Feb 132020
 


There is a widespread belief – particularly among advocates of freedom and capitalism – that individual freedom and individual rights will spontaneously emerge if nations gradually adopt various forms of capitalism, freer markets, and/or more private economic initiatives. Yet, many socialist, fascist and communist jurisdictions have done exactly this, but nevertheless remained socialist, fascist or communist. While their economies may have become more ‘efficient,’ their people still do not enjoy individual rights, having ironically been turned into ‘slaves’ of a state-directed economic ‘efficiency.’

Additionally, there is a certain ‘literalism’ on the philosophic front, with many freedom advocates rejecting the best political alternative on the basis of some kind of philosophical impurity or inconsistency on the part of a given politician or party.

This is dangerous thinking, and can lead to unwarranted feelings of futility, frustration, and cynicism regarding political action in general. It is an affliction that most affects those on the Right, and is in part responsible for the continuing ascendancy of the Left and the erosion of our freedoms. Continue reading »

Feb 062020
 


Take ten freedom-loving people, put them in a room in front of some microphones, and what do you get? Our first ever ‘Freedom Panel,’ sharing views on Brexit, climate change, and a mutual frustration with the lack of rational philosophies in politics.

At long last, Brexit has become a reality. But that development reflects a long-established British history and philosophy that has always been incompatible with that of the European nations. For that reason, many have regarded Brexit as inevitable. Founded on individualism rather than on the European collectivism that has brought the continent to disaster on repeated occasions, Britain can now once again forge its own political destiny, freed from the control of Brussels.

With the good news on the Brexit front, it’s too bad that politicians continue to ring the bells of climate alarmism, pretending to talk about the weather when what they’re trying to prevent changing is the climate of collectivism.

Ironically, it is the growing politics of populism that is beginning to demonstrate an effective defense against collectivism’s ills. Even so, many individualists and supporters of political freedom remain opposed to a populism that they see as being unprincipled. But is populism really an obstacle to freedom, or is it an opportunity for rational principles to once again become part of the political playing field?

Though our panelists have many differing perspectives on this question and other issues, one thing you can always count on is a discussion that will be Just Right.

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

Jan 162020
 


“I call it Climate Change BS and by BS – if I have to spell it out – I mean Bad Science!” concludes our guest Dave Plumb, whose book ‘Inconveniently Screwed’ describes and explains the ‘good’ science behind what we actually do know about climate change and its causes.

In the face of continuing outrageous claims about a pending ‘climate crisis,’ the real science of climate has been replaced by the fake ‘political science’ of Leftist politicians.

Since ‘facts don’t matter’ to those on the Left, the whole climate change debate can become quite frustrating for those who think that facts do matter. The relentless efforts of the Left to continue promoting their climate fiction can only be resisted and defeated by a similar relentless effort on the part of those who have the Right ideas about climate and climate change.

As always, the real climate the Left is talking about – and wants to change – is our political climate. The only consistency to be found in their arguments about climate change is a hatred of individual freedom, capitalism, and of humanity itself. Forced discussions about carbon dioxide and weather concerns are mere distractions from their evil intentions.

With one form of BS (Bad Science) being promoted via another form of BS (Bad Schools), facts are the last thing the Left wants to hear about.

Given the Bad Science being taught in Bad Schools, it would be Just Right to conclude that the politics being used to support and promote those two forms of BS is the BS of the traditional type.

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

The Busybodies – The Danielle Metz Show 084

 Comments Off on The Busybodies – The Danielle Metz Show 084
Jan 022020
 

Audio as broadcast on WBCQ

Judging the actions of other people has become a fine art in this age of peak insanity. Whether it is compelled speech, sin taxes, or signalling one’s moral superiority it seems to be rooted in our nature as human beings.

We come out of the womb hard wired to change our environments. We possess parenting skills which we can’t seem to turn off when it comes to adults. And we participate in a competing free-for-all in an attempt to shape society to our wishes and whims.

Well at least some people do. They are the busybodies.


If you’ve enjoyed this presentation please consider supporting us: 🧡PayPal

Dec 122019
 


It was an epistemological train wreck. To understand today’s appeal of socialism and why capitalism remains an “unknown ideal,” one need look no further than to the December 4 Munk Debate on capitalism held in Toronto. The motion: “The capitalist system is broken. It’s time to try something different.”

Speaking in favor of the motion were Yanis Varoufakis (economist, author, Greece’s former finance minister) and Katrina vanden Heuvel (editorial director and publisher of the Nation, Washington Post columnist). Speaking against the motion were Arthur Brooks(Harvard professor and author) and David Brooks (political commentator, New York Times columnist and author).

Despite their credentials, none offered even a subjective definition of capitalism, and despite being presented as debate opponents, all effectively spoke in favor of the motion. In fact, as noted in the National Post coverage of Dec 6, “Munk Debate opponents find common ground.”

That common ground was their mutual hatred of capitalism and what Ayn Rand described as “a hatred of the good for being the good.” All of the debaters praised capitalism’s role in lifting billions from poverty, yet all condemned capitalism with their next breath. Continue reading »

634 – The black and white truth about lying

 Comments Off on 634 – The black and white truth about lying
Dec 052019
 

Generally, when most people object to lying, they think about themselves being lied to – or lied about – and consider lying to be a moral indiscretion. They rarely see themselves as being the liar, nor do they consider how they might even unwittingly or unconsciously be lending credibility to a lie told, whatever its source or intent.

A ‘lie’ is defined as “an untrue statement made with the intent of deceiving; a falsehood; that which creates or is intended to produce a false impression.” (Funk & Wagnalls)

Note that the definition, per se, does not necessarily imply any form of criminal or immoral objective; it merely defines a lie as being a statement that does not represent the reality of a given situation or fact.

Even among the Ten Commandments there is none commanding that “Thou shalt not lie.” However, specific forms of lying are indeed implied in the eighth and ninth commandments, which command that “Thou shalt not steal,” and “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” Continue reading »

Nov 282019
 

Why Johnny Can't Think

Increasing illiteracy rates and decreasing rates of mastering common knowledge have become highly visible trends within education systems right across North America.

Millennials in particular have been identified as the least educated and most illiterate generation in recent history. However, this is not the fault of that generation, or necessarily of others similarly afflicted by illiteracy and its attendant symptoms. Most of the problem can be blamed on the education systems and the teaching trends followed by most schools across North America.

Moreover it’s not just about ‘what’ is being taught (or not taught), but about ‘how’ it is being taught. Perhaps the most disturbing realization about what has been called ‘progressive education’ is that its teaching methods have been intentionally designed to interfere with and cripple students’ ability to reason. This is no mere accusation, but is the explicit and stated goal of the architects of progressive education.

While for most this is an unthinkable and sinister thing to do to children, to those intent on nurturing compliant and obedient followers incapable of resisting the forces of collectivism, it’s the perfectly appropriate thing to do. It is a practice that has been growing and gaining acceptance within public schools for the better part of the last century. More than any single cause, this practice is responsible for today’s shocking level of illiteracy and for the increasing number of young people who cannot reason objectively or think independently. Continue reading »