The clip below is from the City of Ottawa meeting of April 18th, 2023 where the city took questions on the radical plans to transform the energy grid, and life in Ottawa overall.
The first question asked to Angela Keller-Herzog was about the seeming reluctance of the city to consider what Hydro Ottawa had to say in response to the plan to make Ottawa run on solar and wind.
Herzog’s answer was straight out of one of the early anecdotes from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s. famous book on the workings of the Soviet Union, The Gulag Archipelago.
The example he gives, illustrating the reversal of reality dictating policy, a central axiom of communism, was when the Soviet told the rail engineers that they had to double the amount each train carried on each trip. It was explained to the political officers that the tracks could only handle so much weight and to double the load would lead to catastrophes. The Soviets rounded up those engineers who refused to double the load and shot them. Then doubled the weight of the trains. Catastrophe followed resulting in hundreds of deaths and massive damage. The people who orchestrated that were given the Order of Lenin. (It may have been another honour, it has been a few years since I read book 1)
Listen to Keller-Herzog’s answer about the city not listening to Ottawa Hydro and see if there is a comparison there. The master plan must be supported. The reality of how much you can make by wind and solar is not to be discussed.
The next speaker is using reason to defeat the plan overall, but at the top layer of deception of the plan itself. This means that his objection, while scientifically accurate and verifiable and therefore, ‘true’ still operates on the base assumption that man made CO2 is causing climate change, or more precisely, Global Warming. I would go out on a limb and suggest that he knows the CO2-Global warming connection is utter nonsense, but realizes that our civilization is too far gone into the abyss of scientism to attack the base lie. It has been accepted as axiomatic, both by repetition and by extensive use of Discourse Theory. Still, worth watching as he attacks the plan on the basis of ‘even if true then…’.
The next presenter explains why we have to eat crap we don’t want. The excuse is the Carbon Footprint of food. Which again, is a branch of the base lie, that CO2 causes the world to heat up in a way that is somehow a bad thing. There is no science or reason to the presentation. Just a plan on how to make life less pleasant in order to reduce carbon in agriculture. Something one might suspect is related to this National Post article on Trudeau’s advisor, Mark Carney. Especially the part where he says his plan is to make our lives worse, not better. The presentation on making more plant based options, really means taking away your choice of what you want to eat. Note that prisons are on her list of where food will change.
Next is Nigel Ellis. His volume was very low on the video. I had to raise it to the level of the other speakers to be heard. He also played into the CO2 = Global Warming myth, but at least used science to show why the plans to reduce it are nonsense even if we accept the hypothesis as it is.
Karen Bourdeau asks some proper questions, like “When do you plan to ask the residents of Ottawa about your plan to “prohibit automotive oriented land use”. It should not be a rhetorical question because it is a policy that will destroy many generations of labour and development, and end much freedom and liberty. But we all know it is rhetorical. The Politburo doesn’t ask the public what it wants. It appoints experts to speak for the people, that give the answers the politburo wants. She also asks questions that appear to be related to a covert plan to implement 15 minute city type restrictions in Ottawa.
Next is an Ottawa U prof. His volume was very good. Loud even. So I bet you can guess what his politics are. He launches into full scale and undisguised Habermas Discourse Theory attacks against people who merely asked rational questions about the plan to radically transform Ottawa due to alleged CO2 effects on global climate. He expresses outward dismay that they were even allowed to speak and called them “essentially climate deniers”. This is a Frankfurt School dialectic where you destroy the people who disagree with your consensus view you are trying to impose on the majority. Call them names that effectively makes them thought criminals. For a refresher on the formal method of how this works, click through to this video on Marcuse and Habermas and making truth, hate speech.
It is also famously Saul Alinsky Rules for Radical rule XIII if memory serves.
This Prof. also wants a shift from voluntary to mandatory measures. Somehow, indigenous leadership and rights factor in to changing the climate.
Next is Danielle, who tries to steer the ship back towards safe shores by mentioning that even far left wing extremist, Michael Moore made a film exposing the green scam of wind and solar. She is followed by another climate scare advocate who demands more action to lower CO2.
After the delegations is questions to staff. Here’s one that doesn’t get asked. Why is Canada, which seems to be the most vocal nation in terms of pushing the Global Warming scare, actively working on their Century Initiative plan to increase Canada’s population to 100,000,000 people via immigration from hot countries, where their per-capita carbon footprint goes up by FOUR TIMES!
This ‘debate’ was not about competing visions for a better Ottawa or world. This was a confrontation of individual rights Vs. collective authoritarianism. Authoritarianism using any excuse it can make up to justify its actions. If Covid measures didn’t convince anyone that this is the plan, then don’t be surprised with what these people do to us in the name of ‘climate change’.
For a really comprehensive and science based, fact based analysis on the Climate Scare of Global Warming, please watch this video below and maybe take some notes in case you run into a believer.

It’s an amazing denial of reality, innit? The game with the volume is cute, too. I’d bring a bullhorn along.
National-Socialism! Is there nothing it cant do?
Welkom to Ottawagrad, komrads.
Again, I fell compelled to ask the rhetorical question; why do the zeks still think
The Plan™ can be even slightly modified by obeying the rules?
Can I haz peetch phorks yets?
Sounds to me that they have regular Zoom-calls with their counterparts in Germany.
Ideology first, and the Devil take the rest.
I’m certain you are correct. And not just in Germany. Remember this video? It’s from the EU parliament. A meeting of American communists, the DSA, with European communist groups.
https://3speak.tv/watch?v=rairfoundation/clmcadps
Yes. It’s called the communist international.
https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/index.htm
TEsting due to an issue with the comments. Please talk amongst yourselves 🙂
Continuing to test comments
It’s very difficult to get people who are aligned with the ‘Climate Change’ fairytale to listen to other points of view. Very few among them will research the subject matter.
You said it best: “The Politburo doesn’t ask the public what it wants.”