Faith Goldy, a Canadian political commentator formerly with Rebel Media, is a contender in the election for Mayor of Toronto, to be held this Monday. She’s running an above-board and professional campaign, her message seems fairly solid, and her campaign’s production quality is excellent. So, what’s the problem?
Her candidacy is perhaps an archetypal study into how the media will negatively treat viable populist election candidates. There’s an unwritten rule that a line of demarcation is drawn by the media between “acceptability” and “unacceptability”. Of course, these parameters by their very nature are easily adjustable.
If you’re inside the box of respectability (not seen as a genuine threat) then they’ll treat you with relative disdain but will not pursue the nuclear option. However, if you cross the line that they have arbitrarily drawn, then you can expect to receive treatment the likes of which Faith Goldy is currently receiving.
Their first stage is to ignore the candidate. The media knows how much power it possesses in terms of controlling political narratives. If people don’t know your campaign exists, even if they agree with you, it’s going to be impossible to reach them. If the first time someone discovers your political existence is when they go to the polling station, you’re in for a bad night.
However, in the modern age the internet has become a reservoir of potential for populist breakthroughs, as Trump and others have proven. The international globalists, after licking their wounds, pursued a ruthless policy of de-platforming – accusing people of spreading ‘fake news’ and then blocking ‘fake news sites’ – which is merely anything not considered as ‘respectable discourse.’
Post-Charlottesville, the internet has become far more restricted. The events of Charlottesville have been used, much like the Reichstag Fire, to paint broad strokes of slander across all shades of nationalism and deny them free speech. Faith Goldy’s nascent candidacy received this silent treatment from the media: no interviews, very few articles, no publicity. The intention doubtlessly being to strangle her candidacy in the cradle.
Yet the internet is still largely a free place, and she’s had a following online in her own right for some years. Ergo, she possessed her own means to break through the imposed chamber of silence. Because of this, she and her allies were the only ones covering her campaign and by extension giving her positive and honest coverage. The regime noticed she held this card and thus activated Stage Two.
After being ignored, the decision begrudgingly came to eventually cover her campaign. Caricatures are a seriously dangerous thing in politics, if one can build a caricature of an opponent it can easily be knocked down, and the masses will believe it. Even by Vice’s ‘journalistic’ standards, referring to Goldy as a “shitbird” is perhaps one of the most egregious examples of lazy doggerel and open hostility in the media. Other articles by more high-brow publications are less explicit in their open hatred of her. They will invariably refer to her as ‘far-right,’ never referencing her platform, her campaign, or her character. Just slander, accusations, and bile.
Now we’re at a stage where they’ve covered her. She exists, but they’ve presented a caricatured image of her campaign to deliberately taint voter’s impressions of her. These articles can now be cited as ‘respectable sources,’ because they come from mainstream outlets. Simply check Wikipedia for this.
Her Wikipedia page is utter slander, because Wikipedia won’t accept ‘primary sources/self-published sources,’ meaning in effect that what she says about herself is deemed ‘unreliable,’ yet the caricatured nonsense of a ‘respectable newspaper’ are considered to be objective truth. The media will only cover you as long as it hurts your image and candidacy – by making people believe you’re a racist for example. It is a controlled narrative of negative coverage. They hold the levers of truth in this realm and she does not.
Now, with the election nearing, we’ve progressed into a new stage. In democratic elections there’s an expectation that the media should present all contenders with a relatively equal opportunity to air their platform. This is what happens in a healthy democracy. What’s happening in Toronto right now is the antithesis of healthy, as this opportunity is explicitly denied to a particular candidate.
We see this most poignantly by the fact she was not invited to the first Mayoral Debate. Often these exclusions can be justified by a candidate polling too poorly, but for Faith Goldy this excuse doesn’t work given that she polled 6%. It’s not enough to win the election, but it’s enough to put her firmly in third place. Five candidates were invited to the first mayoral debate, yet three of them never polled above Goldy. She was excluded from the debate – and they were invited.
This was more than a mere snub, it was an attempt to actively suppress her candidacy by denying her the medium of a televised debate. It would’ve been an opportunity to sidestep the controlled narrative which has previously been relayed to voters. In response, Goldy pursued a pugnacious approach. She took to the stage regardless, and was quickly escorted out by security.
This proactive event is red meat for her base and it surely captured the evening’s headlines. The media realised the potential for this event to blow up, and so they’ve largely suppressed news of it, despite it being objectively newsworthy. Her exclusion, her taking to the stage regardless of that exclusion, and her being frogmarched out, has been intentionally given very little air by the media.
After this debate stunt the Canadian regime has been recalibrating its strategy. In Canada, Bell Media as an institution controls much of the television broadcasting airwaves. Her campaign, as all other serious campaigns invariably do, paid Bell Media to run her candidate advertisements on their network. To the media, the law is malleable and always subject to interpretation, and if ‘de-platforming fascists’ is the cry of the day then that will take supremacy over silly little things like the electoral law or fairness.
To conclude, there’s still fight left in Faith Goldy yet. She’s a candidate who is undergoing a baptism by fire in the realities of this controlled system. Her response to the coercion of the media has been innovative. Innovation is necessary for populist candidates to succeed. Due to Goldy’s campaign transparency we can see first-hand the slyness and the depths to which the media will sink in order to prevent an unanointed outsider candidate from gaining momentum.
She is unlikely to be successful in her bid for mayor, but regardless of that or what you think of her views, she will have set a precedent, she will have exposed the corruption deep-rooted within the regime, and will have pursued alternative strategies of breaking through the undemocratic repression of a corrupt and biased media.