Just Right

Just Right is a weekly shortwave radio show. Hosts, Bob Metz and Robert Vaughan analyze issues from a viewpoint of individual rights, freedom, and capitalism.

578 – Culture war – Left and Right with guest Salim Mansur

 Comments Off on 578 – Culture war – Left and Right with guest Salim Mansur
Oct 182018
 

Signing the Declaration of Independence

The unprecedented frenzied and irrational reactions to Brett Kavanaugh’s recent Supreme Court appointment appear impossible to objectively explain. From the theatrics surrounding the outrageous allegations of Christine Blasey Ford, to pounding on the doors of the Supreme Court itself, ‘beyond reason,’ would be putting it mildly, based on the optics.

But the reason for the frenzied desperation over Kavanaugh is quite understandable (though morally unjustifiable), notes Salim Mansur as he guides us through a step by step recent history of the Democratic Party’s steady decline in power and influence. With mid-term elections at the doorstep, the Democrats will only add more fuel to a fire of their own making.

What the Democrats are trying to ‘burn’ in that fire is America itself, in particular, the values of individualism upon which America has been founded. In attempting to do so, they risk getting burned themselves, and so far that has been both the result and the cause of their frenzied and irrational reactions.

America has long been at war with itself – a ‘culture’ war fought between Left and Right – one that has now become visibly polarized around the fundamental concepts of nationhood itself. International globalism or national sovereignty? That is the question. A culture based on shared values, or a ‘culture’ of no/competing values? Open borders or national boundaries? Individual rights or group rights? Continue reading »

577 – Signaling Left

 Comments Off on 577 – Signaling Left
Oct 112018
 

Signaling Left

‘Virtue signaling’ takes many forms, and generally refers to public expressions of ‘virtue’ that are considered anything but. ‘Virtue signaling’ is a favorite practice of the Left, as its collectivist philosophy naturally demands the abandonment of true virtue in its pursuit of sinister intentions.

That’s why the highly racist term ‘white privilege’ has been forced into our political lexicon. For the Left, this offensive term serves two political objectives. First, the term represents a direct accusation of racism directed against those whose skin color is ‘white.’ Why? To induce unjustifiable and unearned guilt on the part of the accused – holding ‘whites’ responsible for history itself. Second, the term serves as the Left’s ‘moral’ justification for its immoral socialist ‘redistribution of wealth’ (stealing) philosophy.

Alarmingly, the term ‘white privilege’ is used more frequently by ‘whites’ than others, even though seemingly directed against white people. For them, the term helps to disguise the real target of their racism – generally directed towards the same ‘visible minorities’ groups they pretend to want to help.

For evidence, just listen to the voices of the Left that you’ll hear on today’s broadcast. Better still, listen to the responding voices of the Right, voices now possible to hear thanks to the power of social media and the internet. Continue reading »

Oct 042018
 

proof

Prove it! That’s what the feedback to our show last week demanded. Our conclusion that there is no conflict or contradiction between determinism, free will, and morality ‘proved’ to be point of discomfort for some.

A demand for proof is understandable and necessary ‘Proof’ verifies a fact, theory, or argument that may lead to (or perhaps prevent) action, and thus, have consequences.

It is important to bear in mind that in order for something to be susceptible to a test of ‘proof’ – whether concerning the existence of an object or the validity of an idea – it must also be capable of being proven false. If it is not possible to prove it false, then ‘proving’ its validity becomes a pointless exercise.

All ‘proofs,’ whether in mathematics or in logic, philosophically are best categorized within philosophy’s branch of epistemology – where it is actually possible for theories and assertions to be ‘proven’ true or false – ironically validated against the ‘unprovable’ but axiomatic reality of existence. Continue reading »

575 – Our godless morality

 Comments Off on 575 – Our godless morality
Sep 272018
 

Contemplation

As faith-based religion continues to lose its monopoly on morality, the source and nature of mankind’s morality is finally being openly questioned and discussed. In fact, that discussion has been drawing unprecedented audiences to both social media and to live venues, where the likes of Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris have essentially established the popular – and incorrect – framework of this public debate.

It’s not surprising in the least that these debates have never produced a resolution; one cannot resolve a philosophical dilemma without confining oneself to the discipline of philosophy itself. In attempting to resolve issues of ‘free will’, determinism, choice, and morality, neither ‘faith’ nor ‘pragmatism’ offer any solutions.

Morality has but one source and one standard: the preservation of human life itself. That is the ‘good.’ The destruction of human life is the ‘evil.’ Morality has no other application or purpose. Like any discipline, the development of an objective moral code is fundamentally a science, and as such, must be based on evidence and reason, not on faith or intuition.

As the third branch in the hierarchy of philosophy (the first two being metaphysics and epistemology), the development of any moral code will necessarily be based on whatever conclusions have been drawn from the first two. This is why the discussion about morality has largely become hijacked by a needless and meaningless debate over atheism versus religious faith. Continue reading »

Howard Rotberg – The Ideological Path to Submission

 Arts & Entertainment, Books, Latest, Religion, Society, Terrorism, Video  Comments Off on Howard Rotberg – The Ideological Path to Submission
Sep 242018
 

Howard Rotberg is a Canadian publisher (Mantua Books) and author of four books. Previously authoring The Second Catastrophe: A Novel about a Book and its Author, Exploring Vancouverism: The Political Culture of Canada’s Lotus Land, Tolerism: The Ideology Revealed (in its second (revised) edition), he now shares his solution to the ever-increasing woes begotten by the West’s ‘tolerism’ in his latest book, The Ideological Path to Submission: …and what we can do about it.

He has contributed over the years to many newspapers, magazines and websites, including VancouverSun, Pajamas Media, Frontpage Magazine, Freedom Press Canada Journal, and others.

If you enjoy this video please consider subscribing to Just Right Media’s Youtube channel and supporting us on Patreon.

Sep 202018
 

The New York Times

That there are those who would regard the New York Times’ anonymous admission of a crime to be an ‘op-ed’ is astounding: “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration. I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations” reads the Sept 5, 2018 headline.

How is it possible that an admission of this sort can be considered ‘opinion’?

This is no ‘opinion.’ It is an assertion of fact on the part of its writer. It is not possible to argue that claiming to be part of a ‘resistance’ is an ‘opinion.’ Nor does the blind rage and hatred expressed against Trump in the same editorial qualify for ‘opinion’ status since it is utterly baseless and presented without a single example or referent on which that ‘opinion’ is based. It is not opinion; it is hate speech.

All participants in this crime, including the New York Times, which has admitted knowing who the criminal is, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent that US law allows. Continue reading »

573 – Guest: Salim Mansur – Political theatre from NAFTA to The New York Times

 Comments Off on 573 – Guest: Salim Mansur – Political theatre from NAFTA to The New York Times
Sep 132018
 

NAFTA

How Canada will fare in closing trade negotiations with the United States is among the big questions of the day. Actions like Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau’s impotent trade retaliations only serve to demonstrate Canada’s failure to understand the election of Donald Trump, a president who has vowed from the beginning that he would re-negotiate NAFTA.

So says Salim Mansur, who joins us for a discussion that illustrates ‘political theatre’ from NAFTA to the New York Times, where an admission of apparent criminal and unethical behavior on the part of an anonymous op-ed writer is being reported as reflecting poorly on Donald Trump! Thanks to the Trump Derangement Syndrome, when it comes to anything political, we don’t get news anymore. Instead we get political theatre masquerading as news.

Watching Leftist politicians/media on both sides of the Canada/US border signal the virtues of ‘free trade’ while standing firm on their protectionist policies is pure political theatre. It is political theatre watching them accuse Trump of being the villain opposed to free trade – when the only national leader on the world stage who has explicitly sought ‘zero’ tariffs and barriers in those very terms has been Donald Trump!

Fact is, certain economic interests often join forces with political interests willing to use the force of law to give them a trade advantage by placing barriers and tariffs on their competition. Or, an advantage can be secured by government subsidies or tax breaks unavailable to others. Given his ‘no tariffs no barriers’ trade philosophy, that’s why Donald Trump is their enemy and must be made to look the fool.

Free trade is not merely about economics, as most would like to believe. In arriving at a trade deal that is Just Right for everyone affected, it might be useful to remember that the ‘free’ in ‘free trade’ ultimately refers to the individuals engaged in it.