Comments Off on 904 – So where’s the party?—on the Left or Right?
Mar192025
Having witnessed the political party machinations in Canada on both the provincial and federal level, it should not be surprising that there have been calls to reduce the influence of political parties.
Operating on the principles of a British parliamentary system, Ontario’s Doug Ford, after having won a two-week February snap election called on a whim, has since made an utter fool of himself attempting to beat US president Donald Trump in a tariff war. Meanwhile, Mark Carney, now Canada’s Prime Minister, was never elected to office and is an open advocate of globalism and an opponent of Canadian sovereignty.
With only 19% of Ontario’s eligible voters giving Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative Party a majority government, and with zero voters on the federal level having elected Mark Carney, some might be asking whatever happened to the ‘democratic’ principle of ‘we the people’?
In Canada, there is one federal party that has addressed this question head-on in its very name: the People’s Party of Canada (PPC) under the leadership of Maxime Bernier. Continue reading »
For many, philosophy has devolved into an exercise where errors in reasoning, logic, and definitions are layered upon one another, resulting in the field becoming a subject of mockery among the general populace. Imagine if foundational sciences like physics, chemistry, or mathematics had clung to their initial mistakes; we might never have seen the advent of computers or advancements in medicine, and basic arithmetic could still be in dispute.
To rejuvenate the importance of philosophy, we need to pinpoint and resolve its historical puzzles and paradoxes, effectively consigning them to obsolescence.
In his work, “Judge: Philosophy and Freedom in the First Person,” Paul McKeever meticulously examines twelve classic philosophical problems, offering solutions with such lucidity that there remains no justification for their continued discussion as credible issues.
“Judge” distinguishes itself as a work of deep insight, crucial not just for academic scholars but for anyone intrigued by the exploration of human nature, our connection to reality, and our interactions with others. In a very novel way, it provides one with an understanding of reality, perception, identity, logical reasoning, ethical principles, and the fundamental aspects of individual freedom.
However, there’s no need to take our word for this assessment. In keeping with the theme of McKeever’s work, you be the judge.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Comments Off on 872 – From Marx to Jefferson—Epicurious about Epicurus
Aug072024
When a philosopher has been said to influence everyone from Karl Marx to Thomas Jefferson, it bears taking note, particularly given the polarized political zeitgeist in which we currently find ourselves. One such philosopher was Epicurus (341-270 BC), perhaps best known as an advocate of ‘the simple life’ as the path to happiness.
So naturally, we became ‘epi-curious’ about Epicurus given that the right to the ‘pursuit of happiness’ is a founding principle of a free society. What we discovered was that ‘happiness’ itself is an incredibly polarized concept, a polarization that can also be seen in terms of the political Left and Right. This perhaps partially accounts for the differing narratives and interpretations regarding Epicurus’ history and philosophy.
For example, given the contrast between the motivations of Karl Marx and Thomas Jefferson, it should not be surprising that each interpreted the philosophy of Epicurus in equally contrasting ways. Were Epicurus alive today, how he himself might have viewed their Epicurean narratives is certainly a subject open to discussion.
According to one source regarding the Greek philosopher: “Epicurus promoted the following worldview: the universe is made of atoms and void and subject to the laws of physics without divine intervention. The world can be understood through an empiricist epistemology, and pleasure, pursued intelligently and ethically, is the goal of life.”Continue reading »
Comments Off on 864 – The Right WING—flying in every direction
Jun122024
The belief that Left and Right have become useless labels has been utterly destructive to those on the Right.
Expressing a recognition that conservatives and liberals have become a ‘uni-party,’ many on the Right have falsely operated on the assumption that, for example, Republicans represent the Right and Democrats represent the Left. The sad fact is that, just as ‘Republicans in name only’ (RINOs) are not Republicans, so too many on the right ‘wing’ are ‘Right in name only.’ Or in other words, their ideologies are Left.
How did this misconception of Left and Right arise?
That Republicans and Democrats sit in ‘opposition’ to each other leads most to believe that the split between them is ideological – Left versus Right. But the real ‘split’ is about power, not about ideology. (This principle also applies to parliamentary governments, where there is an ‘official opposition’ yet with little or no ideological difference to the ruling party.) Continue reading »
Comments Off on 852 – Primacy—consciousness or existence?
Mar202024
“In politics, perception is reality, the truth doesn’t matter.”
Given the broad acceptance of this view of politics, it should not be surprising that so many good people see politics as an evil. They thus avoid getting involved in a process that affects everyone’s life whether they are interested in politics or not.
But this viewpoint is itself a form of political propaganda because in reality the truth does indeed matter in politics, so much so that political interests which are not aligned with truth go to such great lengths to hide and/or misrepresent the truth. Those political views are broadly identified as coming from the Left, which represents many variants of collectivism.
For those on the Right (which represents individualism, freedom, and capitalism), the current state of politics has become so irrational and beyond understanding that it is almost impossible to accept that the tyranny we are experiencing is real. “Everything is upside down or totally backwards,” has become a familiar refrain expressing this frustration and disbelief.
To understand the madness of the political Left, it is necessary to know how those on the Left think. One of the most difficult concepts to grasp is that those on the Left are strictly ideological, not philosophical. Ideology originates strictly in the mind, unconcerned with the facts of reality. A working philosophy on the other hand, is disciplined by the facts of reality.
In philosophy, these two opposing ways of thinking are contrasted as the ‘primacy of consciousness’ (in which reality is not perceived by consciousness but is created by consciousness) and the ‘primacy of existence’ (in which reality exists irrespective of anyone’s consciousness).
In politics, it is the Left that relies on ideology, while the Right relies on philosophical principles.
Consequently, this conflict between Left and Right manifests itself in a battle of definitions and concepts, ranging from the definition of freedom to the definition of democracy. While those on the Left are obsessed with “defending democracy,” many on the Right insist that freedom is the primary value to be defended.
While freedom is indeed the primary value, the surprising truth is that freedom and democracy go hand-in-hand.
Unfortunately, even when the truth is told, most people cannot recognize it or distinguish it from all of the false perceptions about politics. To be understood in a light that is Just Right, truth must be discerned; it requires a process of thought and discipline that too few understand: philosophy.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
“When you’re dead, you don’t know you’re dead. The pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you’re stupid.” And to explicitly conclude the thought of that popular meme: “When you’re stupid and you don’t know it, the pain is felt by others.”
The truth of that statement strikes at the heart of what was experienced in Nazi Germany, thanks to the seemingly willing support that so many German people gave to Hitler. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German Lutheran pastor theologian and anti-Nazi dissident, believed that this was a not a consequence of malice, but of widespread stupidity.
While in a German prison during the Hitler years, he formulated a theory arguing that we must seek to understand the nature of stupidity as stupidity is not an intellectual defect, but a moral one. Stupidity, therefore, is a much more dangerous enemy than malice because one can expose malice and argue against it and even use force to stop it, but this is not possible when dealing with stupidity.
One has but to look at all of the utterly stupid ideas and causes (and quite demonstrably so) being supported in today’s zeitgeist. From Covid to climate change, these stupid fictions continue to be believed by a significant number of people who, as a result, become a danger not only to others but to themselves as well. But having chosen to be stupid, they are oblivious to this reality.
Moreover, this phenomenon of stupidity, observed Bonhoeffer, is most predominant among people living in groups and collectives, and very rare in independent individuals or those who generally live alone. This suggests a strong psychological force at play, and goes a long way towards explaining why the collectivist Left (communism/socialism/fascism) promotes so many genuinely stupid and immoral ideas, policies and ideologies.
Upon a review of the evidence, it would appear that Bonhoeffer’s theory that stupidity is a moral defect turns out to be Just Right.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Ideas matter. Those that are false can lead to tragic consequences while those that are valid can lead to great opportunities and well-being. But how can we reliably prove which are true and which are false?
In our search for truth, demanding “proof” for everything we know and experience in life is perhaps less an asset than a handicap caused by living in a scientific age. “Blinded by science” is a great expression describing an irrational demand for proof. It is also a good way to describe those who are fooled by demands that we “follow the science,” little realizing that the “science” they are actually following is “political science.”
Fortunately, the road to truth is less about requiring “proof” than it is about articulately and consistently expressing ourselves using ideas based on valid concepts and definitions. Armed with such concepts, it not only becomes much easier to identify the truth, but also easier to reveal those who would change and alter definitions to hide the truth. Such people know that truth is knowledge and knowledge is power.
Naturally, the power of truth represents a threat to those who maintain power through falsehoods and lies. For them, the best way to prevent people from discovering the truth is by controlling or prohibiting freedom of speech. And this is exactly what is being done.
When it comes to validating truth, the “proof” as they say, “is in the pudding.” History has demonstrated that freedom emerges when people express their ideas defined in a way that is Just Right, but the truth is that there’s no way to “prove” it – despite the evidence.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
