Jan 182018
 

Saul Alinsky

As the author of 1971’s Rules For Radicals, were he alive today, Saul Alinsky would no doubt be pleased to see his own radical views and tactics resulting in progress for those on the Left – particularly his beloved Democratic Party.

Some of the Alinsky symptoms:

  • increased violence during political rallies
  • the growing intolerance of differing views on campuses
  • the polarization of political forces along lines of racism and the haves and have nots
  • the manufacture of fake news, and much more
  • All of these symptoms reflect the “rules” outlined in Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Many attribute today’s decline in civilized political discourse directly to Saul Alinsky. His book has been often cited as a reason for the successes of Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

    As we share the opinions of Dinesh D’Souza, David Alinsky, and Ralph Benko as heard during a July 20/17 C-SPAN debate about Saul Alinsky’s radical rules, the controversy begins with the book’s opening epigram dedicated to the “first radical” – Lucifer. (After all, it is to Lucifer’s kingdom that the Leftward road of good intentions leads.) Continue reading »

    538 – The “know” ledge | Christopher Essex

     Comments Off on 538 – The “know” ledge | Christopher Essex
    Jan 112018
     

    The Know Ledge

    At what point does it become necessary to actually “know” things about certain issues or topics? When is it ok just to leave the details to the “experts“? It’s a practical question that is fundamentally based on individual responsibility.

    It is also a question that has bedeviled Professor Christopher Essex, theoretical physicist and mathematician with the Department of Applied Mathematics at Western University. As one of the pioneers of climate change computer modeling, his skepticism about the political climate that has arisen around this field of study has fallen mostly on deaf ears.

    Understandably, when it comes to the details of science and technology, most people will defer to the experts. But there comes a point when leaving it to the experts may in fact be quite detrimental to those affected.

    Having reached the point at which the responsibility to know falls squarely on those who need to know, a decision must be made. Shall we continue to rely on opinions and “expertise” that does not seem to be consistent or realistic, or shall we finally take the leap from the ledge of ignorance and embrace the technicalities of knowledge? Continue reading »

    534 – When opinions trump fact the first victim is truth | Paul McKeever & Dave Plum

     Comments Off on 534 – When opinions trump fact the first victim is truth | Paul McKeever & Dave Plum
    Dec 072017
     

    Truth

    It would be nice to believe that the unjust and unfounded inquisition experienced by Teaching Assistant Lindsay Shepherd at Wilfrid Laurier University was an isolated and bizarre anomaly.

    Unfortunately, her experience appears to have exposed but the tip of a poisonous ideology now rampant in all of Ontario’s educational institutions. It is an ideology that holds unsubstantiated opinions and feelings as superior to facts and truth.

    Just ask our guests Dave Plumb and Paul McKeever, who both have witnessed this phenomenon first hand – though from differing perspectives.

    Like Lindsay Shepherd, Dave Plumb was an educational instructor / teacher who found his job threatened by an anonymous complaint. Like Lindsay Shepherd, Dave was being held accountable for the “feelings” of the unidentified complainant while simultaneously being denied any way of directly addressing the complainant’s concerns. Continue reading »

    531 – Capitalism: The best thing… including sliced bread

     Comments Off on 531 – Capitalism: The best thing… including sliced bread
    Nov 162017
     

    Capitalism

    Disturbing poll results (conducted by YouGov) released by Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation have revealed that, as a group, more millennials prefer to live in a socialist country rather than in a capitalist one.

    The declining rate of support for capitalism becomes glaringly visible along age demographics (matures: 78%; baby boomers: 66%; gen xers: 57%; millennials: 42%).

    The surprising exception to the trend was found among the youngest demographic, “generation Z” whose preference to live in a capitalist society polled at 67%. While that bodes well in terms of changing future attitudes, the simple desire to live under capitalism will not make it so. The world is replete with citizens who desperately wish to live under conditions of freedom, yet that reality eludes them.

    Blinded to what philosopher-novelist Ayn Rand boldly proclaimed as “the unknown ideal,” the failure to comprehend the true nature of Capitalism – as a moral system – has been the primary cause of capitalism’s decline in public acceptance. Continue reading »

    505 – Life on the fringe of art and politics | John Palmer & Paul Merrifield

     Comments Off on 505 – Life on the fringe of art and politics | John Palmer & Paul Merrifield
    May 182017
     

    Theatre

     

    Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?

    It’s called “Noam Chomsky vs Rush Limbaugh” and is one of London Ontario’s “Fringe Festival” entries to be featured at the Palace Theatre in June.

    As the only play in the fringe line-up to feature a “political” theme, it asks a question that is often entertained on Just Right: “Is there more to this political bird than just the left and the right wings?”

    To help us entertain that question, we are joined by Western University economics professor John Palmer, who plays the role of Noam Chomsky, and by playwright Paul Merrifield, whose humourous script provided the inspiration for the very unlikely meeting of two highly polarized political figures.

    Says AM980 radio’s Andrew Lawton: “An amusing romp that squarely takes aim at political correctness in a way that I wish more art would.” Adds London City Councillor Michael Van Holst “These are dialogues you wish would happen!” Continue reading »

    Mar 232017
     

    The Scream

     

    Make no mistake: Our Islamophobic politicians are those most responsible for fostering the make-believe phobia against which they are passing “Motions.” The “motions” themselves are cause enough to be rightly concerned. This concern is entirely rational and appropriate. It is in no way “phobic.”

    The constant “anti-Islamophobia” rhetoric generated by those in the legislature and in parliament has itself become a great threat. Since our MPPs and MPs appear unwilling to speak out against the very real threat of Islam’s political agenda, they have instead directed their efforts towards motions and agendas calculated to keep informed voices to a minimum, if not entirely silenced.

    Fortunately, not every political party or its leader is “Islamophobic.” There is one political party and leader with the courage to publicly say what desperately needs to be said: Freedom Party and its leader Paul McKeever who is our guest today on Just Right. Continue reading »

    Feb 162017
     

    Truth

     

    THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT PRAGMATISM – and why it matters:

    Following his ascent to notoriety when confronted by “gender warriors” at the University of Toronto late last year, Dr Jordan Peterson found himself entangled in a debate with Sam Harris (Waking Up with Sam Harris, January 21/17) that offered a truly rare insight into a fundamental philosophical dilemma. What is the nature of truth?

    Having begun their discussion in general agreement on the broader issues, their talk ground to a halt when it became clear that there was an incredible chasm between how each viewed “truth.” For over an hour, their attempt to reconcile the two very different views of truth merely widened the chasm between them. The discussion was halted and a call was put out to their listeners for insight to their dilemma.

    Today’s Just Right guest Paul McKeever offered exactly that, and his assessment of “what went wrong” in the Peterson-Harris exchange drew the attention of Peterson himself. At the root of their dilemma, and indeed at the root of Professor Peterson’s problems with “gender warriors,” suggests Paul, was a deep and long held misunderstanding about the nature of pragmatism.
    Continue reading »