I doubt Matt will answer any of your questions. But I can answer some of them on his behalf.
He is not on the payroll of a Russian university. He claims to be a fellow at the American University in Moscow ..... which doesn't exist (https://thesternfacts.com/american-university-in-moscow-linked-to-russian-state-but-fake-like-trumpu-14d157fa234f). It's a front with ties to the Russian government. However, I assume Ehret receives some kind of financial compensation for all of the hard work he does at this imaginary university. Worth pointing out that he also contributes articles to Kremlin talking points emporium Strategic Culture Foundation, which is, uh, not exactly "reader-funded." I'll leave it at that.
As someone who has also been attacked by Ehret for committing the unthinkable crime of providing information and perspectives that don't perfectly align with his Omnipotent Multipolar Worldview, take it from me: Don't expect this guy to engage in good-faith dialogue. (https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/rts-sneaky-plot-to-topple-putin)
Thanks for the tip about the American University... If you go to his bio on UH, he claims to be a senior fellow there...
Direct Quote: Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas.
Senior Fellow. Interesting job title. I wonder if he has spoken publicly about what exactly he does at this imaginary university...
Hey! Thanks for taking the time to comment! I have yet to hear from Matt, and Im guessing that he recognizes that it is not in his best interest to reply. But I have received quite a bit of positive feedback, meaning that I feel that Ive probably dealt a blow to his reputation.
Quick question: Do you have a link to Ehret claiming to be a fellow at the American University in Moscow?
On another note, over the next week, Im going to be working on a deep dive about the Polar Silk Road, the BRI, the Northwest passage, and the Canadian arctic.
If you could point me towards any resources that you think would help me in my research, I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks for the encouragement... It means a lot coming from you!
Ahhhh, yessss... haha that made me laugh out loud! I hope they call it the anti technocracy cross continental choo choo train! Maybe they could name it after Patrick Wood!
I was under the impression that Ehret was an agent of the Chinese, basing my opinion (and it is only that) not on his relationship with the seductive but equally slippery Cynthia but on his relentless promotion of 'the new silk road' as the wonder of the ages. I generally find his technique, well-honed as it is, of connecting disparate dots, historical facts and personnages in order to blacken their names and 'reveal' pernicious influence, bogus at best. I believe him to be essentially dishonest: a conman, trickster and, ultimately, an agent of chaos.
Might I suggest you also take another critical look at the rest of his cleverly concocted oevre, which distorts facts and deliberately misinterprets the motives and actions of figures such as Russell and (Aldous) Huxley in the absurd and malicious manner you've personally experienced?
As a mere armchair anarchist myself, I commend your and your companions' worthy and courageous activism and sincerely sympathise with those close to you who have been harmed in the course of it.
Considering his reach, I think this was a necessary breakdown of some points Matt promotes that are morally wrong. Thanks!
The "permanent brain damage" bit is not cool though. Some of us got our brains fried or are otherwise mentally disabled and do not appreciate this kind of jabs because it reproduces dynamics that make our lives unnecessarily hard.
Hey! Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I actually really appreciate it feedback like this because it´s very hard to tell if my jokes are landing... I kinda suspect that people are more likely to comment if they liked it than if they didnt...
I suppose that when I think about I was using brain-damaged as a stand-in for the colloquial vulgar use of the word retarded, in the sense of ¨bad at thinking¨ or unintelligent. When I think about it, I suppose its not any less offensive to offhandedly demean people with brain injuiries versus demeaning people with intellectual disabilities. So you made me think about this, for sure... I could easily use many of the synonyms for stupid to get my point across if what I mean is ¨bad at thinking¨.
Its kinda weird to think about things this deeply, and also to think about the power of words... Like if I were to say ¨dumb¨ to mean ¨bad at thinking¨, what effect would that have versus ¨mentally defective¨? And could anyone take offence at the term mentally defective?
Come to think of it, I suppose the word ¨dumb¨ could also be offensive to some people, namely the mute, or stutterers, or people with speech impediments.... I have heard people take offence to the word ¨lame¨ being used to mean ¨not cool¨. Where do you draw the line? I ask this question in all sincerity, because the reality is that you never know what is going to offend someone ahead of time.
I also know, by the way, that not everyone with brain injuries are bad at thinking. I have a friend who has a brain injury and she is actually really quite brilliant intellectually, but suffers from an inability to perform certain cognitive processes normally, such as emotional regulation and decision-making that requires high-level planning. I also had a TBI at the age of 17 which might go some of the way of explaining some of my own abnormality/mental illness.
I am generally of the opinion that we need to start calling a spade a spade again, or at least that a major cultural shift is needed that will offer a corrective to a culture of political correctness that has become divorced from reality in certain ways.
Now, as much as I might relish in offending my political opponents, my intention is actually not to offend my readers, or at least not too much.
Now, my stepsister, who is Afro-Cuban, objects to the word Afro-Descendiente which is catching on in some parts of Latin America to mean ¨person of African descent¨, as opposed to negro, which simply means black in Spanish. The word negro is not offensive in Spanish, and one wonders whether the newly-discovered offensiveness of the term has to do with its offensive connotions in American English. Maybe the offence has crossed the language barrier because of woke sociological departments or something. Who knows? A black female visitor to Mexico can be expected to be called Negrita at some point, and this is not considered an offensive term here. So my sister´s argument is ¨I´m not ashamed of being black, I´m proud of being black, why do people need to act like referring to me by the colour of my skin is offensive?¨ When I thought about it, I realized I was in total agreement with her. By problematizing the word ¨negro¨, youre subliminally suggesting that theres something bad about being black. And this is definitely something that I agree with, based on my understanding of how the subconscious mind works.
On another hand, I think that there is a place for more polite terms, which some people could call euphemistic, in cases where were referring to something to certain disabilities. For instance, I know how hurtful the word ¨retard¨ can be, and how often is used as a term of abuse by bullies. So Im not saying lets all be assholes and use whatever words, regardless if people find them hurtful or not. I think some people need to grow a thicker skin, yes, but Im not saying that we be needlessly cruel for the sake of sticking it to the woke mob or anything like that. But I suspect most people reading this will agree that things are out of wack and need to be smoothed out.
In the case of replacing the term ¨retard¨ with ¨person with an intellectual disability¨, you have making it way less likely that the term will be used as a term of abuse by bullies. So I would agree with a taboo against using the word retard... but I think that people should be aware that an euphemism is being used. The terms ¨idiot¨ and ¨moron¨ used to be medical terms, but society has long realized that any term denoting lower intelligence will be used an insult. The solution to this problem has been to add more syllables, and it seems to be working fine. And if it aint broke, dont fix it! The taboo against using the word ¨retard¨ is one I would generally agree with. Ill get back to you on brain-damaged, Ill have to think about it a bit more. Thanks for making me think about this!
I am saying that we shouldn´t be creating more taboos, and that we should take the time to think about things... like, if something is offensive, why is it offensive? Why is the term ¨people of colour¨ okay but ¨colored people¨ isn´t? And why in the hell did wokesters start referring to living black people as ¨bodies¨? Isn´t that incredible weird? I honestly feel like some of these new trending terms are more offensive than the ones they replace.
In some cases I think that it makes sense to invent new words too. There has been one term that I like thats surfaced in recent years, even though its a bit of a mouthful. That word is neuroatypical. I like that word because I consider a very judgement-free and precise way of expressing the fact that someone has neurological differences. Someone with dyslexia, for instance, is neuroatypical. Their brain is simply wired differently. It doesnt mean they´re less intelligent... in many cases people with dys
So neuroatypical is not synonymous with crazy, or unintelligent, or brain-damaged, or retarded, or anything like that. It simply means that one´s brain is different, and that difference has a neurological, not psychological cause. In other words, its a hardware issue, not a software issue.
Obviously, sometimes this is a really useful word to have in your vocabulary, and in this case a newfangled multi-syllabic word isnt being used as an euphemism, its being used because its the most apt descriptor available.
Okay Ill call it there for now. I like thinking about words!
As I value your work, it brings me joy that you found food for thought in my comment and even asked for me to further my opinions.
I find the use of certain words not so much offensive, but more an opportunity for disruption. I chose to problematize some of your word choices because I believe you work would benefit from breaking away from certain social dynamics that make room for harmful hierarchies. The fact that certain ways of being are considered offensive, like being brain damaged, makes ways to dehumanize and mistreat anyone, just by associating them with such an existence.
The negative impact of referring to certain marginalized groups to demote or offend others is not ameliorated by using more scientific or wordy terms. The association of negative tropes or connotations to an already oppressed group is the problem, the specific word used is really secondary, even if the use of slurs can make the matter worse. Such associations serve the current power structures in that they help explain away or justify oppression of people whose mere existence may openly be considered an offense or something to be mocked.
Please consider that the greatest difficulties in our lives are not a direct effect of our differences or lack or function, but of how it is okay to treat us awfully, because we are seen as lesser, offensive existences. Dismantling such harmful social dynamics will not be achieved by banning the use of certain words, but I do believe that we would all benefit if those that wish to influence the opinions of many would abstain from using us an insult.
Slurs, insults and sciencey words not only have meaning. I barely ever use the word, but I do consider myself neurodivergent, not neuroatypical. The point being that I am different not from what is typical but from a harmful norm that is imposed on everybody by violence. Knowing and calling myself a stupid crazy freak bitch is a way of rebelling against that norm, which I find more effective than calling myself neurodivergent. I do that in pain, knowing that those were the last words that some folks ever heard... Some other folks got pushed to their graves by them being associated with sciencey words, like autistic or bipolar. My wish is that one day is that slurs, insults and sciencey words are instruments for positive change for all those currently oppressed.
Still wrapping my brain around the anarchy philosophies and practice. When I come to your writing, I remind myself to put that "hat" on as best I can, to better understand where you come from (which make increased sense).
It is good to have my brain stretched.
Very scary. Watching the Overthrow here and doing what I can... I can't put my body into things anymore, I wish I could, because this thing needs bodies. I have to fall back to one-on-one info, persuasion, and keyboarding and telephone warrior.
hey there,
I doubt Matt will answer any of your questions. But I can answer some of them on his behalf.
He is not on the payroll of a Russian university. He claims to be a fellow at the American University in Moscow ..... which doesn't exist (https://thesternfacts.com/american-university-in-moscow-linked-to-russian-state-but-fake-like-trumpu-14d157fa234f). It's a front with ties to the Russian government. However, I assume Ehret receives some kind of financial compensation for all of the hard work he does at this imaginary university. Worth pointing out that he also contributes articles to Kremlin talking points emporium Strategic Culture Foundation, which is, uh, not exactly "reader-funded." I'll leave it at that.
As someone who has also been attacked by Ehret for committing the unthinkable crime of providing information and perspectives that don't perfectly align with his Omnipotent Multipolar Worldview, take it from me: Don't expect this guy to engage in good-faith dialogue. (https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/rts-sneaky-plot-to-topple-putin)
Take care and keep up the good work,
Riley
Thanks for the tip about the American University... If you go to his bio on UH, he claims to be a senior fellow there...
Direct Quote: Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas.
Senior Fellow. Interesting job title. I wonder if he has spoken publicly about what exactly he does at this imaginary university...
link here: https://unlimitedhangout.com/author/matthew-ehret/
Hey! Thanks for taking the time to comment! I have yet to hear from Matt, and Im guessing that he recognizes that it is not in his best interest to reply. But I have received quite a bit of positive feedback, meaning that I feel that Ive probably dealt a blow to his reputation.
Quick question: Do you have a link to Ehret claiming to be a fellow at the American University in Moscow?
On another note, over the next week, Im going to be working on a deep dive about the Polar Silk Road, the BRI, the Northwest passage, and the Canadian arctic.
If you could point me towards any resources that you think would help me in my research, I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks for the encouragement... It means a lot coming from you!
How do you think they can build their anti technocracy cross continental choo choo train if people are against it?
Don't worry, the "rising tide foundation" supports bringing everyone up to the same level of technocracy, err progress.
In 🤑🤑🤑 we trust. Cause freedom isn't free. You gotta pay for it with fracked gas!
Ahhhh, yessss... haha that made me laugh out loud! I hope they call it the anti technocracy cross continental choo choo train! Maybe they could name it after Patrick Wood!
He frequently addresses the crime of the BiS getting their mits into the Bank of Canada
Eg
Here
https://canadianpatriot.org/2022/05/06/the-forgotten-history-of-the-bank-of-canada-and-the-multipolar-alliance-vs-wef-run-dark-age/
I stand corrected! Thanks for this!
🕊️
I was under the impression that Ehret was an agent of the Chinese, basing my opinion (and it is only that) not on his relationship with the seductive but equally slippery Cynthia but on his relentless promotion of 'the new silk road' as the wonder of the ages. I generally find his technique, well-honed as it is, of connecting disparate dots, historical facts and personnages in order to blacken their names and 'reveal' pernicious influence, bogus at best. I believe him to be essentially dishonest: a conman, trickster and, ultimately, an agent of chaos.
Might I suggest you also take another critical look at the rest of his cleverly concocted oevre, which distorts facts and deliberately misinterprets the motives and actions of figures such as Russell and (Aldous) Huxley in the absurd and malicious manner you've personally experienced?
As a mere armchair anarchist myself, I commend your and your companions' worthy and courageous activism and sincerely sympathise with those close to you who have been harmed in the course of it.
I might be able to do that for you at some point! I like Huxley, personally… yes, he was part of an elite family, but so was Kropotkin.
As for Bertrand Russell, I very much see him as a crypto-Satanist. My opinion could change, though.
https://nevermoremedia.substack.com/p/is-science-satanic
Though I must say I am bothered that Matt seems to think the multipolar order is ‘in opposition’ to the Reaet.
Considering his reach, I think this was a necessary breakdown of some points Matt promotes that are morally wrong. Thanks!
The "permanent brain damage" bit is not cool though. Some of us got our brains fried or are otherwise mentally disabled and do not appreciate this kind of jabs because it reproduces dynamics that make our lives unnecessarily hard.
Hey! Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I actually really appreciate it feedback like this because it´s very hard to tell if my jokes are landing... I kinda suspect that people are more likely to comment if they liked it than if they didnt...
I suppose that when I think about I was using brain-damaged as a stand-in for the colloquial vulgar use of the word retarded, in the sense of ¨bad at thinking¨ or unintelligent. When I think about it, I suppose its not any less offensive to offhandedly demean people with brain injuiries versus demeaning people with intellectual disabilities. So you made me think about this, for sure... I could easily use many of the synonyms for stupid to get my point across if what I mean is ¨bad at thinking¨.
Its kinda weird to think about things this deeply, and also to think about the power of words... Like if I were to say ¨dumb¨ to mean ¨bad at thinking¨, what effect would that have versus ¨mentally defective¨? And could anyone take offence at the term mentally defective?
Come to think of it, I suppose the word ¨dumb¨ could also be offensive to some people, namely the mute, or stutterers, or people with speech impediments.... I have heard people take offence to the word ¨lame¨ being used to mean ¨not cool¨. Where do you draw the line? I ask this question in all sincerity, because the reality is that you never know what is going to offend someone ahead of time.
I also know, by the way, that not everyone with brain injuries are bad at thinking. I have a friend who has a brain injury and she is actually really quite brilliant intellectually, but suffers from an inability to perform certain cognitive processes normally, such as emotional regulation and decision-making that requires high-level planning. I also had a TBI at the age of 17 which might go some of the way of explaining some of my own abnormality/mental illness.
I am generally of the opinion that we need to start calling a spade a spade again, or at least that a major cultural shift is needed that will offer a corrective to a culture of political correctness that has become divorced from reality in certain ways.
Now, as much as I might relish in offending my political opponents, my intention is actually not to offend my readers, or at least not too much.
Now, my stepsister, who is Afro-Cuban, objects to the word Afro-Descendiente which is catching on in some parts of Latin America to mean ¨person of African descent¨, as opposed to negro, which simply means black in Spanish. The word negro is not offensive in Spanish, and one wonders whether the newly-discovered offensiveness of the term has to do with its offensive connotions in American English. Maybe the offence has crossed the language barrier because of woke sociological departments or something. Who knows? A black female visitor to Mexico can be expected to be called Negrita at some point, and this is not considered an offensive term here. So my sister´s argument is ¨I´m not ashamed of being black, I´m proud of being black, why do people need to act like referring to me by the colour of my skin is offensive?¨ When I thought about it, I realized I was in total agreement with her. By problematizing the word ¨negro¨, youre subliminally suggesting that theres something bad about being black. And this is definitely something that I agree with, based on my understanding of how the subconscious mind works.
On another hand, I think that there is a place for more polite terms, which some people could call euphemistic, in cases where were referring to something to certain disabilities. For instance, I know how hurtful the word ¨retard¨ can be, and how often is used as a term of abuse by bullies. So Im not saying lets all be assholes and use whatever words, regardless if people find them hurtful or not. I think some people need to grow a thicker skin, yes, but Im not saying that we be needlessly cruel for the sake of sticking it to the woke mob or anything like that. But I suspect most people reading this will agree that things are out of wack and need to be smoothed out.
In the case of replacing the term ¨retard¨ with ¨person with an intellectual disability¨, you have making it way less likely that the term will be used as a term of abuse by bullies. So I would agree with a taboo against using the word retard... but I think that people should be aware that an euphemism is being used. The terms ¨idiot¨ and ¨moron¨ used to be medical terms, but society has long realized that any term denoting lower intelligence will be used an insult. The solution to this problem has been to add more syllables, and it seems to be working fine. And if it aint broke, dont fix it! The taboo against using the word ¨retard¨ is one I would generally agree with. Ill get back to you on brain-damaged, Ill have to think about it a bit more. Thanks for making me think about this!
I am saying that we shouldn´t be creating more taboos, and that we should take the time to think about things... like, if something is offensive, why is it offensive? Why is the term ¨people of colour¨ okay but ¨colored people¨ isn´t? And why in the hell did wokesters start referring to living black people as ¨bodies¨? Isn´t that incredible weird? I honestly feel like some of these new trending terms are more offensive than the ones they replace.
In some cases I think that it makes sense to invent new words too. There has been one term that I like thats surfaced in recent years, even though its a bit of a mouthful. That word is neuroatypical. I like that word because I consider a very judgement-free and precise way of expressing the fact that someone has neurological differences. Someone with dyslexia, for instance, is neuroatypical. Their brain is simply wired differently. It doesnt mean they´re less intelligent... in many cases people with dys
So neuroatypical is not synonymous with crazy, or unintelligent, or brain-damaged, or retarded, or anything like that. It simply means that one´s brain is different, and that difference has a neurological, not psychological cause. In other words, its a hardware issue, not a software issue.
Obviously, sometimes this is a really useful word to have in your vocabulary, and in this case a newfangled multi-syllabic word isnt being used as an euphemism, its being used because its the most apt descriptor available.
Okay Ill call it there for now. I like thinking about words!
As I value your work, it brings me joy that you found food for thought in my comment and even asked for me to further my opinions.
I find the use of certain words not so much offensive, but more an opportunity for disruption. I chose to problematize some of your word choices because I believe you work would benefit from breaking away from certain social dynamics that make room for harmful hierarchies. The fact that certain ways of being are considered offensive, like being brain damaged, makes ways to dehumanize and mistreat anyone, just by associating them with such an existence.
The negative impact of referring to certain marginalized groups to demote or offend others is not ameliorated by using more scientific or wordy terms. The association of negative tropes or connotations to an already oppressed group is the problem, the specific word used is really secondary, even if the use of slurs can make the matter worse. Such associations serve the current power structures in that they help explain away or justify oppression of people whose mere existence may openly be considered an offense or something to be mocked.
Please consider that the greatest difficulties in our lives are not a direct effect of our differences or lack or function, but of how it is okay to treat us awfully, because we are seen as lesser, offensive existences. Dismantling such harmful social dynamics will not be achieved by banning the use of certain words, but I do believe that we would all benefit if those that wish to influence the opinions of many would abstain from using us an insult.
Slurs, insults and sciencey words not only have meaning. I barely ever use the word, but I do consider myself neurodivergent, not neuroatypical. The point being that I am different not from what is typical but from a harmful norm that is imposed on everybody by violence. Knowing and calling myself a stupid crazy freak bitch is a way of rebelling against that norm, which I find more effective than calling myself neurodivergent. I do that in pain, knowing that those were the last words that some folks ever heard... Some other folks got pushed to their graves by them being associated with sciencey words, like autistic or bipolar. My wish is that one day is that slurs, insults and sciencey words are instruments for positive change for all those currently oppressed.
Thanks for your work, journalistic and other.
Zow! I read every word.
I'm learning a lot.
Still wrapping my brain around the anarchy philosophies and practice. When I come to your writing, I remind myself to put that "hat" on as best I can, to better understand where you come from (which make increased sense).
It is good to have my brain stretched.
Very scary. Watching the Overthrow here and doing what I can... I can't put my body into things anymore, I wish I could, because this thing needs bodies. I have to fall back to one-on-one info, persuasion, and keyboarding and telephone warrior.
Thank you.