May 21, 2015

The Rebel's breakout star Lauren Southern: "I'm trying to go against everything I've been taught"

Rebel Staff
 

Lauren Southern's first video for TheRebel.media -- "Why I Am Not a Feminist" -- went viral, getting well over half a million views.

I was in British Columbia recently, and caught up with Southern to talk about why she thinks her videos are so popular.

She's still a university student, so she shares some depressing stories about how difficult it can be to be the only student challenging the Marxist worldview of academia. Her instructors and fellow students tend to mock her or just ignore her.

Southern, however, isn't complaining.

She's more determined than ever to keep questioning what she's being taught and creating her iconoclastic videos for The Rebel.

For that, we're grateful!

 

READ Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights --
Ezra Levant’s book about the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, censorship and the Mohammed cartoons was voted "the best political book of the last 25 years."

JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-05-28 19:18:44 -0400
@ Robert Prongay…who said: “isn’t hearing the other side creating a more informed student? The whole Socratic method…etc….” …Robert she ISN’T “HEARING THE OTHER SIDE”..that seems to be her point….she, the student, HAS BECOME THE ONLY OTHER SIDE…there is no Socratic method here…she is TRYING to GO AGAINST ALL (ALL….SHE SAYS ALL) they are teaching her with no experience or referencing of what the OTHER SIDE ACTUALLY IS……from what she is saying, she is dropped into this left wing education system with NO ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT and somehow she is trying to oppose them. If that is true, what hope is there in such a system for any students WHO DON’T EVEN KNOW THERE IS ANOTHER SIDE????…IF SHE SAID THEY WERE PRESENTING TWO SIDES AND SHE WAS CHOOSING ONE OR THE OTHER, THEN ONE MIGHT CONSIDER THIS AN EDUCATION. But, rather, she infers that she is being ‘brainwashed’ and she has determined not to accept what they are teaching…this is a waste of time and money…if she can do this on her own, why is she paying to have to learn, at here own expense, FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES, THE OPPOSITE of what she is taught…something here makes NO SENSE!

On the other side, if she is getting Socratic method and a full spectrum of ideas then how can you explain that she is rejecting ALL that she is being taught? Is she just a plain genius who has come up with something new, a brand new angle that no one has heard about, bursting on the world with inventive brilliance?

Frankly, if I had a child entering higher education, I would advise them to take practical college courses rather than the so-called arts that have been hijacked by left wing pundits…to learn rather to make things, fix things, create things and avoid the social ‘sciences’ so-called.

@ LIZA…I agree that “You enter University with the hope you will be given information from all sides and tools with which to use and decipher that information” Yeah, you HOPE YOU WILL BE GIVEN INFO FROM ALL SIDES, but instead, it seems quite clear that she is NOT BEING GIVEN THAT…and so she just rejects ALL they are teaching her…that infers that she is only getting one side…THAT IS HARDLY UNIVERSITYTHAT IS JUST PLAIN INDOCTRINATION…( and candidly, it was already like that in the social sciences when I was at university. )

Of COURSE she should never swallow anything hook, line, and sinker…but she is apparently on her own here…either she is getting several sides or she is getting ONE SIDE. In her case, she makes it clear she is getting ONE POINT OF VIEW. That is not education….again…it is INDOCTRINATION. If that is the way she is being taught, it is a waste of money. My concern is that if she is telling the truth about her education, there is something SEVERELY wrong with either the school or the system…knowing how the elementary and secondary system has BECOME a system of indoctrination into left wing thinking, I believe our country’s university education system is also in grave danger and has already fallen prey to being no more than a system of MIND CONTROL for all our children! (for anyone who believes in liberty, free thought and enterprise…we need to address this failure now, if it is not too late!)…although, from my experience, this has been ONGOING for over 50 years….AND SO, frankly, it IS too late. Professors who don’t tow the line lose tenure… or have to go to private universities that permit free thought or alternative points of view… In fact, the censorship of thought goes well beyond universities to news media production as well…To get a taste of this, watch the very entertaining: “Expelled” on youtube….

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g
commented 2015-05-27 23:20:43 -0400
You enter University with the hope you will be given information from all sides and tools with which to use and decipher that information. I don’t think anyone goes into it expecting to be told how to think, and if Lauren did NOT question the bullshit she was being expected to swallow hook line and sinker, then there might be room for personal criticism.
commented 2015-05-27 13:02:05 -0400
I think Judy is being at least a little tongue in cheek, as was Joan when she cautioned Lauren NOT to disregard teachings about sunlight and cancer.
I’m sure Lauren’s a very nice person, and if the Rebel readers mistake her pleasant banalities for insight and “iconoclasm”, no harm is done, as long as she doesn’t take the encomium of this crowd too seriously.
commented 2015-05-27 12:49:53 -0400
Judy, isn’t hearing the other side creating a more informed student? The whole Socratic method is predicated on discovering contradictions in your own beliefs yet you dismiss this as at a minimum as being annoying. Lauren stated as much herself that she wants to hear these contrary positions, why not just stop telling us how you feel individuals can best spend their money to achieve YOUR goals.
commented 2015-05-26 07:46:35 -0400
I still think the bottom line is the waste of money Lauren has spent and is spending on her ‘education’ when she is determined to go against it all…WHO is spending this money and WHY? Surely her parents can’t be pleased that their money is thus spent…I hope she is carrying the entire cost of this ridiculous exercise that could only be carried out in a country that obviously has more money than sense…providing such inane courses. Why not send this money to a place where the money could be used for growing crops or building wells rather than entertaining foolish rebellious children. This seems to me to be the apex of foolishness when there are courses that really count…why not take up mechanical engineering or even photography or something USEFUL so you don’t ‘take the courses’ ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF GOING AGAINST THEM ALL’…This is at best annoying and at worst disgusting.
commented 2015-05-26 07:22:34 -0400
Peter, I’m not sure whether your comments reflected personal experience in being censored by the CBC, or whether you were simply toeing the party line. Your evasion suggests the latter. If you SERIOUSLY believe that CBC edits comments that disagree with a story, or that express a right wing perspective, I strongly suggest you choose any thread that follows a story about the NDP, or native people, or climate change and read it through. I guarantee you will read critical comments. As I said before, comments that are obscene or clearly libelous are usually removed.
You seem like a reasonable person: do the experiment.
commented 2015-05-25 20:15:20 -0400
Ok. Back from work.

My personal experience with the CBC comments is just that, my personal experience. I don’t need to justify my experience to you or anyone else, nor will I do so just so I can be verbally attacked, just I I will be to this comment I am posting now.

I am closing down this conversation now, so have at’er Adam and Terry. Let the hate shit cokmments fly!
commented 2015-05-25 11:52:40 -0400
Terry, after work I will.
commented 2015-05-25 07:34:48 -0400
Peter: I performed a little experiment just now. I visited the CBC website and found the first story I could about some of the topics that get “Rebel” types excitable – Aboriginal people, the NDP, Trudeau, Wynne, etc. Here are some of the comments on the Notley inauguration thread:

""ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." – John Kennedy. Don’t ever say that at a NDP meeting, or your membership will be torn up in your face."
“Upset? Well really more just disgusted. The NDP told a whole bunch of lies and 40% of the voters gobbled it up without have a clue what they were voting for. I feel like puking.”
“Brainwashed by 44 years of Alberta prosperity, where education and health care was the envy of the rest of the provinces.
Brainwashed by every NDP provincial government that turned their province into a have not province. Ones with high unemployment, high taxes, low provincial income, high welfare, high debt and low living standards. Brainwashed by the crying sniveling liberal socialists that blame their inabilities and failures on previous provincial governments or federal governments. "

I could go on – the comments certainly do – but I’m not seeing a lot of evidence of censorship there. What I HAVE noted is that if a commenter says something that’s clearly libelous or obscene, that comment will be removed.
Could you expand on your own experience, please?
commented 2015-05-25 07:24:30 -0400
Judy: didn’t you find Lauren’s declaration: “I’m trying to go against everything I’ve been taught” hilariously and ironically reminiscent of Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman? Except they were being satirical, and I think she actually means it.
commented 2015-05-25 07:21:01 -0400
Peter:
" I have no doubt you will be here to remind us that our opinions are crap and that we are useless people for being conservative minded."
I’m not going to engage in psychotherapy here, Peter, but let me point out: (a) you began YOUR message by suggesting that I “as usual” was missing the point; and then you suggest I’m accusing you of being useless?
Nope. Conservative thinkers cover the same span as progressive thinkers: from brilliant to idiots. I’ve had some excellent discussions on this site with some smart, insightful, amusing folks, and I’ve learned from them. I’ve also had lots of fun poking holes in bad arguments and mocking idiots. Something for everyone.
“You won’t be restricted here like all conservative minded people are on the billion-dollar tax payer funded piece of crap website. "
You keep saying that, Peter. Can you expand on your experience of being censored at the CBC site? Because I see a very wide range of opinion, often extremely hostile to the coverage, represented there. I’m genuinely interested in the censorship you’ve been subjected to.
“with haters like you and Adam, if you wish.”
Good grief. Who exactly is it you are accusing me of hating?
“with the other broadcasters”
Small point of correction. It’s not a broadcaster. It’s a glorified blog.
commented 2015-05-24 21:40:31 -0400
Re Lauren Southern’s declaration: “I’m trying to go against everything I’ve been taught”..This is only valid when studying social sciences or similar studies…if one were engaged in a ‘real’ education one would be FOOLISH to go against everything one was taught…for example engineering, most practical sciences, and most college courses HAVE MUCH VALID CONTENT…this is why the ‘bird’ courses in university are such a waste of time…Lauren only can ‘GOES AGAINST THE MATERIAL’ because Social sciences, anthropology etc. are indeed a waste of time and money…WHY TAKE COURSES, SPEND THE MONEY (or your parents’ money) and deliberately ‘GO AGAINST IT ALL’ ? THERE IS NO LOGIC IN THIS…I hope Lauren is planning on paying for this waste of time herself.
commented 2015-05-24 20:53:52 -0400
Adam spouts, “The only reason you have a problem with the CBC is because they don’t cater to you”

No Adam, that is not the reason.

My problem with the CBC is not only that they filter out comments they do not agree with (some free speech avocates – now there is hypocrisy), but that they get my money to support their bloody left wing lies.

I have no problem with the other privately funded left wing website because the are privately funded. I am sure you do not understand why it bothers me and other conservatives that their money goes to fund hate against the views that they hold. As a left wing “pundit” I am sure you see no problem with that.

And as for calling me a hypocrite, how about you grow some and stop the personal insults? - “And which media sources are censoring conservatives?”

The CBC. That is the only one that I know of, but then I do not leave a lot of comments on websites. Here is different. I have posted there before many times and only the most bland comments get through, any comment that the censor does not agree with does not get posted (“Content Disabled”). I have talked to many other people with the same problem. It does not matter in the slightest whether you believe me or not.

“So you are making shit up here.”

No, I have not “made up any shit”.

It is obvious you cannot be civil. I don’t appreciate you calling me a liar simply because you do not agree with me.

Have a good evening, Adam.
commented 2015-05-24 18:46:54 -0400
To Terry Rudden & Adam Christie, like usual you miss the point.

It is meaningless the “quality” of the productions here on this website. The people here want a place to discuss topics in a venue that allows us to say what we want and to carry on debates and conversations while being mainly a conservative site with people of similar mind. I have no doubt you will be here to remind us that our opinions are crap and that we are useless people for being conservative minded. You and others are free to do so. You won’t be restricted here like all conservative minded people are on the billion-dollar tax payer funded piece of crap website.

Your prediction that the site may collapse due to lack of funds in a year or so may be true, but while it is here we will post our unedited, unrestricted opinions and carry on debates with each other and even with haters like you and Adam, if you wish. Then, if the site does go down, you can jump for glee and post your “I-knew-it-was-a-piece-of-crap-site-spewing-garbage-and-lies-on-trashy-media-clips” on another site, maybe on the billion-dollar boondoggle tax payer funded communist site. I am sure that site will jump for joy with you that yet another site spouting opinions different than yours (and theirs) went down. Yea free speech, yea for diversity of opinion on the communist broadcasting corporation website!!

Btw, if TheRebel receive 1 Billion/year from the government, I am sure audio/video quality and all the other things you two find so horrible about this site would become much better and easily compete with the other broadcasters, except that it would present a conservative point of view.
commented 2015-05-24 16:14:21 -0400
Much of the essay was about Pierre Karl Peladeau, and the predictably peculiar relationship between a multimillionaire Québecois media mogul separatist, and Canada’s would-be voice of the right. But among the comments on Sun Media I found interesting were:
- his acknowledgement that its failure was not due to Evil Conspirators at the CRTC, but the fact that the network was simply not eligible for mandatory carriage (a fact well known to any broadcast policy analyst or lawyer in the country);
- his rueful admission that Sun Media simply produced bad television; low production values reminiscent of community cable, talk-heavy, light on REAL news or analysis, and, towards the end, heavily reliant on simple, talking head attack programming on a limited number of pet topics.
Hmm. Sounds weirdly familiar.
commented 2015-05-24 09:56:35 -0400
It will be interesting to watch the evolution of the Rebel. My prediction is a one year lifespan, based on its extremely odd business model.
Ezra, Brian, et al. correctly identified a short term opportunity following the failure of Sun Media (for reasons best described in the essay censored this week by “the Rebel”). Sun News generated a very strong level of loyalty within a very small group. The current site is built on the basis of (for the most part) one-time contributions to the start-up campaign. It was a shrewd way to leverage the original audience base, and netted enough to create The Rebel.
But that strategy only works well for initial capital costs. An operation like this requires ongoing expansion, aggressive marketing, maintenance, and above all, salaries to attract and retain good people. And you can’t raise that on a predictable, ongoing basis through online begging.
It’s been pointed out that this is a cheaper operation to maintain that Sun News, and that’s certainly true. But it’s also a vastly inferior medium. The technical quality of its production is simply atrocious (listen to the quality of audio in the remote clips. Hint, kids – wind screens?) Look as the embarrassing camera work.) In terms of content, at least Sun Media had the news and editorial resources of the Sun chain to draw on: this website is simply a series of editorial statements on a handful of pet themes, reiterated endlessly and inflated with clickbait headlines (You’ll NEVER GUESS What Obama Said To…!!!!). Gavin is funny, and Theo is funny, and the rest is a kind of low-rent mental spa where folks without a lot of critical judgement can come and bask with like-minded folks and have their worldviews affirmed.
commented 2015-05-24 00:57:25 -0400
Adam said, "the Rebel was created because there was nowhere else for SNN employees to go in their desired field. Nobody wanted to take on these people. They are practically viewed as pariahs in Canadian broadcasting and media. Hell, Postmedia didn’t want to have anything to do with the Sun News Network, when they took over the Sun. "

You are absolutely correct Adam. That is why the Rebel is so supported now. You left wing CBC licker socialists will have to get over it eventually. It doesn’t matter what you say ,but keep saying it.
commented 2015-05-23 16:56:10 -0400
Peter: “Which ones do you find measure up to the standards you mentioned?”
All the time? None, as I said.
commented 2015-05-23 11:42:33 -0400
Lauren, sorry for hijacking your thread! :(
commented 2015-05-23 11:38:49 -0400
Adam said, “The only reason why The Rebel was started was because they couldn’t get real media jobs and they lost their job with the Sun News Network.” and " … but don’t act like they are doing some noble thing here."

You are entitled to your opinion as wrong as it may be. But certainly we like free speech here on this site, unlike other “professional” news outlets that claim they champion the cause of free speech such as the CBC, so post whatever garbage you like.

As to what Ezra would do if he was offered a spot on the CBC or CNN, I cannot speculate, and honestly neither can you. However, I would hope he would take up the opportunity. You somehow seem to be implying that it would be a breach of his principles if he did. Please, do explain why you believe this.

Adam said, “So why didn’t they share your view on SNN considering”

I would have to hear/read what they had to say before I could consider answering that question. To do otherwise would be pure speculation.

If you have available some of those comments, I would be happy to respond to them on a comment by comment basis.
commented 2015-05-23 11:21:22 -0400
Terry said, " I really apologize for not monitoring your urgent question more closely, and for not remaining glued to this site awaiting your queries."

Sarcasm noted. Apology accepted! :)
commented 2015-05-23 11:19:56 -0400
Terry Rudden said, “Does this site? No.”

Which ones do you find measure up to the standards you mentioned?
commented 2015-05-23 09:55:06 -0400
Others below, like LIZA ROSIE, PETER NETTERVILLE, and PETER TOTH (“Interesting and predictable that the left wing lurkers on this site have attempted to deflect attention away from the content of this interview, to a narrative that they support) have noted TERRY RUDDEN’s propensity to redirect conversation away from the topic on hand to something that he wants to talk about. And he has the gall under The Rebel post, “Muzzled”: CBC’s new favourite word (May 20), to tell me to stay on topic (“I’m sorry, Ron, you seem to be off topic”), as a dodge to evade answering a relatively simple question that I had previously posed to him on May 18th related to the Rebel post, “Why Harper’s vow to slash CO2 is meaningless”. I’m sorry, Terry, you seem to be off topic.
commented 2015-05-23 09:37:58 -0400
Judy:
a) Yep, having a news team makes for better news.
b) I can’t comment on your example, not having seen the story. As I said, not every medium or reporter gets it right all the time. Some try.
c) I agree that Ezra doesn’t hide his biases, and doesn’t pretend to be balanced or objective. I was responding to Peter’s query about “journalists”. Ezra is not a journalist, nor does he pretend be one. Like Michael Moore, he’s an editorialist/advocate/entertainer who works in mock-journalism format.
commented 2015-05-23 09:36:18 -0400
Here’s TERRY RUDDEN directing the conversation away from the subject at hand (Lauren Southern’s perspective) to something other that he wants to talk about. And he has the gall under The Rebel post, “Muzzled”: CBC’s new favourite word (May 20), to tell me to stay on topic (“I’m sorry, Ron, you seem to be off topic”), as a dodge to evade answering a relatively simple question that I had previously posed to him on May 18th related to the Rebel post, “Why Harper’s vow to slash CO2 is meaningless”.
Here we go again. TERRY RUDDEN, with your repeated reluctance to answer:
Please tell us, are you aligned with the U.N. position that its science demonstrates a need for such an imperative (for nations to make commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions)? As you had previously said to me, I would ask, TERRY RUDDEN, “Try to make your evasion a little less obvious, there’s a good chap”.
commented 2015-05-23 09:13:57 -0400
@ Terry Rudden says he prefers the big media’s “Honesty. When an honest reporter tells the story, you never get the sense that critical data is being omitted or manipulated to support the journalist’s own ideological bent.”

Terry, that is just the advantage of having a NEWS TEAM that costs us millions of dollars of tax money a year…Mansbridge presented a story recently about government deficits that GAVE THE APPEARANCE of including all data….it was ‘flashed’ onscreen quickly giving the impression that the Conservatives were ALWAYS the ones in deficit…I froze the screen and pasted it onto a Word document…on close inspection, the section showing Mulroney was actually Trudeau’s (pere) enormous deficit…made to appear as if it was Mulroney’s…in fact he inherited it (and thus, with no money left, had to bring in the GST to refill the empty government coffers)…Yes, with lots of money and backroom boys working to help you deceive you can GIVE THE APPEARANCE of honesty while still MANIPULATING THE NEWS TO SUPPORT ONE’S OWN IDEOLOGICAL BENT…that is why I prefer the low budget REAL honesty of Ezra…he doesn’t pretend not to have an ideology like the EXPENSIVE FOR US big boys. That’s real honesty.
commented 2015-05-23 09:02:54 -0400
Peter: “It’s certainly not because they are avoiding answering the questions put to them, that is for sure! They, just by some sheer comic coincidence, just happen not to have visit this article again, or any other article to which I have posted similar questions challenging their comments.”
Well, Peter, you appear to have posted your query around the time I left work, went to pick up my wife, went out for dinner, then came home and enjoyed some television together. I really apologize for not monitoring your urgent question more closely, and for not remaining glued to this site awaiting your queries. I’m going out to Tai Chi class now, and after that I’ll be taking my granddaughter to the Odawa Powwow, but I promise I’ll get back here as soon as I can; please don’t punish me with any more of your devastating sarcasm.
commented 2015-05-23 08:57:54 -0400
Peter: “what is in your opinion of the definition of “reputable and professional journalism”? I asked this of Terry Rudden on another article and he did not answer. He must have missed my question. So, Terry, if you read this maybe you also could answer this same question.”
I’ve actually answered that question several times on this site; if I missed the question from you at some point, I apologize.
That question can’t be answered definitively in a single response (any more than the question “what is good music”), but I can focus on some of the elements that I find lacking here.
a) Balance. Journalists don’t tell a single side of the story. Yes, every journalist has their own perspective, and yes, that affects the way they approach a story. But the GOOD ones try to keep that perspective in check; they seek repudiation, they approach the “other side” for comment or additional information.
b) A clear distinction between editorial and reportorial writing. By that standard, the Rebel does almost no “journalism” at all.
c) Accuracy, attained through fact checking and use of multiple sources.
d) Honesty. When an honest reporter tells the story, you never get the sense that critical data is being omitted or manipulated to support the journalist’s own ideological bent. When an entire “story” is confected out of clips from a crowd selected to make an event look ridiculous (a specialty of Ezra’s), that’s not honest coverage.
Does any journalist or medium in the world achieve those ideals all the time? No.
Do some journalists or media truly believe in those ideals, and TRY to achieve them? Yes.
Does this site? No.
commented 2015-05-23 08:41:39 -0400
Peter Toth: " But the left will do anything to stop her."
Oh, please. This kid seems to be a pleasant, intelligent enough, and presents well on camera. That’s about it. You clearly don’t have enough drama going on in your life if you need to imagine that “the left” really cares very much about Lauren. I feel slightly bad about taking this thread off track, and I should probably allowed her to enjoy everyone’s praise. But frankly, I was quite angered by Ezra’s censorship, and the hypocrisy of him blathering about “iconoclasm” got to me.
commented 2015-05-23 00:10:07 -0400
Adam, thank you for responding. I appreciate it.

Though, you still have not answered my question. You said,
1. “it [Sun news] was unprofessional with poor journalism” – How? In what manner? Be specific. Generalities as you have said are meaning shit unless you have examples. Be specific.

2. “laughable research that could be fact checked in seconds” – I, too, fact check. I know you love to believe because I (and other right wingers like me) like the Rebel, that I am too stupid to listen to and check other sources. That is your mistake. I would gladly put my knowledge up against yours any second of any day. There are opinions expressed by the staff here, of course, but they present their facts with their opinions as well. I, too, check them to make sure they are accurate, and watch the CBC, CTV, Global every day, as well as various left and right wing news sources. Do you?

I challenge you to provide a specific example of where one of the staff here has claimed something as fact and it is not.

3. " terrible on-air talent" – Be specific for a change, who, when, and why do you consider them terrible talent. Do you have the temerity to compare them to a credible source of “real” talent in your opinion and why?

4. “all on a budget of $1.50 that made it all look like shit” – okay, I can’t deny that about the Sun, but theRebel matches any audio/visual from the current billion dollar live-off-the-dole-of-the-tax-payer network when theRebel is completely crowd sourced and does what they do on an extreme fraction of what the CBC or CTV or Global have. With their budget they have, they do immeasurably better than the “billion-dollar-hate-Harper-fest” Liberal propaganda machine. It was the same with the Sun. It is too bad you are too childish to look past the audio/visual and “professionality” of theRebel and look at the content instead.

5. “about spewing their OPINION and AGENDA” – Another left-winger too stupid to understand the difference between opinion pieces and news. Of course they spew their opinion, so do the CBC, so does CTV, Global, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen, Associate Press. But I guess it is wrong in the right wing “spew” their opinion and on their own dime not the dime of the tax payer.