Culture

Toronto International Film Festival: Raw Commercialism Behind A Veneer Of Progressivism

282 Comments

Every year as the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) gets more socially and politically “progressive” in its filmic offerings, the more commercialized it’s become as a whole.

There was a time, up until about four years ago, when TIFF was predominantly a place for cinephiles and romantics. Then, the majority of screened films represented distinguished expressions of different cultures around the world (real diversity) or were smaller independent films searching for distribution. Most importantly, TIFF, even if with its varied lineup, was Canada’s leading film festival.

To an extent, TIFF still caters to that niche and those causes (TIFF 2016 is hosting 397 films from 83 countries, a slight increase in the later from last year), but as the festival continues to grow in scope, scale and popularity, it has inevitably inflated into a more or less culturally vacant commercial enterprise that seems to privilege popular taste and fashionable politics.

While the TIFF street festival is a new and nimble way to cross town, it is also a hotspot for deluded protesters and pesky pedlars.

While the TIFF street festival is a nimble way to jump venue to venue, it is also a hotspot for deluded protesters and pesky pedlars.

As Roosh and others have written, Toronto has become a progressive, multicultural nightmare–one that I’ve admittedly grown accustomed to over the years (is it Stockholm Syndrome?).

Now culturally pluralistic, the city is geographically checkered with disparate ethnic groups and subcultures that refuse to assimilate into one primary identity. Without interconnectivity, citizens are expected to seek out a sense of togetherness by participating in mass consumption and collectively accepting ideas of social “equality.”

You can say this about a lot of American cities, too. But Toronto is a special case: as Canada is known to echo American pop culture–which the Left has a monopoly over–Toronto follows suit by souping up the most skewed aspects of leftist propaganda you see south of our border (Black Lives Matter, third-wave feminism, climate change, etc) and implementing it as common sense–or, worse yet, policy.

This foul leftism seems to evaporate in the air and rise north across the border, where the most harebrained aspects of the ideology distill and condense into Toronto’s ethos. And our leaders lay down and accept it. 

For instance, Black Lives Matter recently halted Toronto’s Gay Pride Parade by setting off rainbow-coloured smoke bombs (note how the embedded article labels the stunt a “victory”? Our mainstream press is this deluded, too), this only a few weeks after a lunatic stormed in and shot up a gay Orlando nightclub.

Black Lives Matter, the pinnacle of race relations in this city. Or something.

Black Lives Matter, the pinnacle of race relations in this city. Or something.

Now what is the city of Toronto doing? It plans on giving the domestic terrorist group this year’s race relations award (though I should note that this terrorism has occurred stateside; in Toronto, BLM is more of a “peaceful” nuisance). Further, Pride Toronto apologized today to BLM for “deepening the divisions” in the LGBT community. That’s like the sheep apologizing to the wolf for having a big appetite. You get the picture.

How does this relate to TIFF? TIFF, while it probably means well, reflects all this leftist up-is-down, left-is-right inverted reality. As Toronto’s flagship arts event, it holds itself up as a vanity mirror to Toronto’s prevailing social and political beliefs. 

Because Toronto is notoriously progressive, TIFF offers these workshops like “The 4%: Film’s Gender Problem” (which you can watch here) and tagging almost every female-directed TIFF film on its site with “Feminism” or “Female Experience” or “Female Director”. Because It’s 2016.

You also now see Spoiled Children march down a blocked-off King Street screaming for censorship in movies. On the same block, you can witness crazies hoisting placards and judging all “idolaters, homosexuals, fornicators, liars, witches” (basically everyone but themselves) as sinners doomed to Hell. This thorny mixture of zealotry ruins what TIFF used to and should still be about: the intellectual enjoyment of watching culturally diverse movies that your typical multiplex may not show you.

Sighted! Religious zealots judging not until they judge themselves.

Sighted! Religious zealots at TIFF ’16, judging not until they judge themselves.

Further, the Politics of Shame progressives know too well takes the fun out of movies. And when you can’t cross the street or enter a ticket line without peddlers trying to sign you up for the newest and hottest streaming service or sample the latest “naturally sweetened” beverage, you cannot help but notice that the festival is less about experiencing art and more about inciting mass consumption.

That mentality defines living in Toronto: you don’t need values or human relationships, just buy, buy, buy and support this company that’s endorsing the most current social justice cause Because It’s 2016.

Toronto, above all, loves “diversity,” thus explaining why Antoine Fuqua’s The Magnificent Seven (which, granted, I have not yet seen) opened the festival this year. A year prior it was Jean-Marc Vallée’s superb Demolition—a movie about a rich white male (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) coping with the death of a loved one.

img_1894

Virtual reality was the latest distraction this year at TIFF’s marketing-driven street festival.

Now it’s a modern Western directed by a black man and starring an ethnically-mixed cast, none of whom hail from Canada (Vallée, meanwhile, is French-Canadian, as is Denis Villeneuve, whose new film Arrival screened at the festival to favourable reviews).

Diversity of skin colour can’t hide the fact that The Magnificent Seven is also TIFF ’16’s most commercial film—minus, perhaps, Arrival, which stars big-name actors like Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, and Forest Whitaker. Fuqua has outspokenly rejected the diversity argument applied to his film, insisting the varied casting of the picture “wasn’t to make a statement […] [he] just wanted to see Denzel Washington on a horse.”

Fuqua claims he made “Seven” to “see Denzel Washington on a horse”, not in the name of diversity.

Opening the festival with The Magnificent Seven falsely suggests one thing while truthfully demonstrating another: as TIFF claims to support the crusade against Hollywood’s diversity problem, it’s become more predisposed to populism and commerce—the two very things that drive Hollywood’s assembly line and perceived racial bias.

Take Nate Parker’s Birth of a Nation, probably the most interesting film to play at the festival. Not because it’s that good—I’ve seen it and it is merely decent—but because of the director’s history. Parker, a black man, was accused in 1999 of raping a white woman, but was found not guilty in 2001. Eleven years later, the alleged victim tragically committed suicide, putting Parker’s feet back in the SJW fire.

Nate Parker wrote, directed, and stars as Nat Turner in "Birth of a Nation".

Nate Parker writes, directs, and stars as Nat Turner in “Birth of a Nation”.

The American Film Institute promptly cancelled a screening of Parker’s new movie, and with TIFF only a few weeks away heads tilted northward in anticipation. TIFF’s organizers declared they would screen the film as planned since it told an “important story,” meaning one with a left-leaning bias.

Meanwhile, a documentary like Vaxxed presents an inconvenient argument about the MMR vaccine and gets bullied out of the Tribeca Film Festival, whereas a film that uses nineteenth-century slavery—a time of true oppression against blacks—to comment on today’s racial tensions brought on by misunderstood notions of institutional racism is fair game.

There is also a point to be made about Parker. If he had been wrongfully accused of rape, but was white and his movie did not reflect SJW fashion, I guarantee you, reader, TIFF would have cancelled the screening. Don’t get me wrong: I commend TIFF for keeping Birth of a Nation in its lineup, but not for why. TIFF is not doing this out of integrity, free speech, or belief in due process—it’s because the film confirms progressive thought, which is what festival organizers mean by “important.”

There is more to be said about Birth of a Nation (wait for my upcoming review when it releases this October) and Oliver Stone’s Snowden for that matter, which had its World Premiere at the festival and is now in wide release.

Snowden is the antithesis of social justice propaganda; while topical, Stone’s film is driven by tight dramatic structure and controlled pacing that lets the movie stand on its own as a compelling work of popular art taking a very unpopular stance. Snowden transcends partisan politics and the liberal grandstanding that is so commonplace in today’s Hollywood product.

Snowden shows that TIFF is not all progressive posturing and that there is, to some extent, a diversity of ideas on display at this eleven-day event, which ran this year from September 8-18th. Nevertheless, there is plenty cause for concern as the festival takes a noticeable nosedive toward promoting Hollywood product and corporate gadgetry, crowding out the intellectual space with an excess of ad space.

If that ends up the case, well, there is always Cannes.

Post-script: A reader accurately points out that film festivals like TIFF charge premium prices for tickets. This is another irksome aspect of TIFF’s aggressive commercialism that must be addressed. While premium charges have been a thing for awhile at TIFF, this year it added Uber-like surge prices to high-demand screenings.

So in addition to minimum ticket prices going up (which is to be expected as the festival increases in popularity), you have to pay sometimes 7 dollars over the minimum, per ticket, to secure a seat. And if you want to exchange tickets and your original purchase was done through Ticketmaster, the service charges an additional 7-dollar exchange fee! Check your pockets; are they empty yet? God knows how TIFF will pilfer its customers next year. 

Read More: Why Emigrating To Toronto Is A Bad Choice For Successful And Ambitious Men

282 thoughts on “Toronto International Film Festival: Raw Commercialism Behind A Veneer Of Progressivism”

      1. I think To Ron To means literally hitler in Canada’s answer to Indians.

        4. Poor? I thought Ghandi was poor in the way that Bernie Sanders is: he feigned it for political purposes.

        5. 25 years in Congress, and Bernie’s barely above water. Tells you everything you need to know right there.

  2. A woman accuses a man of rape. He is found not guilty. 10 years later, she commits suicide. There are two plausible conclusions:
    1. He did actually rape her.
    2. He didn’t rape her and she was mentally unstable, hence she made the false rape accusation. Later she succumbed to her mental ailments and committed suicide.
    Now, I don’t know what happened, but I tend to favor the 2nd option.

    2. I have to lean towards #1 as the man in question was so crazed that he has gone on to make a black lives matter propaganda movie.

        1. “a black hero” who confessed to killing a woman. Hope you got your white face paint and multi-coloured wig on, or maybe you like to black up??? Oh mammy!

        2. I’m sure Nat Turner killed more than “a” woman.
          And no, no white face paint this time. Maybe a big, wide smile after leaving the theater though.

        3. So like how I smile every time I hear a “youff” was shot dead for doing something stupid? I don’t know … I grin pretty wide when that happens…

        4. Sure! If that floats your boat. Me and my black friends will see it numerous times, and will probably guilt our white friends into seeing it as well.

        5. You have a point, he “confessed” to one murder of a white woman but he and his accomplices murdered 60 men, women and children with axes and whatever implements came to hand. Not bad for a bunch of dindus. Oh didn’t realise you didn’t need blackface…….

        8. Well, if they’re doing blackface, they’re on stage most likely. So that’s where they would be. On stage.

    3. 3. Said mental problems surface later in life and have no bearing on the accusation.
      False dichotomy there.

  3. Denzel Washington also starred in “The Hurricane” – the alleged biopic surrounding the life and heinous treatment of boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, who was wrongfully accused of murder. There’s only one problem with that story, however, if you’ve spent any amount of time looking at the evidence in the case – Carter was guilty as sin of the crime for which he was sent to prison. The SJW mindfuckers stepped in and commandeered that entire tale, twisting it to create a fabricated story that would exonerate the “wrongfully accused black man”, and bring attention to the cause of “racial oppression”. Fuck Hollywood stars. They’re all sell-outs, elitist-sponsored stooges who parrot lies in order to bend minds and bank the big bucks. Fuck ’em all…

    1. Don’t even get me started on the Bud Light campaign in which the unfunny, fat, and disgusting overprivileged Jews Seth Rogen and Amy Schumer spew about the wage gap boogeyman.
      Apparently many people swore off Bud Light after this campaign. Not that they shouldn’t have YEARS ago regardless.

      1. Yeah, that commercial induced projectile vomiting when I first saw it. Seth Rogen is probably the most unfunny “comedian” I’ve ever had the displeasure of watching. But he’s perfect in an era where mediocrity is elevated to the level of being sheer genius, and sold as such to the malleable fucktards in TV Land…so it goes.

        1. Two Jews who got their careers courtesy of their kinfolk’s virtues and… well, that’s all, have nothing under the sun to complain about!

      1. Oh good lord no. I was watching “Forensic Files” the other night. They finally had a black man who committed a murder who was featured. I’d say 70% of the time it’s an Evil White Man. Maybe 25% of the time it’s an Evil White Woman. And 5% is divided up between blacks, hispanics, etc. You know – a really accurate cross-sectional demographic of actual murder rates in the USA…cough, cough.

        1. Black people are virtuous and ever so wise! All those years of oppression makes them all like giant wise owls!!!

        2. In Canada out in the prairie country (like Saskatchwan), they hate Native Canadians big time. Suspect them of all kinds of terrible shit. Discriminate against them massively. But they never see black people, and the media makes them out to be saints, so they literally (Hitler) think of them as special beings. Had an ex-gf up there who thought this way, as did her friends. They all claimed that this was a common perception among most Canadians. I just shook my head. Would have take 20 years to explain it to them. Heh.

        5. It’s the same in the US: the extreme deference paid to in particular old blacks. As though they’re wise or sagely.
          This whole mentality of respecting one’s elders is bullshit. If someone has earned my respect, so be it. But to assume that an an old person is wise or virtuous solely on account of their age is bullshit. A young piece of shit will eventually become an old piece of shit.
          And as Judas Priest said: “You don’t have to be old to be wise.”

    1. Look here you Mohamedian you and your “circle jerk of one” need to come up with some better material!!!

  5. I’d forgotten about the racist tragedy that is the reboot of the Magnificent Seven.
    Casting America’s answer to Brendan Fraser/Nathan Fillion-Chris Pratt-can’t redeem the film’s failures IMO. If they really wanted a black guy as the lead then they should’ve shifted the setting to one where that could have been plausible.

    1. It’s surprising how easily one could Google “black cowboys old west” and see countless pictures of just that.
      Clown.

      1. That doesn’t affect anything that I posted. BTW, if you’re using Google, the politically-correct search engine, you’re doing it wrong.
        Yes, you have beclowned yourself.

        1. you could go to your local library and find the same shit in many a book.
          And what in the blue hell does a politically correct search engine have to do with showing pictures of black cowboys?
          I know, i know. I’m a cuck/sjw/virtue signaler or some combination of those things.
          You’re still fully mistaken.

        2. You’re making these false associations here. To spell it out, I’m not questioning the veracity of your “black cowboys”. I’m separately pointing out two things:
          1.) Google is a terrible search engine that shouldn’t be used at all
          2.) The existence of “black cowboys” does not affect the point I made in my original post.
          Sadly even Will Smith’s Wild Wild West film made an attempt to address the issues arising from inserting a black lead character into a period Western.

        3. So you are definitely saying there weren’t any blacks in any kind of leadership roles in the West?
          That’s not a trolling question. I’m legitimately asking if you believe there were no leading black cowboys in the old west. And if you do believe so, what would be the proper setting for a black cowboy to lead, if not in these and many other movies?

        4. i think the objection is to the double standards of blacks appropriating white culture (wild west, hamilton) but flipping their shit every time they encounter a white guy with dreads or accusing elvis or the beatles of “stealing” the blues

        5. Whites appropriated asian culture. The original “magnificent seven” was a retool of the movie “seven samurai.”

        6. “hamilton” is not appropriating white culture. It’s telling a historical story using hip hop. That’s about as black as it gets.

        9. And “Red Tails” was a total fabrication…… along with those feel good movies about how de wite mon be so baaadddd……..were de wattemellon……

        12. you mean a telling of a story based off real events is fabricated to larger-than-life proportions?
          I figured that would be right up your alley, with a comic book character as your avatar and all.

        15. Combine two things making a whole lot of money right now (hip hop and musicals) to make your own money isn’t a Liberal White thing. it’s finding your niche and cashing the fuck in.

        1. So, you’re definitely sure there were no black US marshalls in the 1870s in Oklahoma?
          You have to realize i already know, and im waiting on you to say “no, there were no blacks in leadership positions in the old west.”

        2. Dude, you’re talking to a guy who uses Adolf Hitler as his profile.
          Do you really think he’s going to believe anything other than his echo chamber circle-jerk bullshit?

        3. My avatar is the same as my name: Waldemar Pabst.
          Not every German man with a mustache is Hitler. Chill out.

        4. not at all. I was just trying to see if both he and AMD_Afficionado would double down, press the gas and run right into the wall. Smart of them to tap the brakes when presented with a little truth.

        1. ah, i see. i’m gay, therefore i google ‘black cowboys’ often.
          ‘A’ for effort.

        2. No, for anal, that is what you type in after black cowboys and other phony revisionist history you think is factual.

  6. Eh, I’m not too concerned about Denzel in Magnificent Seven. He’s a great actor, and he and Fuqua worked together on Training Day, so they have rapport with one another. I believe him when he says he didn’t do it to make a statement.
    What really bothers me is that Hollywood can’t seem to come up with one single fucking original idea, so all it’s doing is rebooting old shit–even rebooting not so old shit. This is the reason I gave up going to the movies, but I have a couple of my own scripts in the works. I’ll try and get some original concepts out there, but it’s an uphill battle when dealing with the dredges of Hollywood. I just want to take some of their money for once.

    1. Mind letting me have a read? I won’t say I’m a pro, but I did a lot of video stuff in my life and I always like to wonder about how I would film something. Only that usually, I hate the stuff I read. And I’m too dumb to write good stories myself.

    2. Eh, not sure whether that bothers me. I have come to the conclusion that Hollywood writers today cannot write a good story, so if a film is not:
      A) A true story
      B) A remake of an existing film
      C) A film adaptation of a credentialed writer ie Stephen King, etc.
      I assume the plot is going to be shit. And it almost always is. So while it’s certainly lacking in creativity to simply remake the same old stories with better costumes, film quality, and special effects, I prefer it to wasting 2 hours of my life on something that makes no sense or follows some trite formulaic forced plot twist of a shit story.

      1. I actually hate movie adaptions of King’s work. The only one I like is the one where he wrote the script himself, which is Storm of the Century.
        That said, I don’t think the problem is that there aren’t good writers. I think the problem is that no one chooses them for their projects. In Hollywood at least, this stuff is about money.
        But not all Hollywood movies are bad. Just most of them.

        1. I just watched 11 22 63 and plan on reading the book soon, but really enjoyed seeing the 60s brought to life visually.
          I’m also really looking forward to HBO’s remake of Michael Crichton’s Westworld (Crichton wrote and I believe directed the original) but HBO is gonna make it great, even if slightly less intellectually stimulating.

        2. Hm, does not sound like a plot I would enjoy.
          I did read one of his newer ones, ‘Revival’, which I liked a lot. Weirdly, there were some unsettling parallels between my own fears and the ideas he put into that book. Maybe why I feel so drawn to his writing.
          I also liked the Dark Tower saga very much.

        3. I have never read King before, but have much respect for him, especially reading that he wanted to write this story since before I was born, but at that time he knew he both did not have the writing ability required to tackle a project of this caliber, and that he was too lazy and not motivated and disciplined enough to do it well.
          So he becomes a world class author, writes at the top of his game, and then decades later returns to the idea and with a wealth of research and knowledge, and completes it (reminds me much of Stanley Kubrick in this way, both guys who would not half ass something). For a contrast, Patton Oswalt explains it pretty well.

      2. It really depends. Some of the remakes/comic book movies, etc. have been good, quality films. Others, not so much. I’m finding that most of the creativity has transferred to television. While there are plenty of shit shows, we’ve also had an explosion of excellent television in the form of shows like Justified, Breaking Bad, and Narcos to name a few. I like to wait and read audience reviews before checking out any reboots. Fuck the critics. They write based on who pays them the most.

        1. I liked Breaking Bad. The only thing that annoys me is that when a series is popular, they tend to stretch it out into infinity and instead of ending one plot line and starting a new one, you basically get dragged along without a break.
          This bothered me in the Mass Effect games. I just couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t start a new story in part 2 and 3. To me, the first part ended the first story.

        2. Well, Narcos of course is in category A. But yes, there seems to be more creativity in television than film today. Probably because the barriers to entry are so low. Heck, you have virtual companies like Amazon and Netflix and Hulu producing content now.

        3. Poor Blockbuster. They could have been in on the party. If only they hadn’t had so much faith in brick and mortar stores…

        4. Most shows go 1 or 2, sometimes 3-5 seasons beyond their end game. The story was told well, but the studios offered more money, so the show continued on. Californication is a good example of this. It should have ended after season 4, but it went 3 seasons beyond its expiration date and the story fell apart.

        6. As a contrast, I found the first 2 Walking Dead Seasons quite boring and unengaging. I stopped watching. Somebody advised me to keep watching. And the 3rd actually wasn’t too bad.

        7. Agreed. I thought the last season was one of the show’s best. I’m really looking forward to the upcoming season and Negan.

        9. The first season was not very good. The second was okay, but didn’t draw me in enough to keep watching. Maybe the current season is better? I might check out the season premiere and decide from there.

        10. It would be great if they could bring back some sort of virtual video return box. I used to get a lot of pleasure from popping a returned (and rewound) video into the return box, just before the fine became due. The film itself was irrelevant more or less

        12. Read just yesterday that Netflix is shooting for 40% original content…so while we are in a desert of movie remakes, reboots, and sequels…TV-wise we seem to be entering a golden age

        13. Walking Dead is just more multicultural sjw garbage. The only decent character is betrayed by his faggot brother and killed off at the beginning of the first season

        15. Hahaha. I thought the same way about Season 2, when, I think, the only relatively capable leader is killed by the backstabbing ‘good guy’ hero.

      3. We need more superhero movies. They’re already scraping the bottom of the barrel: ant man … what comes next? amoeba man? prion man?

      4. (((Hollywood))) won’t risk their shekels on something unless it has made money in the past or is sjw propaganda like chimps on horses

    3. denzil aside, compare the original cast with the new lot. There is nothing in Hollywood today that could match the likes of Yul Brynner, Steve McQueen, James Coburn, Charles Bronson.

    5. “He’s a good actor” is not an excuse to use affirmative action on a classic.
      The original Ma 7 was awesome, but adding an AM just makes it unrealistic.
      It would be like Japan redoing Seven Samurai for the Japanese audience, yet adding Denzel as a samurai. Doesn’t make any sense

      1. i don’t know how many times i’ve asked this.
        Are you sure there were no black cowboys in leadership positions in the old west?

  7. The original birth of a nation was a nationalist epic that glorified the South and the prototypical Ku Klux Klan, while at the same time developing most techniques of modern cinematography. The movie was against the Yankee carpetbaggers and illustrated the emancipation of the blacks as a tool for control over the south, the first time minorities were used to obtain political influence.
    Should even be mentioned why this film is a blasphemy and a travesty of the original without even watching it or searching for the sexual misdeeds of its director?

    1. I plan on seeing it 4-5 times. I can reserve a ticket for you if you want to come with me.

        1. heh, no. i’m very much employed. I also support black filmmakers.
          so much so, that I will do my part to make sure Nate Parker gets the thumbs up for another movie.

        2. I have no problem with black filmakers. But the OP’s point is well taken – changing the original film 360% to suit a socio-political narrative is lame (for lack of a better word).
          There are plenty of other stories that could have been told.

        6. Wasnt the original tale about 7 samurai? That would mean white folk appropriated it first.

        8. Well at least it wasn’t too much of a leap of faith for him to play his latest protagonist although instead of bludgeoning a white woman to death with a fence post he only raped a white woman.
          And of course he will get another movie it’s Hollyweird. He’s black, if he were gay he would be sainted…….

        9. “Yes” That’s racism in a nutshell. You should judge men on the basis of their character not their skin colour.

        12. 1. That’s hilarious that you say “judge on character, not color” on ROK.
          2. Did I say I support black fimmakers “only”? I’m starting to see what white people hear when black people say support black business. If I say “support black owners,” you hear “support black owners ONLY.” That’s not what was said or implied. Do asians, hispanics, or jews support “only” their business? No, they favor their own businesses (just like white folk) and still patron white folk businesses.
          When I say I support black filmmakers, I’m not saying I don’t support anyone else. What I’m saying is I will go out of my way to support a black filmmaker whose message or vision I agree with.

        14. I did look it up. I saw “innocent” and will no longer refer to him as a rapist.

        15. I bet I could go to many an SJW post and find a comment that sounds exactly like this one. Do you know what they would do to you on ROK if they found out you were an SJW infiltrator?

        18. yes, that’s because people are allowed to change their opinions when given further information.

        20. as you are free whenever you want to admit that he did not rape that chick. she was most likely batshit crazy prior to the incident, as shown by her subsequent suicide.

        22. These are niggers, they can’t come up with or make anything themselves so they steal shit. It’s the film version of “sampling”

        23. Accept they changed katana to six shooters and didn’t set it in feudal Japan.
          If they wanted to remake it with blacks somewhat credibly they should have changed it to pointy branches and set it in Africa

        27. Affirmative action has done more for white women than any other demographic in this country.

  9. Whenever you hear about how Toronto is the most progressive city in the world, don’t forget that Ontario is 300 billion dollars in debt and run by an ugly lesbian.

      1. A late in life lesbian who encouraged her son to become a Homo.
        Seriously, if one merely reads about Wynne’s life, you’ll find every toxic characteristic; Beta male husband, mentally ill lesbians, careerism, globalism.

        2. But didn’t you hear her (it) after the Orlando gay club massacre? “You can’t fight homophobia with islamophobia.”
          Oh so progressive.

    4. Anytime you hear some shit about the “10 Best Places to Live,” you know it’s no place for a red-pilled man.

      1. The Chinese recently nicknamed PM Justin Trudeau as “Little Potato” at a recent trade meeting for being so wishy washy on his “human rights principles”.
        StatsCanada has shown that our economy is only going downward, and Trudeau has increased his deficit proposals from $10 billion (from his election estimates) to $30 billion.
        He continually proves himself to be utterly useless and yet all you see on social media is about how he is the greatest and dreamiest politician in history.
        I swear I’m surrounded by idiots.
        It shows how completely dense the left is. They constantly talk about shit like how basing someone’s worth on their appearance is “objectifying”, and yet all you ever hear about JT is how handsome and dreamy he is. No one discusses his policies or foreign relations because that’s so BORING.
        I think each country needs to have both a leader and a celebrity frontman. The leader can actually go to work every morning and run the country, while the mascot can take selfies and make childish posts on Buzzfeed.

        2. That is awesome. I’ll support that idea. A selfie-loving frontman and behind the scenes, a man with substance and intelligence (like Harper) who actually makes the tough decisions.
          Trudeau simply personifies the modern politician in the age of the mass TV/Social Media/Academia brainwashing machine.

        3. Justin Trudeau has taken cuck clown game to the next level.
          Also, I think you’ll get a kick out of this…

        4. Too funny. I remember some years ago a comedian, I think in England, did a similar man on-the-scene bit. Simply taking advantage of peoples’ ignorance of the term ‘sufferage.’

        9. LMAO, I subscribed to that channel because of this video.
          “Like OMG, women should never have to suffer!”

  10. I do not know why people are expecting to find anything less than crass consumerism and leftist propaganda at the TIFF. They don’t capitalize the letters of the abbreviation, especially because they represent proper nouns, and they have a stupid pointless period at the end of a non sentence. The organizers cannot even make a logo without two grammatical errors.

    2. A few years ago, I used to work security at TIFF and even back then it was at the extreme end of the SJW scale. Just being around the organisers and the filmamakers was nauseating.

  11. It’s interesting that this is even a topic of discussion.
    Of course prominent film festivals are packed with left wing garbage. How could it be any different?
    If you are still able to find entertainment in films, television, comedy, popular music or video games, you’re not really red-pilled. All of this stuff is nothing more than hard-left propaganda masquerading as entertainment. If you are still able to “look past the dogma and enjoy it for what it is” then you are still a blue-pill putz.
    I can’t watch any film made after the nineties.

    1. Occasionally something good slips through the cracks. But very rarely. Definitely not worth the time investment to find it, though.

      1. Agree. I enjoyed the movie Sully. Of course, it was made by Clint Eastwood who is kinda red pill. They had to add some made up drama, but overall pretty good. I loved the movies when I was younger and its something I can do with family. But, its getting pretty rare that there is something I can sit through without puking.

    2. That’s just nostalgia, if you look for it you will find the same shit in 90’s films, and even 50’s films!

  12. As an ex filmmaker (20+ years in the biz until three years ago) I can tell you why the film world has become increasingly more “progressive”. It’s because it is one of the largest corporate welfare schemes in the world. Back in the day most foreign governments created film commissions in order to halt the American cultural juggernaut. The USA had the largest film market in the world and were able to dump their product into foreign markets at below cost as they made book at home. At some point the Americans decided to join the game by risking the money of foreign governments instead of their own and so the co-production was born. The draw back to this method is each government had it’s own set of objectives or check boxes it had to meet. Some check boxes are about onscreen or behind the camera talent others are about themes. Then the producer has to take the script over to a number of commissioning editors, people who have never held a camera or a boom mic but possess double majors in feminism and 16th century transgender architecture. Yeah, those are our cultural gatekeepers. So lets say you cobbled together five countries for your co-pro, the French, the Americans, the Canadians the Germans and the Albanians. What have you got? You have a film with an Zac Efron , a one legged French co star who plays the part of an transgendered Quebecois woman fighting Nazi robot pterodactyls ( I’m on a roll here) who are trying to destroy the last copy of “Anne Franks” diary which is hidden in a underground bunker in Albina. And you wonder why you don’t go to the theatre anymore.
    The Koreans do not follow this model which is why their films are worth seeing.

    2. Korean movies feature Korean actors and actresses not every other race (yes, Koreans consider themselves a separate race and not just Asian)

    6. Right before Montreal lost the festival to Toronto a local politician got busted giving public funding to a production that did not even meet the minimum requirements to be eligible.
      Then there was the 2 union system. People who were in the S.T.C.V.Q got screwed.

  14. I know I will be literally Hitler for pointing this out but here goes, when people think Westerns,cowboys, old west etc they don’t picture black guys. It’s just that simple. I’m sure somebody can find pictures of old west black cowboys as I’m sure there had to literally (Hitler) be at least a few but that’s just not what people picture in their mind. They picture Clint Eastwood, John Wayne or the Marlboro Man not colored cowboys.
    That being said i don’t have a problem with black people or any other non whites being in movies. It just seems that in modern movies it’s “forced” for lack of a better way to explain my thoughts on this. It’s not like a “black” story or that a black guy was the best one for a particular part, it’s like they do it just for the sake of diversity or to attempt to force us all together by showing it all the time.(if that makes sense)
    We are all stuck here together nobody is going back to Africa,Europe or wherever so we might as well get along, anybody can see that but, where my problem lies is proverbially having my arm twisted to make me more “tolerant”. Blacks are about 12-14% of the population but judging from television, movies, commercials and music, one would think that every neighborhood is da hood. It just seems…..forced.
    It would be like making a movie about a Confederate army unit and having black actors play the parts, there actually were some black Confederate soldiers but, they were few and far between and no one pictures black soldiers in their mind when you say Confederate Army.
    On another note I think Justin Trudeau is a peter puffer….just saying.

      1. Yeah but, in the movie he looks like a white guy. In West World he totally looked like a badass white guy. Lol I saw the original 7 many moons ago and don’t really recall anything about it.
        In the picture you posted he looks like one of the monks in Kung-Fu.

        1. Eh, fair enough.
          I thought it was a decent western. Not on the level of The Searchers obviously, but definitely an entertaining flick.

        1. Brynner was Russian Orthodox.
          Are you Hitler worshipers just naturally stupid or do you have to work at it?

        5. Bu…but Jewish is just a religion
          (sarcasm)
          Ever hear of a crypto jew? Either way, (((commies))) are responsible for flooding Russia with mongols

        6. I thought Bhill was a fucking idiot, but you’re quickly starting to rival him in stupidity.
          I guess it’s true what they say, stupid is inborn.
          (((paddedummy)))

    4. so because what you picture is white folk, no matter what the truth is, it should stay how you see it in your head, true story bedamned?
      you really are showing all your confederate colors. right now, specifically. when i think ‘confederate’, all i see in my head is inbred yeehaw barefoot dirtroad mayo-sammich juggalo dumbfuck. the truth may be there are some smart people who support the losing side, but in my head, i see inbred yeehaw barefoot dirtroad mayo-sammich juggalo dumbfuck.

        1. but that wasn’t your point. your point was they shouldn’t include blacks as cowboys in fictional movies because that’s not how you pictured it.
          I agreed with your point by stating I shouldn’t consider any confederate supporter smart, because when I think of you all i see is Dukes of Hazzard.

        2. No they shouldn’t put them in westerns because it’s stupid…like you….dumbass.

        3. that right there is a solid argument.
          No, it’s not. You’re a clown, and your name makes even more sense than it did 10 minutes ago. and that 10 minutes was time I could have spent doing anything more intellectually stimulating than talking to you. Like peel a couple of oranges.
          Does anyone else want to step in and help their retarded little brother out on this one?

        5. Ya, those long yellow ones you like are called bananas, not oranges. Oranges have the same name as the color they are, remember Dimarkus?

  16. We need to distinguish between films with a faux progressive agenda and serious films that deal with problems minority groups face. There is a massive difference between the films of Pedro Costa, for example, and the films that are pumped out by Hollywood that deal with similar issues. There is Oscar bait crap and there is serious cinema. Chalk and cheese.
    Overall though it’s true that film festivals are definitely playing the diversity card, not just TIFF and it’s becoming a real problem as festivals are now loaded with crap films and charging premium prices for tickets.

  17. “Birth of a Nation” ?
    So they’re making a movie glorifying a slave revolt where blacks went on a rampage and hacked to death any whites they could get their hands on including women and children?
    I recall reading one of the survivors was a boy who climbed up into the chimney to hide while the slaves hacked apart his whole family.
    I’ve seen the ad for this movie. They really try to push the narrative of slavery being some sadistic system that doesn’t reflect reality. A whipped slave was an injured slave and an injured slave couldn’t work.
    More whites died in a single week of the Civil War than all the slaves who were ever executed or lynched.

    2. I would Ike to see a movie based on the African chieftains and their tribes that were responsible in the rounding up of African slaves in their villages and sold on in the slave markets. Africans seem to blame whitey for slavery when they imposed it on their own people.

  18. The Chinese and Koreans own Toronto and Vancouver.
    Dumb whites chimping out for muh gay rights while the Asians buy up all the real estate and install themselves in the top positions in finance, academia, and tech.
    I’m really starting to lose my concern for white people: the average white person is not an RoK or AmRen reader but closer to a brain dead slug addicted to consumption ,materialism, and mental and spiritual self-flagellation.

  19. Does this Denzel character brutally and sadistically kill any white people in this movie? I can’t pay $15 for a ticket unless I am promised some gnarly blaxploitation violence against whitey

    1. I was in the highschool when Mississippi Burning came out. I went to see it on a double date at the theater on 14th street. Now that is kind of a posh area, but back then it was where people went to buy drugs and shit. This was maybe first few weeks of movie being opened.
      Anyway, sat through the whole movie. My buddy was with his girl and I had my arm around one of her friends. Anyway, the theater is packed. That movie was big. And I am thinking maybe half the people black and the other half a mix of white and Spanish. After the movie ends with this super dramatic sad ending I stand up and say, as loud as I can, to my buddy “you know tom…..you were right. this movie just wasn’t as funny the second time”
      Loads of bad stares and we got out of there pretty quickly.

        1. hahaha I wanted to go see it in Forest Hills which is a heavily Jewish neighborhood in the outer bororughs of New York to do just that but by the 90’s my reputation as an asshole was such that no one would trust me to go

        2. ah, I’m lying….still a good Bit though.
          In reality I never got into hassling the general public, though I have been accused otherwise…

        3. for me it wouldn’t be about hassling the general public but embarrassing the people I was with. My comment in Mississippi burning was to make my buddy and our dates wish they were dead, not to harass the other movie goers.

        4. I figured. Nothing I’ve read from you suggests ‘public asshole’.
          But yes, I too used to thrive on embarrassing my ‘friends’ like that, ALWAYS being the loudest motherhood to enter a room and what not. Still makes me smile 25 years later thinking of some of that pure jackassery…

        5. I do it with my nieces and nephews now (between ages 4-16 there are 12 of them). You would think I have Tourette’s the way I will yell like a lunatic just to fucking embarrass the hell out of them when I take them out for ice cream.

        6. I hear that – from what I’ve read I don’t see a ‘public
          asshole’ in you.
          What I said was in the spirit of Jackie Martling, laughing
          over the more tragic news items on Howard Stern…good stuff.
          But yes, I used to love doing just that, embarrassing the
          shit out of my ‘friends’, being the loudest motherfukker to enter the room… Pure
          youthful jackassery
          still makes me grin 25 yrs later.

        7. thought I lost my comment and re-wrote it….
          Shit, if Tourette’s existed when we were kids we would have gotten away with murder!

    2. yeah, i’m sure he shoots plenty of white folk in this movie. along with a team of ancillary white folk, native americans, a hispanic and an asian.
      I’ll save you a ticket if you want to come with me.

      1. You will never see violence committed against:
        animals, children, women, and minorities
        only against white men

        1. nah, i’m sure there will be plenty of violence against natives.
          but yes. the majority of people getting shot will probably be white dudes. I’ll bring tissues if it’s going to get you emotional during the movie.

  20. Why do these liberals always look so unhealthy? They always look like some virus is breaking down the connective tissue in their bodies. The elderly people in my family never looked like Soros. These people literally reflect the sin they have stored up.

  21. I don’t understand TorontoPride apologizing to BLM. How did they deepen racial divide? Did they catch the smoke bomber?

    1. “Hetero” Canadians apologize for something that is the other guy’s fault, what did you think the fags were going to do when confronted with a bomb hurling chimp out?

  22. Has anyone else noticed that a black director can’t make a movie about anything other than “being black?” Likewise, every black author writes about being black, the black condition, real and imaginary racial grievances etc.
    White directors can make a movie about aliens or Asians or Africans or insects or robots but black authors can’t create anything that doesn’t tie into being black.
    Interesting.

    2. If I try out for the role of some run away spade slave in a movie and don’t get the part can I sue for racial discrimination?

      1. No. As a white man without vocal fry, you will be typecast as “evil oppressive aristocratic white landowner”
        And of course owning slaves (a completely legal thing to do at the time) in which you provided food, shelter, care in exchange for working the land means you deserve to be sadistically tortured and murdered in the eyes of movie goers. They’ll applaud and cheer at the scene in which the virtuous noble slave in search of his freedom exacts just revenge on the evil white man.

    3. You’re being obtuse again, Waldo.
      Are you definitely saying black directors haven’t made movies about subjects other than being black?

    4. and again, so I’m understanding you correctly…
      1. you don’t want blacks appropriating white culture, so they shouldn’t be allowed to make movies about subjects you deem “white”
      2. you also have an issue black directors directing black films for black people about black issues
      How do those two arguments make sense, argued by the same person?
      Waldo. you’re arguing yourself into a corner. In my dealings with you, I’ve realized all I have to do is let you talk without interruption and you will trip yourself up every damn time. It’s like watching a giraffe learn how to walk.

      1. Blacks shouldn’t be allowed to have anything to do with movies until one of you figures out how to build a camera… So never

  23. “There’s always Cannes”.. now as my head tips back and a roar with laughter. But seriously.. there’s always Sundance =D
    Anyhow, Toronto sounds like a real piece of work. I cannot believe — fucking believe, mind — what BLM is getting away with up there. A race relations award? Is this a joke?? It’s as if the whole of Toronto turned into one big Tenderloin or South-Central or Over-the-Rhein.. with the minority white populace made a bitch to the local gangstas, terrified for their lives with a gun to their heads.
    I mean, you don’t have to like the LGBTs.. but being fucked by BLM during their own parade, and THEN being forced to apologize for it! Christ that made me mad. It’s as if some homie rapes a white woman in a ditch.. and the Judge makes her get on her hands and knees and beg forgiveness for bloodying up the poor African American’s cock.
    Fuck them all to Hell.

  24. BTW, I don’t have problem with black actors. Frankly, while most white actors are playing lilly-livered betas and blubbering cucks, black guys are bringing power and masculinity to the screen which is refreshing. If they just had to remake M7, I’m not complaining if the likes of Denzel Washington was given top billing. At the very least it’s historically plausible.
    Now they just need the Duke, Lee Marvin, Sam Peckinpah, and a case of whiskey… 😉
    But FFS I hope they haven’t stuck a woman in one of the roles. But they probably have.. coz as we know, it’s 2016 and violence BY women is kewl!

    1. the big question is what do we see first. Black James Bond or Female James Bond?

      1. Black James Bond. Even you people here would rather see a black man than a woman playing the role.

        1. Honestly it makes no difference to me. It would be a sign that the casting happened based on SJW values rather than who would best fit the role. I am an obsessed Bond fan. I nearly quit when they made a female M but I’ll admit she wasn’t good in the role. If they make Bond black or gay or female (all ideas thrown out) I will not watch

        2. That renders your question moot.
          And I’m a huge Bond fan. And just so I understand where you’re coming from: a fantasy spy movie about a man (or series of men) who is an orphan, dubbed 007/James Bond, couldn’t possibly be anything other than white?
          I’d start looking for a new series to love if I were you. David Oyelowo is the voice of Bond in the latest audio novel. And it’s canon.

        3. I don’t doubt you are right. And it isn’t that I think a bond character COULD NOT be played by a black person. My problem is that I see the reason behind casting a black person being Hollywood thinking “it is about time” and not that “this is the best person for the gig” It is the intention behind even thinking that it would be necessary to cast a faggot or a minority or a woman in a role that has been played by white men since 1962 because equality. Why don’t they recast Malcom X and make the main character Jackie chan?

        4. because Malcolm X was a real person who was black, James Bond isn’t.
          But I see your point, to a point. I would also disagree with casting if, say, a serial character’s race/sex was changed to appease a group. But, if you see any casting that differs from what you think should be the main character, you could easily chalk it up to “SJWs ruining a great franchise.” I honestly believe, even if David Oleyowo acted circles around anyone else and was the best man to play James Bond, white folk would be unhappy because he was black.
          And trust… Damien Lewis (the current favorite for the next Bond) is a fine actor, but to say he’s a better actor than Oleyowo is objectively false.

        5. My problem, again, isn’t the black people playing bond. It is the white people behind the bond franchise seeing this venerable movie franchise as a vehicle for social change. You want to make a movie about an black MI6 agent…if it is a cool movie I will go see it…I have been hearing a lot about Oleyowo. Make an awesome spy movie with him. Why does it have to be part of the bond franchise? Somewhere there are a bunch of lefty faggots thinking they are making some kind of social change by casting a minority in the role. They will strike a real blow for equality with this movie. And that is not what a movie should be about. A movie is for entertainment. This franchise has a long history. Fair enough about Malcom x being historical figure. What about if we made a remake of Blade with Jackie Chan. What if we made Uma Thurman in a remake of the color purple or Matthew McConnehey as the new shaft? Imagine, some tall pretty white boy with a southern accent playing a remake a shaft. The fact is, there is no point other than to make a political statement to making Oleyowo James Bond rather than just write a new spy thriller for him. That is something I can’t abide by.

        6. now we’re getting somewhere.
          to you, it doesn’t matter if the non-white actor could blow his white contemporaries out of the water on screen. it comes down to you not being pleased because the character is not white, no matter how good or fit for the role he is. “This franchise has a long history” of casting prominent British actors who are just short of becoming a household name. In the age range who could play bond, who would put there? Damien Lewis, who may look the “traditional” part but has none of the British acting cred normally associated with Bond, or David Oleyowo, a classically trained Shakespearean actor with multiple drama and action movies under his belt?
          Let’s go with second place, because he looks more like Bond.

        7. I think we are getting to a place of agreement. However, from Sean Connery to Daniel Craig the franchise has always picked actors who WEREN’T household names. They became so after, and because of, the bond films. Finding a relatively unknown actor who generally fits the physical description Ian Flemming set out in the books is what they have done for each and every single bond.
          I don’t doubt David Oleyowo is an excellent actor. And maybe he would make a great spy in a movie. I will go see it. In three books he is described to look like Hoagy Carmichael and I don’t care if David Oleyowo is the greatest actor to ever live, a look alive of Hoagy Carmichael he is not.
          What is important to remember about bond is that he is not a rich sophisticate. He is an orphan who joined the navy and was picked for a variety of reasons to be a double o agent. One of those reasons was that they could pass him off as old world class in proper british society. Him being tall, white, blue eyed, short haired, tone but not overly muscular, etc. etc. etc. are more than just a coincidence in the actors. They are more than just how he is described in the books. They are part and parcel of his back story.
          Like I said, the only reason to deviate from the 54 year long history of casting relatively unknown actors who match flemming’s description of bond is to use the movie franchise as a tool for social change and that is not a movie I will watch. Period. No problem with black actors, but bond is bond and changing him is, in my opinion, rank heresy which is politically motivated.

        8. also, and for what it is worth, I was one of the people against Daniel Craig as bond because of his blonde hair.

        9. one last thing, even if Damien Lewis wasn’t as good of an actor (and remember, good is relative to the role) that doesn’t mean that these are the only two people in the running. I think Henry Cavill, Tom Hiddleston, James McAvoy would make an excellent bond…better than Oleyowo. I do, however, think there is an excellent role for David Oleyowo which would be
          Dr. Kananga in a retelling of Live and Let die.

        10. Jackie Chan as Blade does not make sense. Snipes and Chan are both martial artists, but Chan is more circus-like which wouldn’t fit Blade’s brooding character. Viable white replacement: Cyril Raffaelli
          Uma Thurman’s Color Purple. The story wouldn’t make sense. a turn of the century black overseer with a white housemaid? Be real.
          Matthew McConnaughey in Shaft. He’s a great actor, but he’s not hard enough to play Shaft, nor does he carry the street cred to pull it off. Viable white replacement: Vince Vaughn.

        11. Yes. Jackie Chan as Blade doesn’t make sense. Uma Thurman’s Color of purple doesn’t make sense. And a black bond doesn’t make sense. Like I said: Make a black spy movie and if it is good I will like it. but don’t try to push some bs equality agenda by destroying a respected franchise in the name of making things even.

        12. I’ll give you James McAvoy; he’s charming and a great actor.
          Hiddleston is excellent but would be a much better villain than hero.
          Henry Cavill – he had his shot with U.N.C.L.E. He’s a decent actor, but in my opinion can’t command a scene like McAvoy, Hiddleston or Oleyowo.
          Oleyowo as Dr. Kananga is actually a pretty solid choice.

        13. McAvoy is my number 1 choice right now. A live and let die with a McAvoy bond and Oleyowo playing Dr Katanga would be fucking amazing. I hope you see my point at least. Bond’s appearance is tied up inextricably with his back story. Movie makers changing that appearance are choosing social justice causes over deference to the back story of the protagonist. That is totally unacceptable. I am sure it would make for a good movie, but not a good Bond movie.

        14. well-argued, I’ll concede. I’ve never read a Bond book but have seen all the movies multiple times. if the book describes him as having a certain look, then by all means they should stick to that look.
          I suppose I originally considered Oleyowo a fair play for Bond because given your solid argument, there have been many non-white characters played by white characters throughout cinema, so I’m less apt to call it an SJW issue to put a non-white character in a white role.
          Aside from all that…agreed, McAvoy/Oleyowo would be goddamn amazing.

        15. In Shawshank redemption when Red was cast as Morgan Freedman despite being a red haired irish guy in the book (in movie tip of the hat to that is Andy Saying “why do they call you red” and morgan freedman saying something like “because I’m irish”) I had absolutely no problem. The Character of red was there to tell the story of andy. It didn’t matter what he was racially. But bond looking the way he does is as much a part of his character as his martini or his Walther PPK.

  25. The only time Hollywood really screams Diversity is to cover and justify bad films and awful acting.

  28. Toronto is all about commercialism and following the latest pathetic fad in dining or progressive activism. I chewed my Anglo bud out one time (his family has been here for a couple of centuries) for being part of a ‘people’ so lame that they couldn’t fashion a real culture after two centuries in this damn spot. How much longer did they need…5 more centuries? Jeez. I’m gone soon; it’s been a few years in the making but I’ve finally got my affairs in order and can’t wait to get outta here. The city is the most emotionally cold and uncomfortable place on the planet; I bet a slum in a third world country somewhere has got more of a spark…

    1. Being condemned to exist (because you don’t really live, you just exist) in Can’t-a-duh due to misfortune of birth or because you are a foreigner who was dishonestly solicited into moving there, is worse than being dead.
      You freeze your ass off half the time so you don’t do shit half the year. If you do it’s torture. You might as well be living in a rocket in outer space or at the bottom of the ocean in a submarine. So even if you “live” to 80 years old it’s like you only really “lived” to 40. Worst of all is everyone is a total cunt, the females obviously, and the males otherwise they wouldn’t still worship the Queen of England by sending her millions of dollars per year, but kicked the tea suckers out instead like Americans did. I say males because having a cock and balls clearly doesn’t make them real men.
      The brutal, frigid climate turns the females’ vaginas into ice boxes and they are bitches because of it. They are all butt ugly because the attractive women managed to sell their asses to move where it’s warm so they could lay out in the sun instead of being pasty. The cold weather causes their mashed potato bodies to store fat as insulation.
      In order to leach taxes they hand out Canadian citizenship like tic tacs to the sheisty scum and dregs of the turd world because any local with half a brain does not want to subject their offspring to the same unbearable conditions in Can’t-a-duh that their idiot parents subjected them to so they spare their kids the misery by not having them at all which means that you are surrounded by assholes exclusively. Family included. The face palm generating conversations with relatives on holidays and political/economic policies they vote in reflect it.
      An entire welfare state exists, it’s a province called Quebec. Instead of Spanish most of the inhabitants speak French almost exclusively, government employees included. Even though the rest of the cUntry supports them financially Quebec wastes millions of dollars on referendums to separate even though they were stomped in a war hundreds of years ago, which they celebrate annually for some illogical reason. It’s like the federal government paying for Indians on a reserve to have a vote to get their own state in the US! This instability causes no foreign companies to want to risk investing there and the Qebec-ers are too fucking stupid and useless to start any themselves unless they are fully subsidized and granted a monoply by the government. These companies always lose money instead of turning a profit but the government keeps dumping tax dollars into them to avoid even higher rates of unemployment than exist already because most of the population “works” at them if they aren’t idiotic, unilingual bureaucrats in the civil service hired based exclusively on nepotism. Then to add insult to injury there is this
      http://www.international.gc.ca/department-ministere/evaluation/2012/dev-ifa-fia12.aspx?lang=eng
      Just look at the mongoloids in the states claiming that they will move to Can’t-a-duh if Trump wins because he is the first candidate to make any election promises that aren’t complete shit. That is 99.9% of hosers.
      They delusionally spew nonsense “like Canada is the best country in the world to live in” when the statistics prove that to be bullshit if you need to look at them because you lack common sense.
      SJW/multiculti/commie central, government corruption without any acccountability, no right to bear arms, no right of freedom of expression due to hate speech “laws” (even though these “laws” violate the Charter) or any other basic human right in reality even though reading the strictly theoretical Charter would mislead you about that.
      A half a fag/bisexual (who inherited severe mental illness from his whorish mother) PM named JustinE who prances around in a pink shirt at a Pride parade with a butt plug up his swish ass while his beard of a wife cheers him on next to a queer AIDS infected muslim rapefugee is the most popular politican in Canadian history because he lied about legalizing weed to get votes even though his pedophilie father committed high treason in 1974 making him the worst criminal since the birth of the nation.
      A dirty wizard, homeless santa beard having, flying carpet riding towel
      head as minister of “defense” (offensive war actually) even though his kind have a grudge against
      muslims that goes back since before guns were even invented yet Can’t-a-duh is matched only by cucked Germany when it comes to the number of muslims with no ID imported?! Of course Barry Soetoro publicly praises this suicidal, illogical action.
      Justine pretends that he is a tough guy by “winning” a charity boxing match against a feather indian coke head half his size, then Justine pisses a bunch of tax money away by giving more free shit to the savages who don’t even pay taxes.
      Anyone unlucky enough to be stuck in Can’t-a-duh for even a second is failing at life no matter how much money they have.

Comments are closed.