It's not often that we encounter other voices on social media whose perspectives so closely mirror our own. So you can imagine our surprise when, during his conversation Alex Jones on a recent podcast, G. Edward Griffen expressed such a perspective, and along with it, told his unique story about how that perspective emerged.

For example, for years he had been convinced that communism and fascism represented the 'extreme Left' and the 'extreme Right' respectively. But after comparing their ideologies to each other, to his utter shock he discovered that they were "exactly the same."

"If I could be fooled on that - that communism and fascism were opposites - if I could fall for that, I could fall for anything," he lamented.

And while that experience appears to have kept him uncomfortable with using the labels of Left and Right, Griffen undertook a journey of discovering the true political polarity that drives all of politics and essentially arrived at the same perspective that we ourselves have been advancing each week on this show.

"There is a battle between collectivism and its opposite, which is called individualism. I found out that those are the only two ideologies in the world," he concludes. And, in refuting collectivism's sacrifice of the individual to the group, Griffen demonstrates that 'the group' is a non-existent abstraction.

Explaining why society continues to drift Leftward, Griffen has faulted individualists with failing to define and explain the philosophy of freedom in the same way that collectivists have done with the likes of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto, or Hitler's Mein Kampf. In response, he plans to publish his own list of principles associated with individualism, tentatively titled 'The Human Manifesto.'

"It's not a political ideology, it's a human ideology... and that is what freedom is based on," he explains.

While his objective is laudable, isolating and associating the word 'human' exclusively with individualism comes with risk. Collectivists have exercised a near monopoly on their various 'human-isms,' and to them 'human rights' refer exclusively to some given collective. In contrast, the only possible kind of right that actually exists is called an 'individual' (not 'human') right, and only individuals are capable of exercising such rights.

Indeed, Griffen himself has already acknowledged this reality through his understanding that any given 'group' is just an abstraction that does not actually exist in the physical world. While it is tempting to encourage him to consider 'The Freedom Manifesto' for his book title, this too comes with risks, given both the over-use and misuse of the word 'freedom' itself.

Hopefully, given his lesson learned the hard way with respect to discovering the fake Left-Right polarity (identified as communism versus fascism), he might become more comfortable with considering a title that cannot be usurped by collectivists, something like 'The Right Manifesto.' In this context the word 'Right' can both be interpreted in its generic meaning (correct, proper, etc.) and in terms of being the correct political polarity associated with individualism.

Whatever title he ultimately chooses, at 94 years of age with decades of objective research and experience behind him, we should not be surprised that G Edward Griffen should have arrived at a philosophical perspective that certainly looks Just Right to us.

Britain's Tommy Robinson and Rupert Lowe have forced an uncomfortable discussion of the incompatibility of Islam with British culture into the political spotlight. And it is a rude awakening to say the least, given the multitude of unconscionable and horrific crimes associated with Islam that are being cited.

Lowe's recent urging the British parliament "to listen to the testimony of these victims... and to act" following the anticipated release of his Rape Gang Inquiry Report, was accompanied by a litany of documented criminal and horrific acts routinely carried out by predominantly Muslim-affiliated groups and individuals.

Meanwhile, Tommy Robinson attests to the fact that "I've seen all these problems my whole life," and for documenting and revealing those 'problems' to the public he has been unjustly jailed several times by the British state.

What is particularly sinister about this whole situation is how complicit British authorities have become in the commission of these crimes, which makes the whole disturbing affair all the more difficult to comprehend or accept.

From encouraging and funding mass immigration, to treating white victims of interracial crime as the criminals, to criminally charging thousands of British citizens for their critical social media posts, to outright direct participation in the crimes themselves, all of these horrific realities are now being pushed into public view to be seen in full context.

But simply identifying the problem is not enough to resolve it: "I want everyone to be political and understand that they have to get involved in politics," insists Robinson, while Rupert Lowe appears to be creating a political option to make such involvement very worth the effort.

Can their leadership circumvent growing fears that ballots may soon have to be replaced by bullets?

Given that these unique circumstances are pushing Britain into uncharted political waters, it remains to be seen which approach to solving Britain's incompatibility problem proves to be Just Right.

In the midst of a growing pandemic of stupidity, many are becoming alarmed at the degree of cognitive decline that threatens civilization itself.

This decline can be measured by record high illiteracy rates, the acceptance of absurd ideas like believing that men can be women, and by an inability to understand the evils of socialism or to appreciate the benefits of individual freedom.

Thus the question arises: How can human behavior be shifted from its growing state of stupidity back to a state of common sense and rationality? Podcaster Maria Karlova explains that a person's change in thinking doesn't come gradually through accumulated evidence or experience; it comes as a phase shift.

"The shift happens when you stop assuming that what the system tells you should actually make any sense. When you stop trying to find a 'reason' for arrangements that were never designed to be reasonable, the system's architecture becomes visible the moment you stop expecting it to be sane."

This very much describes the process experienced by millions when the truth behind political campaigns like the war against climate change, the so-called Covid vaccines, and the cult called multiculturalism were all revealed to be part of a single effort that had little to do with any of those issues.

Once a significant number of people come to understand that these policies were never meant to make sense but only to manipulate the masses for political power, then those pushing such policies no longer command the authority they previously may have had. And this is exactly what they fear the most. Their persistent efforts at censorship and controlling the narrative speaks to sinister motivations.

Arguing that we are living in the most psychologically manipulated era in human history, psyop expert Chase Hughes has been studying how to modify human behavior and the mechanics that make that possible.

Since human beings are essentially 'programmed' to think and behave the way they do, researchers and scientists trying to resolve the intelligence deficit have been recently citing a discovery that the human learning process may not be as linear and straight forward as once assumed. As explained in a May 22 PsyPost article written by Eric Dolan:

"A newly discovered developmental process reveals that the brain’s primary memory center starts out with an excess of tangled, random connections that get pruned away to form a highly structured, efficient network as an animal grows. These physical and functional changes optimize the brain’s capacity to store and retrieve memories over a lifetime. The study detailing this transformation was recently published in the journal Nature Communications. "Two competing philosophical and biological models framed their approach. The first model is the tabula rasa, or blank slate theory. This concept suggests that the brain starts with very few connections and slowly builds them up as the animal experiences the world. "The opposing model is the tabula plena, or full slate theory. In this scenario, the brain begins with an overabundance of connections that are gradually trimmed away, leaving only the most necessary pathways."

However, one must be critically aware that the term 'tabula rasa' in the context of studying the 'mechanism' of learning (i.e., that the brain starts with very few connections and slowly builds them up) is very different from the term 'tabula rasa' in the philosophical context where it refers to an actual lack of content (knowledge) in the mind.

In fact, the philosophical term 'tabula rasa' (blank slate) happens to be perfectly consistent with the mechanistic term 'tabula plena' (full slate) when describing the human brain at birth. While this may seem a contradiction, it is not so. The first is a philosophical term referring to knowledge itself; the second, a scientific term referring to mechanism and process.

From a purely political perspective, the challenge facing Western culture is how intelligent and rational people should deal with entrenched stupidity, especially given that the idea of having an informed electorate in today's zeitgeist seems to be an impossibility.

Clearly, understanding how this whole 'shift' phenomenon might be employed in a way that proves Just Right in the shifting of political thought from Left to Right is a problem yet to be resolved, but every effort to do so should be welcomed as a step in the Right direction.