home

A sad story of cause pimp fighters at Ryerson radio.

January, 2012

Here is a story of some people who have not made out very well at fighting a gang of pimps who tried to take over a very sweet honey pot. In this case it was the Trotskyites trying to use CKLN Ryerson student radio as a power base. For more background about the whole CKLN mess, you should visit the CKLN section in "bad orgs".

I hope that the group now trying to reestablish the station get the broadcast license back and are not again subject to cooptation attacks from psycholefties. There is some danger that they will be; the Ryerson student union at present still seem to be controlled by the Trotskyites. This Palin foundation has control over the radio station's premises and had sided with the slime balls before.

This piece is mostly a commentary on one person and some friends of his who were also involved in the fight with this nasty group of people. Attached to it is an article I wrote from notes I took of an interview with this person in late 2009. I polished it up a little before putting it up once more.

It is something that should be part of the cause pimps archive for people who would like to learn more about why anything non profit tends to go wrong in Toronto. You can read it here. However, the story after the "story so far" is also very instructive and cautionary.

the problem

So, we have a problem in Canada, especially in Toronto, that we have people who are mostly the children of the elite, who cannot get anywhere in the real world but think they should be ordering working people around. Of course they become one sort of other of communists and feel they have to be "more revolutionary than thou". I am not from Toronto but I am amazed at how they seem to be everywhere there is the slightest opening for them. I shit on them.

They are aided by the usual avant colonial Canadian problem of an inadequate legal and political system that creates a playground for many kinds of criminal behavior. One problem is the courts, more about that. But a lot of it is the irresponsibility of people in positions of authority, who cannot be made to act responsibly.

In this story, the main irresponsible authority is the Ryerson university administration. They refused to intervene and let the problem grow and grow. The point of this story is that it is just about impossible to deal with a gang of psychopathic and narcissistic bully types, especially when they have a lot of cover for their activities.

It is worse when they have anyone in their way, anyone they are targeting, isolated. These kind are always good at dividing people who should have the sense to work together. But even when you had some people willing to cooperate to oppose the creeps it was almost impossible to defeat them. They just kept regrouping and coming back.

the failure

At the time I took notes of "Gs" exasperated rave, he had beaten the Lehrer bunch in one round and felt that he and his associates had the goods on them to take them to court and take them out. I cannot know the details of how this turned out, but the most recent news is that they have lost a round in court and are hit with "costs". What is depressing is that it seems the costs are against this Mary Young who I understand has medical problems and a shortage of money.

I can deduce three things. First, G and friends are being milked by their lawyer. Two, their law suit is completely futile. Three, Lehrer has discovered just how to get under G's skin.

I have some experience of taking unarrestable criminals to court. I have learned the hard way to never use lawyers; to learn to conduct my own case. It seems Lehrer is conducting his own case, and making motion after frivolous motion which G thinks he has to pay his lawyer to answer to. This is very lucrative for the lawyer, who would have no incentive to put an end to it.

reality

I do not know why anyone expects to get justice from the family compact-age courts of this country, especially in Ontario. If you can speak for yourself, have a simple and clear case, and are after strictly monetary damages, you have a chance. But even with this, you are going to be fighting the courts more than the creeps who victimized you.

Why this is should not be hard to figure out. G notices that this society is very open to criminal behavior. It always has been; sometimes more so, sometimes less so. This is so because the courts do not seem to want to really deal with criminal behavior, except in very limited areas. G thinks that this is because they are afraid they will have too much work to do.

However, we have to have rule of law if we are going to have a stable society, or even a civilization at all. The confidence of evil doers that they will not be punished largely creates the large amount of crime all around. The greater surety of punishment would greatly reduce crime, especially opportunistic crimes like those of the CKLN opportunists. Therefore, courts that are able to really deal with criminal behavior should not be much more expensive to operate.

The ruling classes in society must know that their defective legal system reduces economic efficiency and makes government more complicated. It would not be hard to make it much more effective. That they leave it the way it is and fight any effort at reform says that it suits them as it is.

It suits them because the protection it allows them making it very difficult for people without money to assert their rights against wealth and power, is more valuable to them that the greater stability a sensible system would bring.

It is often noted that the world is run by psychopaths. That is, people who have no conscience and live by manipulating other people. Such people thrive in an unstable, "open to crime" environment. They do not like the idea of victims refusing to be victims and demanding and obtaining justice. So, such people like the legal system the way it is, operated to bully and crush the hopes of victims seeking justice.

This would hold true even if the abusers from which justice is demanded are the kind of people the ruling class should not like; hard core leftists. This is because such super lefties are no real threat to the present order and as noted, often the children of elite families.

There are somewhat less sordid reasons why courts might not like to deal with the kind of case that G makes against the Ryerson clique. It puts the courts in an awkward position to have to fix other people's mistakes. The CKLN mess was an administrative problem that never should have become a legal problem. When the Ryerson administration refused to do their jobs, they in effect dumped it onto the court system.

the better way

The real solution for this problem was not to take it to court but to take it to the Ryerson students who are paying for something they do not have any interest in. Going to court with this is a rather elitist approach. I attempted to explain this a couple of times to G but he was not listening to anything, just raving at me to take down the web page before Lehrer screwed him some more.

I think the idea was that he wanted to preserve CKLN at all costs, and wanted the basically elitist and isolated board structure kept. He and his friends just wanted it run their way. G was actually at the CRTC hearings about revoking the license, asking the federal bureaucrats to delay a decision until he could get results from his law suit. This did not impress them. Any involvement of the mere students might lead them to decide to shut down the station altogether, or to decide they want more open control of it.

This is approximately what happened after the broadcast license was pulled and the Trotsky/Lehrer/CFS board was booted out of the building. Some of the naive do gooders matured enough to realize that "change from within" is a fairy tale and to try doing things in an open, egalitarian way. They were given some incentive to this by some libertarian type enrolled at Ryerson who started a petition to have CKLN defunded.

The counter petition, asking that CKLN continue but be made to serve the interests of the students who paid for it, won by a large margin. This motivated the Ryerson administration to finally act constructively and create a new framework with student involvement but also grownup and expert overview. Why on earth could this obvious approach not have been taken years ago?

conclusion

Not only have G and friends lost but both they and the Trotskys and Andy Lehrer have become totally irrelevant. It should have been obvious that the case, whatever the details of it, would drag on for years while the Lehrer bunch have already altered the facts on the ground and events have completely moved on.

G was demolished by these cause pimps, because he is an arrogant ass. As such, he delayed a solution to the CKLN trouble and further imperiled it, rather than defend it. And it troubles me to think that he may have led other, naive and vulnerable people into harm for nothing, especially this Mary Young.

So now, this is going up on the net, as well as the original notes from Gs narration. I will not entertain any further pleadings to take it down. I wish I had not responded to previous whines. It is something instructive for those who need to fight against psychopathic cause pimps trying to hijack any institution.

The moral of the story is that you cannot oppose people like that from a position of elitism. You can only come at them from a position of populism. If you cannot engage the public that benefits from what you are seeking to protect, that you are not the person to lead the opposition.

Also, if you do not have the character to with stand the psychological games these kinds of people will play on you, to not be drawn into playing their game, than you are not someone to lead.

The counter for psychopathic opportunists is for people to give a damn, and to not be coming from their own petty egotism. If there is not a public willing to support an institution and which cares that it function properly, then it is nothing and is better closed down.

It is never about you.

tr

home