849 – Applied philosophy—the practicality of freedom

 Comments Off on 849 – Applied philosophy—the practicality of freedom
Feb 282024
 


In their struggle against tyranny, many dismiss ‘philosophy’ while calling for ‘practical’ solutions to a condition that is wholly the consequence of ideas – and ideology. Given that the predominant zeitgeist of today’s culture is primarily on the Left, it should not be surprising that the field of philosophy has been largely discredited and dismissed as a failed subjective approach to the problems and challenges of life. However, this is a tragic error.

Reality dictates that one cannot possibly separate the philosophical from the practical without encountering a contradiction. If the ‘theory’ does not match the ‘practice’ then the ‘theory’ is no longer valid and cannot be regarded as such. The proper response is not to dismiss all ‘theory’ out of hand, but to formulate a theory that does indeed match the practice.

In the fields of ethics and politics, ‘theory’ is often equated with ‘philosophy’ or ‘ideology.’ Each of these terms is properly associated with modes of thinking that lead to certain intended outcomes or results.

So why do so many applied ‘theories’ fail to result in their intended outcomes? For a simple reason: the ‘theories’ are based on a mode of thinking philosophically referred to as the “primacy of consciousness” which stands in direct opposition to the “primacy of existence.” Continue reading »

846 – United Freedom Party of Alberta—neither united nor free

 Comments Off on 846 – United Freedom Party of Alberta—neither united nor free
Feb 072024
 


Due to the emergence of an officially registered party in Alberta called the United Freedom Party (UFP), we find ourselves forced to conduct some damage control given our own association with Ontario’s officially registered Freedom Party. The two parties have literally nothing in common.

Organizers of the UFP, Luke Denis and Chris Hampton, have described themselves as “extreme right wing Christian conservatives,” whose key agenda includes the advancement of anarchy, libertarianism and the socialistic redistribution of wealth. Citing the “fifth greater re-set event being held right now, from the libertarian sector and the yellow and black anarchist types,” they attribute the current functionality of society on “some kind of magic hootenanny.” Seriously.

Unable to offer an objective definition of political freedom, the UFP organizers suggest that freedom is “the ability to do whatever one wants, so long as it does not ‘harm’ other individuals or the environment.” Among the ‘harms’ it includes in this definition is, for example, the inability or failure of a private road contractor to meet the financial or construction obligations of its contracted agreements. They appear to be unaware that using the so-called ‘harm’ argument to justify restricting freedom was the very ground on which everything from covid injections to wearing masks to mandated lockdowns was justified.

For the most part, the UFP’s perspective on politics and the economy is incoherent, contradictory, and so bizarrely oblivious to any kind of consistency or civilized standard that it is difficult to comprehend what kind of people would support such madness. The principle of justice, due process, or consent is nowhere to be found in their rhetoric. “We don’t need their bloody permission” they say of their fellow Albertans.

At one point it was suggested that Bill Gates should have been “murdered and ripped apart on stage.” They see people like Tucker Carlson and Douglas Murray as mostly “controlled opposition.”

Among the UFP’s bizarrely contradictory and anti-freedom proposals are the following:

The UFP would institute an across-the-board 3% resource tax and provide all Albertans with cheques drawn upon that account “because these are natural resources that we should share.”

In a pure Joe Biden open border policy, the party would “flood the province of Alberta with millions of people from outside the province (doubling Alberta’s population) who would theoretically support and vote for “unity” and “solidarity” though no means of vetting such people was deemed necessary. At the same time the party would expel all current Albertans who disagree with the party’s policies: “Get the ‘f’ out.”

On the democratic front, there is simply no way to reconcile or make sense of the party’s utterly contradictory and illogical proposals. On the one hand they would “remove the power of politicians” to legislate, and would “end the voting process after the UFP is voted into power.” On the other hand, they would encourage people to “vote more furiously in all the time honored ways of voting.” The UFP would also be in favor of “forming a new country” in the province of Alberta and within other jurisdictions around the world.

While they pay lip service to “private education” they claim the right to “educate the sheep” and “if you don’t like it get the ‘f’ out.”

And all this is just the tip of the iceberg of the UFP’s irrationality.

Claiming that ‘unity’ and ‘solidarity’ are their central concerns, one must question the motives of a party that would register in a province where there are already a myriad of conservative splinter groups with those same objectives, including Artur Pawlowski’s political party which had already successfully registered candidates in all of Alberta’s ridings.

Given the utter irrationality and contradictory statements made by the UFP, it’s beginning to look like the only way to define Alberta’s UFP in a way that’s Just Right is as some kind of psyop designed to disrupt and destroy any opposition to the existing regime.

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

845 – Politics is simple—it’s just not easy

 Comments Off on 845 – Politics is simple—it’s just not easy
Feb 012024
 


The spectacle of thousands of political protesters gathering to “fight tyranny” without having a clue as to how this might be done can only lead to continued tyranny ahead. Though accomplished and expert in their own fields of discipline – whether medicine, law, education, journalism, etc. – most of the leading voices in the “freedom movement” are clueless when it comes to the politics of freedom.

It’s one thing to be able to identify the political condition (tyranny) you’re running ‘from,’ it is quite another to identify the political condition (freedom) you must move ‘towards.’ Calls for ‘unity’ or ‘solidarity’ or for ‘political separation,’ or for ‘creating a republic’ or for ‘changing the electoral system’ are not calls for establishing a free society. They are desperate aimless propositions that amount to a clear admission that the protesters really don’t know what must be done.

This is completely understandable. Most people pay no attention to politics until it is too late. Fortunately, one group that has discovered the fundamental principles necessary to the advancement of individual freedom is the Freedom Party of Ontario, established on January 1, 1984.

A brief review of the party’s myriad of successes in changing and affecting the laws of Ontario makes two things clear: (1) that winning individual battles against the deep state and the political parties of the day is doable, if one employs the proper principles and tactics, and (2) that Canada’s tyranny today is no different than it has been for the past half century and longer. In every respect, municipal, federal and provincial governments in Canada were as abusive of their power and authority in the 1980s as they are today.

Protesting against tyranny and oppression certainly has some limited value. But preventing the next wave of tyranny and oppression demands a political discipline currently not seen in the political arena – one ‘for’ freedom, not merely ‘against’ the latest manifestations of state injustice.

The war for freedom can only be won by those who understand and act on the singular set of freedom based principles that are Just Right.

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

843 – The missionary position—on sex, politics, and religion

 Comments Off on 843 – The missionary position—on sex, politics, and religion
Jan 182024
 


“We’re far more divided than we thought – between people who see freedom as God defines it and those who see freedom as they define it.” So declared one Christian spokesman regarding the current “freedom alliance” on the Right.

Surprisingly, his concern was primarily based on differing sexual attitudes and lifestyles: “God created marriage for one man and one woman, for life, and any sex outside of that is a sin and against nature.”

While this choice of lifestyle is perfectly legitimate for those who choose to adopt it, turning it in to a point of division between those who differ is tragically self-defeating. It is as if to argue that no political alliance is possible unless everyone in that alliance uses the missionary position. This is a complete non sequitur in the greater war on tyranny, where the only consensus required for alliance is the acceptance of individual freedom.

Different attitudes on sexuality are unnecessarily divisive when brought into any political sphere or arena. By sexuality in this context we mean disagreements over consentual lifestyle choices, not on the tyranny of gender politics.

Thanks to gender identity politics, sexuality has become yet another area of disagreement and division. But gender politics is not about sex or about sexuality. It is about creating division and conflict in the political arena.

It’s unfortunate that some in the religious community are using their own personal sexual beliefs to create further division. Complete unanimity between differing religious groups, faiths and those who profess no specific religious views is not a necessity in the broader war against the current tyranny.

The current “freedom alliance” need not be threatened from within. All it takes to keep it intact is a consensus of freedom that is Just Right for everyone.

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

Jan 112024
 


“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

Jan 042024
 


Sometimes our philosophical assumptions and beliefs can be challenged by the most unexpected and seemingly trivial events. To illustrate this, we offer a remarkable true story about a lowly housefly named ‘Myfly’ and what it tells us about human nature.

The story has encouraged us to re-examine some long accepted philosophical principles, like the one that postulates that truth is that which reflects and corresponds to reality. But is that really ‘true’? Might it be possible for something to be true, but not necessarily real? Is there a distinction between the ‘real’ and ‘reality’? These are but a few of the questions considered in our first presentation of 2024,and we hope and trust that everyone had a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Given all of the dire predictions and expectations for this new year, being able to distinguish between narratives that are true or false becomes all the more urgent and necessary. The science devoted to the discovery of the proper methods of acquiring and validating knowledge is known as epistemology.

In both politics and war the first rule is to define or be defined and in so doing, control the narrative. Through the application of valid epistemological principles. false narratives can easily be identified and discredited without having to resort to censorship and other means of speech restrictions.

If it is true that the narrative is all, then clearly those on the Right must endeavour to spread those narratives known to be Just Right.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider donating:
🧡 PayPal

Dec 212023
 


Since October 7 the attack on Israel by Hamas has dominated the world stage. Though initial global reaction sympathized with the Israeli victims, it was not long before Western public sentiment had expressed a surprising level of moral support for the actions of Hamas, accompanied by open calls for the death of Jews.

Why the Jewish culture has been so hated and condemned throughout history has never been explained in a way that can withstand the test of time. To help broaden our discussions about the nature of Israel and Jewish traditions, our guest Irving Weisdorf – as a secular Jew himself – offers his own perspective and experience within the Jewish tradition.

With a traditional stress on education and hard work combined with an ethic of “being the best that you can be,” that philosophy goes a long way towards explaining why the Jewish culture is so successful. It may also help explain the real motivation behind anti-Semitism as being a “hatred of the good for being the good,” as described by Ayn Rand.

Whether this proves to be the explanation that is Just Right is something that can only be determined in an open forum of free discussion involving the nature of good and evil itself.

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