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 »

854 – No peace in the foreseeable future | Jacob Peretz

 Comments Off on 854 – No peace in the foreseeable future | Jacob Peretz
Apr 032024

“There will be no peace in Israel’s foreseeable future” predicts our guest Jacob Peretz.

His pessimism is based not only on current events or on the history of the region, but also on personal experience. His regret over saving the life of a wounded Egyptian soldier during the Yom Kippur war speaks to a growing sense of hopelessness regarding any prospects of peace or brotherhood between Jews and those who relentlessly disparage and attack them.

In speculating beyond the “foreseeable” future, Jacob notes that there are forty-eight Arab states in the United Nations, states that do not have any interest in pursuing peace with Israel. In making this observation, he has also identified the fundamental evil nature of the United Nations, which was described by Ayn Rand many decades ago (and not in reference to Israel):

“There is no margin of error about a monstrosity that was created for the alleged purpose of preventing wars by uniting the world against any aggressor, but proceeded to unite it against any victim of aggression.

“Who but a concrete-bound epistemological savage could have expected any other results from such an ‘experiment in collaboration’? What would you expect from a crime fighting committee whose board of directors included the leading gangsters of the community?”

What we need is not a “United Nations,” but an international organization of “United Democratic Nations,” suggests Jacob, and until such a body emerges, any organization with members opposed to freedom and democracy can only be a threat to peace, not a vehicle for peace.

Meanwhile, as the global debate continues to rage, Israel’s military efforts continue to escalate – demonstrating that predictions of “no peace in the foreseeable future” are proving to be Just Right, as tragic as that reality may be.

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

Defending Israel | Jacob Peretz

 Audio  Comments Off on Defending Israel | Jacob Peretz
Mar 292024

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has sparked intense debate worldwide, especially now that Israel stands accused before the International Court of Justice on the charge of committing genocide. It is crucial to approach this issue with a well-informed perspective, considering the historical context, the motivations of the involved factions, and the underlying values that drive their actions.

While a comprehensive understanding of the history of the region is necessary to comprehend the current situation and the motivations behind the actions of the factions involved, history alone does not provide a moral compass. It is essential to consider the values that drive the actions of both Israel and Hamas. These values, whether they be peace, religious beliefs, or the pursuit of a promised afterlife, are crucial in understanding the conflict at a deeper level.

Values are a fundamental aspect of human existence, shaping our actions and beliefs. Understanding the values held by Israel and Arab Palestinians is essential to understanding their motivations and aspirations. By examining the values that drive these factions, we can gain insight into their perspectives and potentially find common ground for a resolution, if such a resolution is even possible.

To further explore the values and motivations behind the conflict, we have invited Jacob Peretz, an Israeli-Canadian businessman and veteran of the 1973 Yom Kippur War (or Ramadan War from the Arab perspective), to give us the benefit of his experience. As a firsthand witness to the decades-old conflict, Mr. Peretz can provide significant insights into the values that drove him to risk his life and the broader motivations of the Israeli people.

► Robert’s Substack

Your financial support is always appreciated and is what makes our programming possible.
E-Transfer your donation to
Or via PayPal

853 – Israel reconsidered—in the light of history

 Comments Off on 853 – Israel reconsidered—in the light of history
Mar 272024

In his March 4 essay entitled Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus* – The Chronicle of Zionist lies and their implosion foreseen, Salim Mansur concludes that the Balfour Declaration which created the state of Israel has no legal standing.

Given Israel’s current military actions in Palestine and the recent International Court of Justice‘s (ICJ) provisional judgement finding it “plausible” that Israel is violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, events suggest that Israel’s “false history” is rapidly catching up with its present.

That history includes the publication of Theodor Herzl‘s book, ‘The Jewish State’ with its “plan” for Zionism, how the Balfour Declaration was implemented, the suppression of the King-Crane Commission report, the Alfred Dreyfus case and the controversial opinions of figures like Edwin Montagu.

When Salim suggests that “a settlement will come within the context of a false history,” he is not solely referring to any possible ‘court’ settlements regarding the state of Israel, but to the inevitable continuum of history. Although various historical narratives are often shown to be false, actual historical events themselves nevertheless unfold on the reality of the past, not on the political fictions. “It’s karma.”

Even when not recognized as such, the reality of truth exerts its own deterministic force against intentions and efforts to hide truths that, given enough time, eventually surface. Since the study of history is a discipline dealing with related events through passages of time, an accurate history becomes an indispensable necessity in establishing any understanding of the present.

Global pressures and public opinion against Israel continue to build, and now even include Donald Trump‘s cautionary warning to wrap up its mission in Palestine. Whether or not Israel maintains (or perhaps improves) its status and international respect as a state is unpredictable. But a “settlement will come” and it will be interesting to see if that settlement proves to be one that is Just Right – irrespective of any false histories.

* Latin “False in one, false in all.”

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