Euthanizing the Homeless? It’s a Start

Posted By Jim Goad On In North American New Right | Comments Disabled

[1]1,463 words / 10:47

Audio version: To listen in a player, use the one below or click here [2]. To download the mp3, right-click here [2] and choose “save link as” or “save target as.”

As artificial intelligence renders everyone unemployable, financial systems collapse, and healthcare systems become overburdened, maybe the only prudent, humane, and cost-effective solution would be to kill everyone.

“One third of Canadians fine with prescribing assisted suicide for homelessness [3],” reads a recent headline in Canada’s National Post. “Roughly the same number told a poll [4] they were fine with approving MAiD [Medical Assistance in Dying] for someone whose only affliction was poverty,” adds the subhead.

The article uses the word “fine” seven times to underline how perfectly fine a substantial quotient of Canucks are with letting the nation’s shivering hobos perish with state-provided anxiolytics and anesthetics and neuromuscular blockers rather than find them something to eat, a job, and a place to live.

https://counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/MAiD.mp3 [2]

Only a handful of countries­ [5] — all of them majority-white — currently allow for assisted suicide, but Canada seems to be going out of its way to appease its masters at the World Economic Forum by concocting creative new ways for people to self-terminate even if they’re merely feeling a tad lonely or a trifle sad.

At first it was done in the name of “rights and freedoms.” Canada’s Supreme Court ruled in Carter v. Canada in 2015 that the nation’s Criminal Code needed to be amended so that euthanasia was no longer classified as homicide; it would have to change to satisfy elements of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that declared it was a fundamental human right to kill yourself, and that every last Canadian should be able to do it — with the government’s help, of course.

In June of 2016 the Parliament of Canada passed Bill C-14, which legalized both physician-administered euthanasia, where a doctor or nurse practitioner injects you with drugs that kill you; and physician-assisted suicide, where you are prescribed drugs that you use to kill yourself. Back in the law’s original incarnation, though, it stipulated that a candidate had to be terminally ill and likely to die within six months.

Apparently, more than 99% of Canadians [6] who’ve availed themselves of Medical Assistance in Dying’s (MAiD) services opt to be lethally injected by a doctor or nurse rather than swallow the poison pills themselves. But even if one’s intent is to alleviate unbearable suffering and go out peacefully, one doctor [7] claims that the paralytics that MAiD uses to kill patients may produce “a frothy fluid in the lungs” and “bear the potential for a painful death akin to drowning.”

MAiD also comes custom-made with a little loophole allowing doctors and nurses to suggest euthanasia to patients regardless of whether that patient has already made clear that they don’t want it; that way, any pesky legal liabilities could be averted, because medical practitioners can merely shrug and say the patient refused treatment.

But since all legal systems are rapacious and insatiable, it didn’t take long before MAiD started skiing pell-mell down the slippery slope. In 2021 the initial law was amended by Bill C-7, which dropped the requirement where a candidate needed to have a terminal illness that was destined to put him in the grave over the following half-year. Instead, now one merely needs to have a “grievous and irremediable medical condition.” According to the Canadian government’s official webpage [8] about MAiD, “You do not need to have a fatal or terminal condition to be eligible for medical assistance in dying” [emphasis theirs].

As a result, euthanasia deaths in Canada spiked from 1,018 in 2016 to 10,064 in 2021, accounting for 3.3% of all deaths that year.

In December of 2022, the Canadian government loosened restrictions even further to where one doesn’t even need to have a physical ailment to qualify for state-sponsored extinction; if one’s sole condition was the unquantifiable phantom demon of “mental illness,” they were willing to kill the patient for free. Originally slated to go into effect in March of 2023, the law was delayed for another year, so Canada’s nutjobs and cuckoo birds will have to wait until March 17, 2024 before the government will permanently erase their psychic pain.

In February of this year, a government committee issued a report pondering whether MAiD should be offered not only to adults, but to “mature minors [9].” Some activists are even agitating for MAiD to be extended so that it provides euthanasia for terminally ill babies [10].

In an article called “No Other Options: Newly revealed documents depict a Canadian euthanasia regime that efficiently ushers the vulnerable to a ‘beautiful’ death [11],” Alexander Raikin writes:

Since Canada legalized euthanasia in 2016, there has been a strange balancing act at the heart of its medical system. There is a national suicide prevention hotline you can call 24/7, where sympathetic operators will try to talk you out of killing yourself. But today there are also euthanasia hotlines, where operators will give you the resources you need to carry out your wish. Doctors and nurse practitioners are now in the business of saving the lives of some patients while providing death to others.

And even though Canada technically won’t permit the “mentally ill” to be euthanized until 2024, what are we to make of the 2020 case [12] where “[a]n elderly Canadian woman was killed by her doctor because she would rather be dead than go through another COVID lockdown”?

And even though the word “poverty” is nowhere to be found in the letter of the law, I suppose that being poor can make a person anxious, and I reckon that anxiety is one of those “mental illnesses,” right?

[13]

You can buy Jim Goad’s ANSWER Me! here [14].

In 2022 a woman pseudonymously known as “Sophia [15]” applied for, and received, a lethal injection via MAiD because she couldn’t find affordable housing.

Late last year, a disabled Canadian man [16] applied for MAiD services merely because he feared impending homelessness. Another disabled man says that one doctor officially approved [17] of the MAiD application he’d submitted because he was afraid that changes in his pension benefits would send him out onto Canada’s unforgivingly frigid streets.

What if you’re a male veteran of the Canadian Forces who applies for mental-health treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder? Wouldn’t it be easier for everyone involved if the government offered to kill you instead [18]? Okay, what if you’re a retired female army vet who merely wants a wheelchair lift or ramp installed in your house? Wouldn’t everyone be happier if you just shut up and died [19]?

Canadian doctor Ellen Wiebe [20] — who has reportedly euthanized over 400 people and calls it “the most rewarding work we’ve ever done” — says that “[a]s all Canadians have rights to an assisted death, people who are lonely or poor also have those rights.”

Last year, a chilling headline in The Globe and Mail read, “We must make it easier to both live and die with dignity, but denying MAiD to those living in poverty is not the answer. [21]” It spoke of MAiD’s “evolution since being legalized in Canada in 2016.”

I suppose one man’s “evolution” is another man’s rapid slide into state-sanctioned mass murder.

In a startlingly cold-blooded essay titled “Choosing death in unjust conditions: hope, autonomy and harm reduction [22],” a pair of female bioethicists at the University of Toronto simultaneously lament the fact that there isn’t a more robust healthcare and social-services network to meet the public’s needs while they essentially encourage patients to go ahead and let some nurse jab them to death anyway:

The fact that better supports are not provided in cases like these is abhorrent and the lack of options constitutes a deep injustice. . . . [But] restricting an autonomous choice to pursue MAiD due to the injustice of current non-ideal circumstances causes more harm than allowing the choice to pursue MAiD, even though that choice is deeply tragic.

What’s also deeply tragic, yet darkly comical, is that the world’s well-meaning bioethicists, along with all the sadistic keyboard eugenicists, seem to think they’re immune from one day sliding down that slippery slope, too.

Or, as Martin Niemöller might have put it, “First they came for the street trash, but I did not speak out, for I was not street trash.”

There are a few voices of sanity howling alone up there amid the Great White North’s barren tundra. As one pundit for an obscure website [23] puts it,

MAiD is changing our health system to one designed to bury us at the lowest possible cost. . . . As euthanasia is increasingly institutionalized, and as a younger generation of professionals becomes fully adjusted to its “medical” use, we must expect that typical patients will face an increasingly hostile clinical environment if they do not accept the recommended treatment.

Canada can’t feed and house everyone, you know — after all, that nation of only 38 million inhabitants is taking in another half-million or so new immigrants every year. So it’s out with the old blood, in with the new.

Jim Goad [24]

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:

Paywall Gift Subscriptions

[26]If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:

To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.