In her second “free speech pub night” Lindsay Shepherd of The Laurier Society For Open Inquiry introduced Andrew Lawton to speak on Ideological Conformity in Politics and the Media.
Andrew Lawton is a writer, columnist, broadcaster, and former radio talk show host. With a quick wit, entertaining speaking skills, and personal anecdotes he reveals the lunacy of post-modernism and the problem with politics in both Canada and the United States.
‘Syndrome’ and ‘derangement’ are both words that accurately describe what has been driving many of the irrational objections to Donald Trump. They also apply to the kind of thinking that supports irrational objectives like ‘fighting climate change.’ But when it comes to anything we could call a ‘derangement syndrome,’ the Left’s irrationality concerning Donald Trump and climate can’t hold a candle to its ideas about sex and heterosexuality.
To the Left and its many radical feminists, the reality of a male-female binary represents a political problem to be solved. Part of that solution is to first deny that the binary even exists. Then, assert that heterosexuality is ‘forced’ and that sexual/gender preferences are completely a product of socialization – all nurture, no nature. From children’s toys to adult pornography, the biology that drives such preferences has been driven from discussion.
It’s deranged thinking, particularly when faced with the evidence. As Gad Saad, evolutionary behavioral scientist at the John Molson School of Business Concordia University, insists: “Biology counts!”
By examining relevant ‘idea pathogens,’ the source of much of the Left’s deranged thinking about gender and sex can be identified. To counter these deranged ‘idea pathogens,’ Dr. Saad recommends the establishment of various ‘nomological networks of cumulative evidence’ – accumulated evidence that is unassailable when used against arguments denying such evidence.
Are human sex and gender behaviors the result of ‘nature or nurture?’ To answer that question objectively requires an examination of the actual evidence in a way that is Just Right.
No matter its legal status, abortion continues to generate a polarized debate that will never be aborted. Which ‘right’ is the valid right? The ‘right’ to an abortion or the ‘right’ to life? Given polarized views of life, death, and individual rights – the abortion controversy is perpetual.
Whatever one’s view on the subject, the idea of ‘celebrating’ abortion as one might celebrate life has forced the issue back into the spotlight. In a skit that has arguably ‘crossed the line,’ comedienne Michelle Wolf’s recent ‘celebration of abortion’ (The Break / Netflix) was not particularly funny in the view of many.
Wolf’s skit reflects the Left’s nihilistic view of life, suggest Danielle and Robert in their consideration of the moral and ethical issues involved: “normalizing abortion by making it heroic.”
Calls for the outright prohibition of abortion have long been associated with the Right, particularly since those calls have been seen to originate from the so-called ‘social’ conservatives. In contrast, ‘fiscal’ and ‘pragmatic’ conservatives prefer to leave the abortion issue off the political table entirely – while ‘progressive’ conservatives would fully support a Leftist agenda. Continue reading »
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as we know it no longer exists. In an era of shifting trade winds precipitated by the free trade policies of Donald Trump (no tariffs, no barriers, no subsidies, etc), the threat of a global ‘trade war’ has now crossed the horizon.
That ‘war’ is being precipitated by the nations who most insist on maintaining their controls on free trade, while hypocritically pretending to be on the side of ‘free trade.’ To them, Donald Trump is the ‘bully.’ Bully for them. But crying ‘bully’ doesn’t make it so.
As Western University’s assistant professor of political science Salim Mansur illustrates, we are witnessing a shift in world trade – away from the destructive policies of ‘globalism’ and back to a world of sovereign nations, each determining its own destiny and interests against those imposed upon it by other nations.
The lesson to be learned is that every nation – whether under ‘globalism’ or ‘nationalism’ – will always act in its own interest. As soon as that interest in no longer served, old ‘alliances’ quickly fade while new ones are formed.
Need to shine a light on today’s most important political and social controversies? Apparently the place to go is to the intellectual ‘dark web’ or perhaps even to the critical ‘darker’ web where disagreements abound, but honesty, a respect for free speech, and a general sincere desire to improve humanity’s condition seem to be the common ground on which its debaters stand.
In their quick review of a veritable ‘Who’s Who’ on the ‘dark web,’ Robert and Danielle highlight the contrasts and similarities among its most notable representatives – whether on the Left or Right. They include Gad Saad, Joe Rogan, Camille Paglia, Owen Benjamin, Lindsay Shepherd, Christina Hoff Somers, Douglas Murray, Dave Rubin, Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Steven Crowder, Matt Christensen – and of course, Eric Weinstein.
In his recent conversation with Dave Rubin and Jordan Peterson (Rubin Report, June 29/18), Weinstein proposed “hermaphroditic parties” that ‘combine’ elements of right and left. Of course, such a notion is one that can only emanate from the Left. But his is a ‘Left’ largely disassociated from its namesake (where no debate or discussion is permitted) – and thus finds itself, like the Right, on the so-called ‘dark web.’
Whether on the Left or Right, members of the ‘dark web’ generally tend to be united in a search for ‘truth’ through open and honest debate and discussion.
The irony of all this of course, is that in order to create the free speech environment where true alternative viewpoints can be freely discussed, it was necessary to move toward the side of the political polarity that is Just Right.
Anyone attending his London Ontario appearance at Centennial Hall on July 21 would have noticed that Jordan Peterson’s message is no longer focused on gender issues or on his conflict with university policies. His mission has now turned towards philosophical fundamentals and the determination of Truth.
In this venture, Dr Peterson has relied heavily upon religious and mythological symbolism and metaphor, while finding himself opposed to most ‘atheistic’ philosophical interpretations of Truth. Secular philosophies, he suggests, are incapable of describing humanity’s Truth, lacking “an animated, spiritual world, saturated with meaning, imbued with moral purpose.”
This view of Truth has now itself become subject to a growing controversy, one ironically being debated amongst those who are already generally agreed that Truth and Reality are objectively determined – which includes today’s show panelists as they review some of the ideas of Jordan Peterson.
Do abstractions and religious stories used to describe Truth help clarify or confuse the issue? The correct answer may simply depend on perspective and context. Continue reading »
In responding to talk show guest Judge Jeanine Pirro, The View’s Whoopi Goldberg declared “I don’t have Trump Derangement; let me tell you what I have. I’m tired of people starting a conversation with “Mexicans are liars and rapists.” The ‘debate’ ended shortly thereafter with Goldberg ejecting Pirro from the show. She then became verbally abusive by swearing and directing profanity against the Trump-supporting judge.
Agreeing that this viewing of ‘the View’ was an uncomfortable one, Robert and Danielle also view Whoopi’s embarrassing meltdown and reaction to Pirro’s arguments as yet another symptom of the Left’s inability to defend itself. Ironically, it is also an extreme example of Trump Derangement Syndrome, in which the sufferer denies the affliction while openly exhibiting its symptoms.
Given that Trump never made any such statement, Goldberg’s hysteria was understandable. Her assertion against Trump could neither be justified nor verified, yet she insisted on asserting it – more evidence of the emotional compulsion that drives Trump Derangement Syndrome. Goldberg’s later non-apologetic apology was just the icing on the symptom.
Thanks to its panel of Leftists like Whoopi Goldberg, ‘the View’ provides everyone with an inside view of Leftist views – views apparently not debatable when contradicted by facts.
Fortunately for Danielle and Robert, ‘the View’ from here is Just Right.