Consent. By its nature, it is the difference between giving and stealing, between murder and assisted suicide, and between sex and rape. By its nature, it is the difference between victim and non-victim. In law, it is also the difference between guilt and innocence. Therefore, its legal definition, and the way it is judged to be present or absent, has a dramatic impact upon whether justice prevails or fails. It should concern everyone, therefore, that a small but vocal number of activists are promoting a new approach to consent that is certain to facilitate injustice, to endanger young children, to make sex repulsive, and to replace love and respect between men and women with fear, distrust, disrespect, animosity, and hatred. Read more
The world’s journalists and talk-show hosts are making a mistake. It is an innocent one. The mistake is to report that Islamic terrorists in Paris committed murders and assaults in reaction to the publication of cartoons that mock Islamic prophet Mohammed, or that mock militant Islamic leaders. The only entities served by the mistake are the terrorists and other Islamic Theocrats. Read more
November 15th “Politics is Personal” Dinner
Lamplighter Hotel, 591 Wellington Road, London, Ontario
The theme of tonight’s dinner is “Politics is Personal”. Although the theme was one ultimately chosen by Bob Metz, the idea of the personal nature of politics has worked its way into a lot of my thinking in recent years.
There are several senses in which politics is personal. For my part, tonight, I will submit to you that the fact that politics is personal is the reason that we are all gathered in this room tonight.
What I find most striking is the extent to which many in society have tried to hide the fact that politics is personal. They hide its personal nature by the division of governmental powers. They hide it with elections. And they hide it with political parties. Read more
To produce the values upon which ones survival and happiness depend, one must engage in rational action. Those who are more consistently rational, and those who are physically more powerful, are the strong. The irrational, and the physically less powerful, are the weak. Read more
Over the last few years, a trilogy of movies has been released based upon Ayn Rand’s novel, Atlas Shrugged. I was asked by the movie company to review the first installment (you can read my review here), but I’ve not seen the 2nd and 3rd installments. Nor have I paid much attention to what was done in those two installments. Suffice it to say that many Objectivists (i.e., people who follow Ayn Rand’s philosophy, and love her novels) have condemned the trilogy (in some cases, because of some of the advisors and others associated with the production, including David Kelley and Nathaniel Branden). Not having seen parts 2 and 3, I’ll not comment upon them. However, I am interested in the question of whether it is even possible to convert Rand’s 1100+ page novel into a three-part movie that does the book any justice. Would it be necessary – as some hold – to convert the book into a mini-series?
Today, I performed a little analysis. The methodology would rightly be considered weak and incomplete, but it provides one with at least a sense of the nature of the task faced by a person trying to convert the book into a movie. Read more
In the context of the political philosophy of Man, the terms “free”, “freedom”, and “free society” are properly defined as follows: Read more
The freedom to speak ones mind without being fined or imprisoned does not imply the freedom to speak ones mind without being shunned, publicly humiliated, or condemned. So long as the misguided advocates of alleged “free speech” make that false inference, they will serve only as enemies of morality and freedom. And, for that, they must be shunned, publicly humiliated, and condemned…as follows. Read more
A member of the facebook.com community asked:
“Can someone explain to me in 5 sentences or less what objectivism is and how it differs from libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism without saying “it’s Ayn Rand’s philosophy,” telling me to read a book, or sending me a hyperlink. I just want a short explanation. That’s all. —> EDIT: Use a dozen sentences if necessary. Just don’t write a novel or use philosophical lingo I won’t understand.”
I replied as follows: Read more
Michael Chong’s proposed Reform Act, 2013 has been praised as a bill that would shift each party leaders’ power to their respective caucus members, thereby revitalizing an allegedly withered role of Parliament’s confidence in government, and facilitating a broader diversity of party policies and philosophies in Parliament. Whatever the merits of such arguments, they miss the essential nature and function of Mr. Chong’s would-be law, and the threat that it poses to democracy itself. The bill should be rejected by all MPs worthy of re-election. Read more
The headline aroused my suspicions right away: “Tim Hudak Seeks Andrea Horwath Support“. The story that followed it was comprised mostly of an open letter that the Progressive Conservative party leader, Tim Hudak, had written to New Democratic Party leader Andrea Horwath (and shared with everyone who would bother to read it). The letter started with a host of insults and attacks: Horwath and her party “don’t grasp” that the governing Liberal Party of Kathleen Wynne is not serving the public; are shockingly “not troubled” by Liberal corruption and moral bankruptcy; are “enabling” the Liberals; have priorities that are “in sync” with the Liberals; have chosen not to “put the needs of Ontario first”, etc.. It concluded with “So let’s sit down and talk about it, sooner rather than later.” In other words, it was a punch in the nose followed by a feigned invitation to kiss and work together. “Bush league”, I thought, “Hudak wants everyone to believe the falsehood that he wants to work with Horwath, and wants everyone to believe that Horwath refuses”. Read more