May 222024
 


In a speech delivered before the Institute Of Public Affairs in Australia, writer and podcaster Brendan O’Neill suggested that ‘lockdown amnesia’ is a consequence of the shame people experienced during the Covid lockdowns.

Based on his observations that many people have completely forgotten some of the most outrageous violations of individual rights and freedoms perpetrated by governments during the Covid lockdowns – including the lockdowns themselves – O’Neill contends that “the state is complicit in cultivating this culture of forgetting.”

His view is reminiscent of Ches Crosbie‘s (of Canada’s National Citizens Inquiry) call to end the “censorship industrial complex” that he identified as also being complicit in cultivating a culture of fear and ignorance. “It must be eliminated before the truth reaches enough people and a proper reconciliation can be pursued.”

The censorship industrial complex is indeed ‘complex’ and can be said to include the ‘amnesia industry’ and the intentional manipulation of memory.

But one must wonder how much of the impetus ‘to forget’ is actually driven by shame or how much is driven by the fear of being held accountable. Either way, it appears that a great reckoning is on the horizon.

As more and more of the destructive and negative consequences of everything to do with the lockdowns become impossible to ignore and avoid, attempting to erase the causal history behind all of the destruction appears to be a viable backup strategy to keep a significant part of the public in the dark.

“It is an abomination to forget what happened,” warns O’Neill, “It is essential to remember to protect ourselves from the possibility it will happen again in the future.”

Perhaps the most chilling aspect of the entire ‘culture of forgetting’ is the number of people who have forgotten what is Just Right, and in so doing, have just Left themselves to be manipulated by those who would destroy them.

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

May 152024
 


Question: What does Canada’s MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying) program have in common with environmentalism? Answer: They are both prescriptions for death and depopulation.

Canada is sadly among a growing number of nations intentionally murdering their own citizens. Strong words? Hard to believe?

Says Britain’s Dr. Vernon Coleman: “This is the most evil cold blooded massacre since Genghis Kahn made genocide fashionable. Forget the self-serving myth that euthanasia is painless and dignified.

And on the environmental front, in announcing the release of Canada’s ‘Federal Plastics Registry,’ it was described as an “important demonstration of Canada’s commitment to end pollution and build a circular economy.” Continue reading »

May 082024
 


In their attempt to dismiss or ignore narratives and truths that conflict with the ideology of the Left, the term ‘far right’ has been used as a pejorative to silence the opposition.

‘Far right’ is an anti-concept. It is based on a fictional political spectrum that simply does not exist, either in theory or in practice. Left and Right do not exist on either end of a ‘spectrum’ but are strictly polarities representing the opposing political conditions of tyranny (on the Left) and freedom (on the Right).

‘Far right’ implies that there are other types or ‘degrees’ of Right. However, the values represented by the political polarities of Left and Right do not exist in ‘degree’ but only in ‘kind’. There is no ‘middle of the road’ and any compromise between Left and Right can only benefit the Left, as the Right (the good) has nothing to gain from the Left (the evil) in such a compromise. This has been the political trend for many decades.

In the information war, as in any war, it’s “Define or ‘be’ defined.” Unfortunately, those on the Right (meaning those in favor of freedom and capitalism) have come to lack both the vocabulary and proper definitions to articulate their values, and this was not by accident or omission. The Left has been hard at work destroying the very concepts necessary to articulate these values. Continue reading »

May 012024
 


Conservatism is being promoted as a Christian political philosophy that should be applied to the governing of a country. That, at least, was the expressed opinion of David Haskell (Wilfred Laurier University) during his recent debate with Bruce Pardy (Queen’s Law).

Sponsored by Augustine College and First Freedoms Foundation, the 2024 Rand Debate (named after Canadian Supreme Court Justice Ivan Rand), was based on the following resolution: “Be it resolved that, as Wokeism destroys the West, the first responsibility of government is to foster a virtuous society, rather than protect individual liberty.”

In addition to the resolution itself being based on a contradiction (pitting “virtue” against “liberty” when in fact they are inseparable), the debate serves as an ideal exhibit of what we have been referring to as the “political dyslexia” persistently surrounding political debates and discussions.

Most disturbing is the Christian ‘virtue signaling’ now literally being advocated as a political response to the politics of WOKE virtue signaling.

David Haskell argues that through the power of the state, “conservatism as guided by the Judeo-Christian tradition is going to make choices you don’t agree with, especially if you’re not a religious believer.” Bruce Pardy, in response, notes that “this is why so many progressives think that conservatives are dangerous.”

Given Haskell’s subjective definitions of words like ‘liberal’, ‘virtue’, ‘equality’, ‘utilitarian’, and many others including ‘conservatism’ itself, Haskell and Pardy could never have arrived at anything resembling agreement. This creates a deep and unnecessary divide between those fighting for ‘liberty’ and those fighting for ‘conservatism’ in their mutual war against ‘Wokeism.’

Until more people who regard themselves as ‘conservatives’ begin to use definitions that are Just Right, their proposed solutions for defeating the WOKE ideology, let alone for achieving freedom, will always be just wrong and ineffective.

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

857 – Political dyslexia—causes and cures

 Comments Off on 857 – Political dyslexia—causes and cures
Apr 242024
 


The disdain and revulsion that many people have developed for politics is understandable. But a growing danger emanating from this attitude is the inability to conceive of any political solutions to our freedom dilemma, and to withdraw from the political process entirely.

This is particularly tragic for those on the political Right – the polarity of individualism, freedom, and capitalism – because most people who believe in these values have demonstrated little interest in politics. And to the extent that they do participate in the political process, they more often than not continue to support and vote for parties and candidates opposed to their values.

Most voters are so confused about politics that they still cannot tell Left from Right, a condition perhaps best described as political dyslexia.

In fact, the prevailing myth is that there is no difference between Left and Right, based on the mistaken assumption that political parties like Canada’s Conservative Party and America’s Republican Party are on the ‘Right’ when they are actually as Leftist as their liberal and democratic counterparts.

Consider the political awakening of Rosanne Barr who, in a recent discussion with Russell Brand, described her 2012 candidacy for president as leader of the Green Party as “socialist.” Remarkably, she associated “freedom of speech, civil rights, self improvement through education, and individual rights” with socialism and the Left. Continue reading »

856 – ATHEISNT—Fallacies And Realities About Atheists

 Comments Off on 856 – ATHEISNT—Fallacies And Realities About Atheists
Apr 172024
 


Atheist Richard Dawkins recently sparked a controversy that challenges fundamental assumptions about both atheism and faith-based belief. Referring to himself as a “cultural Christian” he has been criticized by both atheists and religious believers alike.

Unfortunately, too many self-described atheists are being unfairly criticized and maligned by those who, on the one side, equate atheism with an absence of morality, while on the other equate the sharing of some religious beliefs with unprincipled atheism.

One dictionary we consulted incorrectly defines ‘atheism’ as “the belief that there is no god.” The problem with this definition is that atheism is not a ‘belief’ system at all. Nor is atheism a philosophy or code of morality. It is merely the non-acceptance or a rejection of the concept of a literal supernatural ‘deity’ – nothing else. Atheism does not require ‘belief’ as its base of justification. Atheism is primarily a response to theism, which does rely on ‘faith’ and ‘belief.’

The fact that many atheists abide by a moral code that mirrors that associated with Christianity is less about atheists borrowing from Christian values than it is about Christians and atheists alike borrowing values from other shared philosophical sources. This includes many writers and philosophers throughout history setting out the principles of Western culture over time – from the early Greeks through the Age of Enlightenment and to the present day.

Those who blame atheism as being the source of our current tyrannical zeitgeist – or who blame the Soviet Union’s past tyrannical history on its ‘officially atheist status’ are arguing a contradiction. One cannot judge any individual or national actions on what is ‘not’ believed and practiced but on what ‘is’ believed and practiced. In both cases, the cause of the tyranny was (and is) the ideology of collectivism.

Today’s WOKE ideology is merely the latest label given to yesterday’s Marxist ideology – and religious affiliation or lack thereof has little to do with the support of such ideologies. The same principle holds true for freedom.

Whether atheist or religious, if one accepts and respects the principles of individualism, individual rights and freedom, then it is possible for people of every belief and non-belief to share the ideals and blessings of a society that’s Just Right, with the understanding that freedom of religion also includes the right to be free from religion.

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

855 – Do you mind?—thinking about thinking

 Comments Off on 855 – Do you mind?—thinking about thinking
Apr 102024
 


There has recently been a growing concern and much discussion about why so many people are still not awake, but just remain WOKE in the face of a pending civilizational collapse. “The WOKE mind virus is the greatest existential threat faced by humanity,” concludes Gad Saad, and Elon Musk apparently shares his alarm.

Among other causes cited for this sad state of affairs are the inability to have an inner monologue, the effect of the Covid spike protein, fear mongering, bacteria, chronic infection, the fake news media, intelligence guided by irrational bias, and of course the WOKE ideology, to name but a few.

Missing from most of the discussions is the ‘means’ by which people actually think: through the use of concepts and language. Because the human mind is essentially ‘programmable,’ and because words and concepts are the ‘software’ on which each mind functions, humans in the exercise of free will have the capacity and choice to think and behave either rationally or irrationally.

An irrational concept is one that does not conform to reality or reason. And significantly, irrational concepts can be held by highly intelligent people. How is this possible? Continue reading »