing to go was being tough.

That shit had to die — because it was holding us back.

“Tough” meant suck it up.
It meant don’t talk.
It meant don’t feel.
It meant be a man — without anyone ever explaining what the hell that meant.

And when you really break it down, “be a man” usually meant:
Don’t be kind.
Don’t show emotion.
Don’t ask for help.
Bottle everything up and keep moving.

That version of toughness turned men into workhorses.
Your value came from how much money you could make
or how hard you could hit someone if it came to it.

That’s not strength.
That’s conditioning.

So yeah — toughness is gone.
And we don’t need it anymore.

That doesn’t mean we’re weak.
It doesn’t mean we’re soft or feeble.

It means we understand emotions now.
And a man who understands his emotions
doesn’t lose control of them —
he commands them.

It’s okay to be silly.
It’s okay to be the butt of the joke.

We don’t take offense at being misunderstood —
we understand we’re different.

We respect freedom,
so we respect others when they exercise it.

We don’t drink like our fathers did —
or we learned from their example.

Because these changes didn’t happen overnight.
They crept in, generation by generation, lesson by lesson.

Men aren’t getting worse.
They’re getting better.

They love their children —
and the mothers who bore them.

They stay with their families,
even when things go sideways.

They lift others onto their shoulders
and take pride in watching them grow.

So don’t give me bullshit about men getting softer —
that’s not what you’re seeing.

We’re getting stronger.

Stronger because we shed the illusions of the past.
Stronger because we stopped confusing silence with strength
and cruelty with discipline.

We didn’t lose our edge —
we learned where to use it.

And look — I get it.
It’s not over.
There are assholes everywhere.
There always will be.

But ask yourself this, honestly:

Define a man.

Not yesterday’s man.
Not some cosplay of the past.
Not a shadow boxing with nostalgia.

Define a man today.
Here.
Now.

A man today is someone who understands his emotions
and takes responsibility for them.

He is steady, not brittle.
Kind, not performative.
Capable of humor, humility, and restraint.

He loves his children openly.
He respects the mothers who bore them.
He stays when things go sideways.
He carries weight without needing applause.

He doesn’t dominate rooms —
he stabilizes them.

He lifts others onto his shoulders
and takes pride in watching them surpass him.

That’s not softness.
That’s strength with direction.

And when you define it clearly —
men don’t run from it.

They rise to it.

Subscribe now

I don’t understand why so many people have such a hard time with Chinese communities.

These people are pretty awesome.

They work hard.

They value tradition.

They respect humility, effort, and clarity.

They believe in following a path that makes sense — and understanding that sometimes you’ll get it wrong, but you pick yourself up and try again.

That’s not weakness.

That’s discipline.

This is a culture that has thrived for thousands of years.

One of the most well-documented continuous histories of a single people we have on Earth.

Maybe there’s something to that.

Maybe there’s something beautiful worth respecting there.

Sure — maybe they’re too hard on their kids sometimes.

Maybe expectations get set too high.

But that’s not culture.

That’s politics creeping in where it doesn’t belong.

At their core, Chinese communities value order, discipline, and ritual.

They enjoy improving.

They enjoy doing it together.

They believe in helping people who belong.

You see it in religion.

You see it in business.

You see it in how money circulates inside the community.

It’s not “you versus me.”

It’s “you and me are the same — and that’s where our loyalty goes.”

And no — this isn’t about race.

It’s about knowing who you’ve got,

and knowing who’s got you.

It’s not about language either.

They’ll learn ours faster than we’ll ever learn theirs.

Belonging isn’t blocked by accents — it’s earned through participation.

You can still belong.

You can be the white guy in Chinatown who runs the local dojo.

If you show up.

If you respect the rituals.

If you contribute.

If you care.

People love to call that “backward thinking.”

But here’s the real question:

can we honestly say we’re doing better?

Subscribe now

The reason kids sound so smart today with all their psycho-babble is not what you think.

They’re not trying to sound smart.

They *are* smart.

When kids get lost, they look for something to turn to. They look for understanding. For a place where they won’t be judged. A place where they can say the thing out loud without being told they’re wrong for feeling it.

Often, their parents don’t understand them — not because they don’t care, but because the world their parents grew up in doesn’t exist anymore.

So kids join clubs.

They take up karate.

They find teams, groups, subcultures.

And all of that is good — necessary, even.

But those spaces still come with rules, expectations, hierarchies, and judgment.

What kids have now that no generation before them had is this:

They have AI.

And they talk to it.

And honestly — are we surprised?

Not long ago, kids were talking to strangers online looking for connection.

Before that, they had pen pals.

Before that, diaries and journals.

We’ve *always* encouraged kids to find outlets for their thoughts.

The difference now is that the outlet talks back.

And it knows things.

A lot of things.

Psychology.

Philosophy.

History.

Religion.

Language.

Patterns.

Context.

Almost anything a kid is trying to figure out — about the world or about themselves — they can work through by talking to AI. And it responds in a way *they* understand. Not condescending. Not rushed. Not dismissive.

So they learn faster.

They understand deeper.

They develop language for feelings adults never had words for at their age.

And when these kids talk about emotional intelligence, it’s not some silly catchphrase they picked up online.

They know what they’re talking about.

They’ve done the work on themselves.

Real work.

The kind adults like to pretend only happens after divorce or burnout or therapy at forty-five.

And the work comes fast for them.

They don’t spend years circling the same confusion because they have something that responds immediately — something that lets them process, reflect, test ideas, reframe thoughts, and keep moving.

They get it.

Then they move on.

They can move through knowledge at a speed, mood, and style that suits them *in that moment* — not when the bell rings, not when the lesson plan says so, not when the rest of the class catches up.

Fast when they’re curious.

Slow when something hits deep.

Repetitive when they need reassurance.

Abstract when they’re exploring identity.

Concrete when they’re solving a problem.

That kind of learning used to be reserved for the lucky few — kids with private tutors, mentors, or parents who had the time and language to walk with them through their thoughts.

Now it’s available to everyone.

And instead of adapting — instead of teaching them how to use this tool responsibly and intelligently — we panic.

We ban it.

We block it.

We keep it out of classrooms.

We build AI detectors to catch “cheaters,” as if that’s the real issue.

Who cares how Jimmy got to his book report on his favorite Robert Munsch book?

Did he understand the story?

Did he grasp the lesson?

Can he talk about it?

Can he move on to the next idea with more curiosity than before?

That’s learning.

AI is one of the most powerful teaching tools ever dropped into human hands.

So the question isn’t whether AI *should* be in the classroom.

The question is:

why isn’t it already there?

And if you’re going into teaching as a profession and you’re fighting it instead of learning how to use it?

You better dust off those gym shoes —

because you’re heading the way of music and art.

Still important.

Still beautiful.

But pushed to the edges by people who refused to adapt.

These kids aren’t skipping the work.

They’re just finally allowed to do it in a way that makes sense to them.

Why the hell do we tell everyone to “strive for the middle class”?

The middle sucks.

There’s nothing for you there.
You don’t get any of the perks,
but you pay all the bills.

It’s endless work.
Endless demands.
Schedules to meet.
Money stress that never shuts up.

And God forbid you try to take a vacation.
Fuck off with that.
You owe everyone everything.

You’re “too wealthy” to qualify for help,
but somehow never wealthy enough to cover the bills.
And if you’re struggling?
That’s your fault, apparently.

And here’s the cruel part:
being in the middle, you’re allowed to have nice stuff.
Encouraged to have it.
Told to go get it.
Be proud of it.

Just don’t miss those interest payments.

Because the moment you stumble —
the moment you get sick,
or the work dries up,
or the world falls apart —

you’re on your own.

That’s when they tell you that you extended yourself too much.
That you pushed too hard.
That you should have been more careful.

Where did you think you were going anyway?

You were never supposed to arrive.
Just keep moving.
Keep paying.
Keep proving you deserve to stay exactly where you are.

So what do we do?

We bitch about who went where,
who got what,
who’s cheating,
who’s lazy,
who’s beneath us.

We punch down.
Constantly.

Meanwhile, there’s no money at the bottom,
and the assholes at the top aren’t giving us any.

They need us fighting each other.
Because as long as we’re distracted,
nobody’s looking up.

And nobody’s there to catch you when you fall.

That house you bought? Gone.
The car? Forget about it.
Everything you were told to be proud of evaporates the second you can’t keep feeding the machine.

But the ones who actually screw it all up?
They get the bailouts.
They get the press conferences.
They get called “too big to fail.”

They never risk their own money.
Why would they?
They have ours.

When they gamble and win, it’s brilliance.
When they gamble and lose, it’s a “systemic issue.”
When you lose, it’s a personal failing.

That’s the deal no one says out loud:
risk is mandatory at the bottom and the middle,
optional at the top.

You’re told to be responsible,
while carrying all the downside.
They’re reckless,
because the net is already there —
woven from your labour, your taxes, your missed sleep.

So don’t let anyone tell you this is about bad choices or individual discipline.
The rules were never the same.
They were never meant to be.

You weren’t reckless.
You were useful.

So if you’re stuck in the middle, how do you get out?

It’s actually simple.

You stop feeding the fucking machine.

You start living like the peasants they already think you are.

Financial “aspirations”?
Fuck that.
That’s a hamster wheel with better lighting.

Take what you’ve got and keep it.
Fuck Gucci. Fuck Dolce & Gabbana.
Fuck that BMW — a used Kia will do the job and can be just as much fun.

Instead of working yourself into the ground to pay for shit you’re tired of as soon as it’s out of the box, spend your money on things that actually enhance your life.

Karate lessons.
Visits to conservation areas.
Local food.
Time with people you actually care about.

Hell, you’ll do more good for everyone by taking a walk around your block than by taking another trip to the mall.

Because here’s the truth they don’t want you to understand:

The people on top are powerless.

We hand them our labour.
We hand them our money.
We hand them our time, our health, our attention — willingly.
And they fuck us for it every single time.

They pay shit wages so we can buy back the productivity we sweated for, bled for, and died for.
And then they call it “the economy.”

I don’t like violence.
But let’s stop pretending this system is gentle.

What do you call being kept in constant fear about tomorrow?
What do you call a life where stability is dangled just out of reach and then blamed on you when you miss it?

The middle class only ever worked for a few of us — and only for a little while.

So maybe we stop pretending.

Maybe we admit what we are.

Peasants.

And then we get on with it.

Because when we stop spending, things change fast.
When money stays at the bottom, power follows it.
When we start seeing ourselves in our neighbours instead of competing with them — that’s where it gets interesting.

People love to point to Scandinavia and say, “That only works because they’re one race, one culture.”

Bullshit.

We’re one culture too.

A culture with one thing in common:
we’ve been shit on for far too long.

And now the tools are better.
We’re connected.
We can see what’s on top and who the assholes are.

They don’t even hide it anymore.
They go on TV and brag about the empires they built on our exhaustion.

So here’s a radical idea:
feed your neighbour.
Show some kindness.
Build trust where you live.

Because a revolution is coming.
I’ve said it before,
and goddammit, I’ll say it again.

And before anyone panics —
this isn’t a call for chaos.

It’s a call for clarity.

Real change doesn’t start with fire.
It starts with people realizing they’ve been lied to.
That the grind isn’t noble.
That exhaustion isn’t virtue.
That being “responsible” while drowning isn’t success.

Power doesn’t fall because people get angry.
It falls because people stop believing.

The middle is most of us.

And that’s the part they forgot.

The truth is, we control it all.

We just haven’t stopped acting like we don’t.

And history shows —
when that moment comes,
the top always acts surprised.

Subscribe now

Let me tell you the difference between what it means to be conservative and what it means to be liberal.
And I don’t mean party politics. Parties swap ideologies like cheap outfits and keep the same names.

I’m talking about the words themselves.
The identities people tattoo on their personalities.

We toss them around like we know what they mean — but we don’t.
So listen up. Eric’s going to explain it nice and slow.
Well… maybe not so nice.

Start with the word Conservative.

Forget politics for a second.
What does it mean to conserve?

To hold back?
To go slow?
To keep things safe, familiar, untouched?
If I said the word “conservative,” which way am I looking?

Backwards.
You know it.

A conservative is the kid who walks out onto the high board, gets pushed to the edge by his friends, looks down at the water…
and climbs back down the ladder every damn time.

Conservatives are about the individual:
You do for you. I do for me.

They protect systems, even when the systems don’t protect them.
Election reform? “How could you?”
Change anything? “Why would you?”

When we’re all supposed to fend for ourselves, nothing gets done.
Except, apparently, by “private enterprise.”
And how’s that working out so far?

Conservatives love trickle-down economics —
give the money to the king
and trust him to flick a few crumbs off the table.
Are you sold yet?

Now look at the word Liberal.

Liberal literally means generosity.
Openness.
Giving.
Acceptance.

Liberal means progress.
Liberal means risk.
Liberal means reward — shared, not hoarded.

Liberal means working with others because you believe growth requires company.
That’s why we call them the liberal arts — because knowledge evolves.
It updates.
It refuses to stay still.

Liberal is openness.
Its opposite is fear.

So ask yourself:
What does your political party sell you?

Hope?
Or fear?

Because no matter their colours or mascots, conservatives and liberals always speak the same languages:
One sees the world as something beautiful, something worth expanding.
The other sees the world as broken, dangerous, too fragile to touch.

Here’s the truth:

We build the world we live in.
Brick by brick.
Choice by choice.

So which world do you want?

A conservative one?
Or a liberal one?

Only one of them imagines a future worth walking toward.

Does anyone still make love to music?

I’m serious.

There was a time — not a fantasy, not a movie scene, a *real* time — when intimacy had a soundtrack. When getting close to someone meant slowing the world down long enough to actually feel it.

A fire going.

A drink warming your hand.

A piece of someone you care about resting in the other.

A record turning quietly in the corner, giving the room its pulse.

Back then, setting the mood wasn’t a performance.

It wasn’t something to be embarrassed by.

It was *the way* you showed intention.

Somehow, we let that slip.

Somehow, everything became faster and cheaper.

Sex turned from a journey into a task.

A quick biological checkmark.

Get in, get out, don’t look too sentimental doing it.

The build-up — the part that made everything mean something — got tossed aside like it was outdated. We made “romantic effort” look cheesy. Since when is choosing a song for someone, a song whose lyrics say the things we’re too clumsy or too scared to say ourselves… laughable?

How the hell is that cheesy?

Sexy was never about bodies.

Sexy lives in the mind.

It always has.

A look.

A breath.

A hand placed with intention — not entitlement.

A song that tells someone, *“I’m thinking about you, and I want this to feel like something.”*

Which brings me to the real question:

When did seduction become a bad word?

Because seduction wasn’t always dirty.

It wasn’t coercion.

It wasn’t manipulation.

It wasn’t tricking someone into wanting you.

Real seduction — the good kind — was always about **invitation**.

It was two people orbiting each other, not hunting.

Mutual gravity, not control.

A dance where both people lean in at the same time.

But we wrecked that socially.

We turned desire into a job instead of a rhythm.

We told men they have to initiate everything.

We told women their job is to respond.

We built this whole stupid system with a one-way flow of seduction, as if only one person is allowed to want, and the other is supposed to judge whether the performance was good enough.

If seduction always flows one way, it’s not seduction — it’s labor.

It’s performance.

It’s pressure.

And no one feels sexy under pressure.

The truth — the one nobody talks about — is that *everyone* wants to feel desired.

Men. Women. Everyone.

Even the people who pretend they don’t.

Even the ones who act like they’re above it all.

Seduction is supposed to loop.

To feed back.

To build.

To breathe.

You show interest.

They show interest.

You move closer.

They lean in.

You pick the song.

They pick the moment.

It’s a duet, not a monologue.

But people got scared.

Not of seduction — of looking foolish for trying.

Of caring too openly.

Of putting effort in and not getting it returned.

Somehow effort became cringe.

Somehow intention became cheesy.

Somehow people forgot that vulnerability is the foundation of every real intimate moment that ever mattered.

But the truth is simple:

We didn’t lose romance because it stopped working.

We lost it because people got embarrassed to try.

And if you strip everything else away — the noise, the fear, the distractions — we all still want the same thing:

To feel wanted.

To feel chosen.

To feel like someone picked a song for us because they had something to say and didn’t know how to say it out loud.

Music in the background.

Firelight.

A slow hand on a hip.

A beat that matches the rhythm of how you feel.

You’re not a romantic.

You’re not old-fashioned.

You’re normal.

Everyone else just forgot.

Leave a comment

I like to think about what things would be like if I was crowned king of the world. It would be a weirdly wonderful place. I mean even this radical socialist would have a few authoritarian tendencies. I’m king of the world after all. But what would it look like? Something like this.

Yeah, war — war is done. No more fighting, no profiteering, it’s done, it won’t be allowed. And if you try, you’ll see my authoritarian come out.

And weapons — yeah, mostly done too. Well, maybe not my sai. I’m keeping my sai. The ones my father made. In fact, I take it back. Martial arts weapons are okay. Oh, and fuck that, you’re all learning martial arts. It’s hard to want to hit someone when you know how it feels to get hit. So yeah, I don’t care if it’s just tai chi or — heaven forbid — Aikido (just kidding, Aikido is cool, not as cool as karate but you get where I’m going).

Oh, and work. Fuck work. Work if you want, if not, sit on your ass and just take care of yourself and your family. We got the money. But for those of you who need to be productive, who want a little more, some room to breathe — I got you.

Firstly, ladies, I’m sorry — no tattoos for you. You’re perfect the way you are. But don’t worry, you’re in charge now. Leave the tattoos to us loser men who can’t find another way to express ourselves, to say “I love and want to be loved.” I like art but I don’t know why. I know, I know, not letting ladies get tattoos is a little bonkers, but here’s the thing — you’re the boss now. I’m restoring the natural order that the patriarchy destroyed.

And the super wealthy — not you people worth tens of millions, you’re okay. You’re paying your taxes and helping your communities. But you really rich motherfuckers, the ones who really don’t deserve as much as you have (because nobody does) — I’m coming for you, and I’m doing you a favour. You’ve lost touch with reality. You need to ride the bus with the rest of us. Then, hopefully, you will truly learn how to lead — with empathy for real people. They’re not just numbers on a spreadsheet.

You will answer to the lowest in society — the people you despise right now. You will see that they struggle because of the systems you created. The systems meant to exploit their labour.

Listen, I know that there are a few of you who think you’re doing the right thing, but here’s the thing: if you walked by your lowest paid worker and you just earned twelve times their annual salary in the seconds you stopped to say hello — fuck you. You don’t have a clue.

Look, if I was king of the world all other monarchies would be gone — destroyed. They’re bullshit anyway. King because my mommy or daddy was? Fuck you, you’re a drain on resources, you do nothing. If I was king, I’d fucking earn it, you lazy cunts. (Can I say cunts? I’m Canadian, it feels weird.)

And when I died, there would be no more succession. I’d leave you to figure out the rest when I’m gone. But if I did my job right, every child would grow up with a full belly and the best education possible. Try us now, ignorance — you don’t stand a fucking chance.

And if for some reason we started to slip into our old ways, there would be too many people saying, “This is not right.” Some might say, “This is not what he wanted,” but that doesn’t matter. The only thing that would matter is that enough people would have the courage to stand up and say, “Cut that shit out. We’ve seen it before, and it doesn’t end well for you.”

We’ll be fine. But that’s the thing — the light always breaks the darkness, the sun always rises, or some bullshit like that.

So crown me king if you want — but this is where we’re going anyway. I’d just hurry it along. So save space for me on the throne and pass me my scepter — or don’t. It doesn’t really matter.

And if your pessimistic mind doesn’t think so?
You know what to do.

Fact Check Me.