941 – Democratic dilemma: Is democracy just a fiction?

 Comments Off on 941 – Democratic dilemma: Is democracy just a fiction?
Dec 032025
 


Democracy: Consent of the governed? Or government by consensus?

What most fail to realize is that these two views are incompatible. That’s because the principle of ‘consent’ rests on individual rights, while the principle of ‘consensus’ allows for the violation of individual rights.

These two very different concepts of ‘democracy’ have long been in conflict, resulting in a social condition that no longer seems ‘democratic.’ Consequently, many no longer feel that their governments represent them and they are actually questioning whether or not what most see as ‘democracy’ is a just a fiction.

One can argue that America is a constitutional republic and not a democracy, but this does not address the reality that it currently operates as neither, given its assumed mandate of protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Many voices on the Right have gone into a panic mode trying to resolve the nation’s democratic dilemma by offering many valid observations and insights into the symptoms of the problem. Unfortunately, they have offered few viable solutions to a cure, owing to a fundamental misunderstanding of what has assumed to be ‘democracy’.

Democracy, like government itself, should be limited in terms of elections and voting; voting should never be allowed to violate or infringe on the individual rights of others – and thereby also on their ability to consent.

Under the principle of ‘majority rule,’ no such limits exist. That’s why understanding democracy in a way that is Just Right first requires abandoning the foolish notion of ‘majority rule’ as a justification for the violation of individual rights.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

940 – Right wingers—from fragmentation to stagnation

 Comments Off on 940 – Right wingers—from fragmentation to stagnation
Nov 262025
 


It’s bad enough when those on the Right publicly exhibit internal ideological conflicts; it’s even worse when those conflicts become personal.

For example, says Ben Shapiro: “The fragmentation of the political right is caused purposely by a splinter faction led by Nick Fuentes. They’re white supremacists; they hate women, Jews, Christians, brown people, blacks, America’s foreign policy and constitution, and they admire Hitler and Stalin,” and “Tucker Carlson is an intellectual coward, a dishonest interlocutor, and a terrible friend.”

Says Mark Levin: “Tucker is a racist so, no, I don’t debate the Klan and I don’t debate Nazis.”

Says Tucker Carlson: “Mark Levin is full of hate. (He supports) killing kids because you don’t like their parents. He is describing blood guilt.”

You get the general idea – not exactly inspiring displays of reasoned debate or clearly defined principles. And these are but a few examples.

The concern has been raised as to whether or not the various conflicts between recognized voices of the ‘Right’ will cause a fragmentation on the Right serious enough to compromise the MAGA movement and its resistance to the Left.

Whether or not these conflicts will evolve from a minor right wing fragmentation to another major right wing stagnation is something impossible to predict.

But to suggest that these disagreements are being aired and debated in a way that is Just Right depends on whether one takes them seriously or just as comedic entertainment.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

939 – Socialism—not very social

 Comments Off on 939 – Socialism—not very social
Nov 192025
 


Thanks to the recent election of Zohran Mamdani as the City of New York’s ‘socialist’ mayor, there have been increasing alarms warning of a rise in ‘socialism’s popularity’ among a majority of America’s young people. However, this may be an overstatement.

While it is fair to say that there has been a rise in the number of socialist politicians getting elected, to attribute these electoral wins to any love of socialism is simply misguided. Why? Because the average ‘socialist voter’ has no concept of socialism, either in terms of its definition or in terms of its horrific history. They are voting ‘against’ something, not for it.

Socialism, as an understandable or relatable concept, has little or no relevance to most voters’ daily concerns and lives. To them, socialism is just some nebulous label that politicians use to belittle one another (even though they may all behave the same and pursue the same socialist policies).

In practice, socialism is the political application of the philosophy of egalitarianism. Socialist ‘equality’ does not mean ‘equality before and under the law’ – it means equity: the ‘equality’ of results. It means that those who work hard, take risks, and produce the goods, services, and products upon which a society’s survival depends, must be punished to the degree of their success, while those who do not fit into the productive class (for whatever reason) are to be rewarded by sharing in the products they had no part in creating. Continue reading »

938 – The great escape—from Canada | Mark Vandermaas

 Comments Off on 938 – The great escape—from Canada | Mark Vandermaas
Nov 122025
 


“I’ve gone from being a patriotic Canadian to the point where I wouldn’t risk a hangnail for Canada,” laments our guest Mark Vandermaas. “Canada’s done. There is no political solution; there is no legal solution.”

A retired member of the Canadian armed forces, Mark’s experience as a Canadian activist included his being arrested for carrying a Canadian flag in public. This was perhaps an event symbolic of his ultimate decision to escape the tyranny in Canada and thus be able to say: “We love our life in Ecuador.”

In sharing his story of how he came to ultimately choose Ecuador as his destination, Mark’s narrative of events describing Canada’s descent into tyranny serve as a chilling reminder of just “how fast a supposedly civilized society can go off the rails.”

Referring to the Canada of today as a “grotesquely racist country,” whose national pass time has become “hating people,” Mark is convinced that Canada is not “fixable” and is doomed to collapse as a nation. Continue reading »

Escaping Neverland—A Canadian refugee in Ecuador | Mark Vandermaas

 Audio, Governance, Health Care, Latest, Politics, Society, Video  Comments Off on Escaping Neverland—A Canadian refugee in Ecuador | Mark Vandermaas
Nov 102025
 


“When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…” These immortal words from the Declaration of Independence heralded the birth of a great nation, forged in revolution against despotic rule. Today, however, one man has chosen a quieter path to freedom: relocating from Canada to Ecuador to escape the creeping shadow of political tyranny.

That is precisely what Mark Vandermaas and his wife did after life in Canada had grown unpredictably autocratic. Host, Robert Vaughan, likened his homeland to the Neverland of Peter Pan, where the Lost Boys remained children, perpetually stunted in their growth and maturity, unable to become responsible adults and forever treated like children by a paternalistic, stern, and stifling government.

Confronted by a relentless onslaught of encroachments upon their personal liberties—assaults that permeated the lives of every Canadian—they swiftly packed their belongings and departed for the serene, temperate elevations of that comparatively tranquil nation. They established their new home in the city of Cuenca, nestled high amid the majestic Andes Mountains.

In our discussion, we explore Mark’s activism in Canada, the pivotal decision he and his wife made to emigrate, and the striking contrasts in politics and culture between Canada and Ecuador.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider making a contribution:
🧡 PayPal

937 – No Canada? —an unconventional view

 Comments Off on 937 – No Canada? —an unconventional view
Nov 052025
 


In December 2024, a documentary film entitled ‘Canada the Illusion’ was released on multiple on-line platforms with a descriptive: “This film is entirely based on facts and not on opinions.” Produced by Timm Stein in collaboration with Xander La Rue, Doug Force, and The Myth is Canada, the documentary delivers a painfully detailed legal and political history of how the nation known as Canada came into being. And then ceased to be.

Citing the Statute of Westminster (December 11, 1931) as the most important document defining the land mass known as Canada, the documentary concludes that from that point forward, the nation of Canada ceased to exist as a sovereign entity. The provinces, because they owned the land, became sovereign states unto themselves. Consequently, every piece of federal legislation passed after December 11, 1931 is invalid and lacks any authority to enforce it.

As implausible as this sounds (as it also did to the documentary’s producers), there appears to be no way to dispute this conclusion based on Canada’s legal and political history, documented at every step of the way. So how could it be that a nation called ‘Canada’ has carried on as such irrespective of its history and relevant laws? Continue reading »

936 – Why Canada sucks—from tariffs to racism

 Comments Off on 936 – Why Canada sucks—from tariffs to racism
Oct 292025
 


In response to a political ad produced and distributed at a cost of $75 million by Ontario premier Doug Ford’s government, US president Donald Trump terminated all trade negotiations with the entire nation of Canada.

The ad, featuring former president Ronald Reagan speaking on the subject of tariffs (on April 25, 1987) was edited in such a way as to completely distort and misrepresent Reagan’s original comments in full context. It was an attempt by the Ford government to imply that Reagan and Trump held opposite views on tariffs and free trade, when in fact their stated views were identical.

Worse, as Trump observed, the release of the fraudulent ads occurred in conjunction with pending US supreme court decisions regarding a president’s authority to impose tariffs. This was the very issue originally addressed by Reagan when he gave his speech.

Why a provincial politician like Doug Ford would interfere in American politics is a question no doubt being considered by the Trump administration. Ford faces no immediate election prospects himself, though his government is planning to abandon the idea of fixed election periods altogether. Continue reading »

 Older Entries