Maybe it’s just the season.  Somehow things seem to get a bit less serious in the Summer.  People take time off from their jobs.  Less meaningful work seems to get done in the Summer.  People are on leave.  Some even take leave of their senses.

There’s a British magazine called The Economist.  As the name implies, the magazine is run by economic experts, and it generally deals with economic issues.  The editors are not only journalists, they’re British journalists.  That description virtually screams wimpy left wing A-holes, but don’t take my word for it.  Here’s the description from Allsides.com.  “The Economist takes an editorial stance in the radical center of classical and economic liberalism that supports free trade, globalization, open immigration, and social liberalism.”

They want globalization (ala George Soros), no borders (ala the DSA) and social liberalism (translation – Woke bullshit).  It would be bad enough if the magazine simply stuck to economic issues.  We expect journalists to be Woke A-holes.  It’s what they do.  But now they’ve gone too far.

Now The Economist has attacked – wait for it – The Paw Patrol.  The magazine recently published an article entitled The Dark Underbelly of Paw Patrol.  For those of you without young children or grandchildren, the Paw Patrol is an animated children’s television series, on the air since 2013.  It features a group of puppies, led by a boy named Ryder.  They live in a town called Adventure Bay, and in every episode they fix seemingly intractable problems, most of which were caused by adults.

The pups all have special skills and responsibilities.  Their leader, Chase, drives a police car.  Marshall is a Dalmatian in a fire truck.  Bulldog Rubble is in charge of construction.  Labrador Zuma does water rescues in his boat.  Rocky handles recycling, and Tracker specializes in jungle rescue.  Skye handles air rescue in her helicopter, Liberty does urban rescues, and Everest does snow rescues in a snowplow.

The pups spring into action when emergency situations require their skills.  When incompetent, corrupt former Mayor Humdinger screws up and puts lives in danger, the Paw Patrol saves the day.  When a natural disaster threatens to wipe out the town, the pups come to the rescue.  Their motto, “No job’s too big, no pup’s too small.”

The kids eat it up, and why not?  In its own silly way, Paw Patrol teaches them they can accomplish just about anything they set their minds to, if they work hard, remain faithful, and work as a team.

So what’s The Economist’s beef?  Let them tell it in their own words.  Apparently, there are certain parents who have decided that Paw Patrol, while amazingly popular, has subliminal messages which are pernicious.  That’s the problem with Woke A-holes.  They can’t accept the obvious; that Paw Patrol is harmless entertainment for kids that can do them no harm and may do them some good.

The Woke must search for a hidden message, and if there isn’t one, they just make one up.  Isn’t is strange that the shallowest dolts among us are always searching for a deeper explanation?

The people who have tried to sell us white privilege, safe spaces, global warming, defund the police, legalized theft, and free everything, now have broken the Paw Patrol code.  They’ve uncovered the truth.  “Paw Patrol is authoritarian neoliberal propaganda,” which “encourages complicity in a global capitalist system that reproduces inequalities.”  The only deep thing in that analysis is the horse shit.

The magazine condemns Chase because he wears a police uniform.  This makes the whole show “pro-police copaganda.”  For the record, Chase carries no gun, and no handcuffs, and in the countless hours I have been treated to the Paw Patrol’s exploits, I have yet to see Chase arrest anybody.

No matter.  The Woke morons figured it out.  The game is up.  The fact that town leaders call on the pups, who the morons have labelled “unaccountable freelancers,” is “a sly advertisement for privatized State services.”  Can you believe this shit?

But there’s more.  According to the Woke morons, Paw Patrol also is sexist.  Because the Woke never let facts get in the way of their feelings, they got this one wrong too.  According to The Economist, it’s sexist because the pup Skye, who the magazine tells us is the only girl, only wears pink.  However, Liberty also is female.  Then there’s Everest.  She doesn’t wear pink, and she drives a snowplow.  To the red neck ultra-conservative morons, the subliminal message might be that Everest is an LGBT pup.  But I digress.

In an attempt to appear high-minded and oh so cultured, the magazine supports its condemnation of Paw Patrol with a quote from C.S. Lewis, of Chronicles of Narnia fame.  “A children’s story that can only be enjoyed by children is not a good children’s story.”  The magazine concludes that Lewis “would not have liked Paw Patrol.”  Lewis made that quote, to be sure, but, as usual, one quotation led the Woke idiots to the wrong conclusion.

C.S. Lewis said some other things too.  “To live his life in his own way, to call his house his castle, to enjoy the fruits of his own labour, to educate his children as his conscience directs, to save for their prosperity after his death — these are wishes deeply ingrained in civilised man.  Their realization is almost as necessary to our virtues as to our happiness.  From their total frustration disastrous results both moral and psychological might follow.”

“Since it is so likely that (children) will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage.  Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker.”

“Once you were a child.  Once you knew what inquiry was for.  There was a time when you asked questions because you wanted answers, and were glad when you had found them.  Become a child again, even now… You have gone wrong.  Thirst was made for water; inquiry for truth.”

These quotes run directly contrary to the Woke agenda.  “Your home is your castle” smacks of royalty and the protection of personal property.  “Enjoy the fruits of your labours” is clearly capitalist.  And urging parents to educate their children as they see fit, and encouraging us to make inquiries to get to the truth isn’t encouraged by the Left, which seeks to stifle any and all dissent.

The Economist warns that “There is a reason that dictators try to control the stories told to the young.”  The Woke morons running the magazine know that all too well.  So-called progressives have been shoveling Marxist propaganda into the minds of the young for more than 100 years.

Paw Patrol isn’t authoritarian propaganda, and there’s nothing subliminal about it.  Its messages are quite simple.  Here’s what Paw Patrol has taught my grandson and me.  When people you care for are in danger, you do what you can to try to help them.  No matter what your background, you can make a contribution.  Whatever job you do has value, and you have value.  And although you may have doubts and fears, they can be overcome, as long as we all work together.

Those themes are reinforced in every episode of Paw Patrol.  How anyone could find such values pernicious, subversive, or in any way negative or dangerous is beyond me.  Maybe The Economist should confine itself to trade policy and interest rates, and leave normal, well-adjusted people, and especially our children, the Hell alone.