Rebecca Hagelin, vice-president of The Heritage Foundation has reviewed Ed Feulner’s Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today. Feulner was in the Reagan administration and was president of The Heritage Foundation for over thirty-years. From what Hagelin says, it looks like an important book for small-c conservatives to read, including those of us in Canada.
Here’s a quote:
Conservatives need to reacquaint themselves with their principles. There’s a reason that conservatism has survived as a popular movement for so many years — because it’s grounded in reality and proven wisdom. Unlike liberalism, it isn’t based on wishful thinking, shallow reasoning and good intentions. It works.
[HT: The Shotgun]
No, I’m not talking about Chinese markets with raw meat hanging in a window, unless you’re talking about their the market with the corpse of freedom for sale. I’m talking about a clean look at the dirty politics of Chinese communism. The infamous Ezra Levant has published a column on the riots in China (no cartoons involved) that a commie-loving western media doesn’t want on your screen. Good night and good luck? Hey Cloonie, try Wen Jiabao on for size. The Chinese comrades would make for a good flick, don’t expect it to get you an Oscar® nod though.
Thanks Ezra for stepping up for Freedom. Google won’t do it, so someone has to.
Tim Challies has reviewed David Kupelian’s The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseud-Experts Sell Us Corrpution Disguised as Freedom. It looks like an excellent book. Check out what Challies has to say.
The Marketing of Evil is a book that will make you wince. It will make you angry. It will make you appreciate or understand the brilliance of the evil one who is engaged in an all-out war against the biblical foundation upon which America was founded. And hopefully, it will serve as a wake-up call that evil is not merely an abstract concept, but is a force, a strategy, that is cunningly marketed and brilliantly deployed against all that is good.
My friend Dan commented on an earlier post and sent me this link to an interview from The Middle East Media Research Institute. The people involved in the interview I’m not familiar with, but the Arabic lady definitely has something to say. She explains that the west’s confrontation with Islam is not a clash of civilizations, rather it is a clash of freedom vs. oppression; progressive civilization vs. the Middle Ages; etc.
Her most important piece of advice is the call to examine Islamic holy books that clearly spell the desire for war against the “infidel.”
Winston Churchill said that an appeaser is someone who feeds the crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. In 1938, the British peace movement and the media overwhelmingly supported Neville Chamberlain when he promoted a “peace process” with Adolf Hitler, and cheered wildly when he returned from Munich with “peace in our time”. Six years later, 45 million people lay dead and Europe was in ruins. Appeasement is no basis for foreign policy.
Want to watch something scary? No, I’m not talking about Saw II or Hostel…I’m talking about the real deal. Check out these videos of Palestinian bloodlust from Palestinian Media Watch, it’s pretty freaky stuff.
Like this video of a Palestinian sitting behind a wall of weapons declaring that they are a nation who drinks Jewish blood.
Or this video of a killer telling his mother that he doesn’t want to see her sad on his wedding day. His wedding day in paradise that is, when he marries all the “maidens of paradise.”
[HT: Andrew Sullivan]
The infamous magazine, Jyllands-Posten, that published cartoons of Mohammad that sent the Islamic world into a “Cartoon Jihad” has now published a manifesto slamming Islamism. It’s utterly brilliant.
The sub-headline says it all:
After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.
The mighty Albertanicus has posted his scathing opinion of the current debate over health-care. It’s worth reading just for the rhetoric as well as the dead-on insight he conveys.
Here’s a good one:
And so the culture of entitlement continues to permeate Canadian culture in ironic, though subversive ways. it is evident in the blind denunciations of shorter wait times and quicker healing. Yet it prefers the entitlement of “equal futility” and “equal pain”.
[HT: Terry O’Neill at The Shotgun Blog]
The Centre for Cultural Renewal has published their analysis of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal’s ruling on same-sex marriage as it relates to freedom of religion. In November of 2005 a lesbian couple sought out a Knights of Columbus hall to rent for their wedding. When the K of C refused, they were brought before the Tribunal. The ruling was confusing in that the K of C seemingly were exonerated for turning the lesbian couple down. Yet, at the same time they were fined for not allowing them to rent their hall.
Here’s an important quote that sums up much of this situation:
“The harm in the analysis conducted by the Tribunal exists in the risk of forcing persons to act against their religious convictions because someone who does not share that belief concludes that it is not essential.”
A friend of mine just returned from visiting his mother in China for the Chinese new year. When he got back, I was sitting in the kitchen with him and some other Chinese friends talking about his trip. I asked him if he had noticed anything different since he was last there, and he made the comment that there are too many rich people. It was interesting to hear him say that, considering that China has historically been severely communist and only the government has the opportunity to obtain wealth.
What they told me was that there has been a gradual shift in China, from a communist economic system to a more open market. At the same time, the political regime is still communist, which can be seen by their totalitarian control over the people. Religious persecution is still high.
The Liberal candidate for the by-election in the Toronto-Danforth riding has stepped in it. Although, judging from the elections in January, it probably won’t matter much. Ben Chin has said that he escaped from political persecution in Korea, but it turns out that this is untrue.
I really do hope that the people in the Toronto-Danforth riding hear this and give it to Chin on the chin, so to speak.
In the excellent book Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada’s New Social Experiment (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2004) edited by Daniel Cere and Douglas Farrow, Canadians are given an opportunity to evaluate the issue of same-sex marriage from an objective and scholarly perspective. Eleven scholars come together in this one volume to offer their analysis from their respective areas of specialization.
Over the course of time I may try to summarise and evaluate the various essays in this book with the hope of disseminating the information they provide as well as offering some thoughts of my own.
Of particular interest to me today is the essay written by one of the editors, Daniel Cere, entitled “War of the Ring.” Cere provides a historical survey of Canadian politics related to same-sex marriage, going back only a few years to 1999 when the federal parliament reaffirmed the traditional definition of marriage. How far we have come in only a few years! Cere catalogues the main events that took place showing how we got to where we are today. I must tell you, it has been a frightening ride, especially for one like myself who is horrified by statism and government interventionism. I enjoy my democratic freedom as a Canadian, and to read the events that gave legal status to same-sex marriage in Canada is nothing but scary. Canadian rights and opinions have been left in the lurch in favour of the opinions of elitist politicians and judges who act as though they are a law unto themselves. Cere also offers a philosophical analysis of this change in marriage, poking at the presuppositions that lie behind this burning desire to push same-sex legislation through – at the cost of freedom.
Daniel Cere writes as one who knows the issues involved, and so he should, as he is the director of the Institute for the Study of Marriage, Law and Culture in Montreal.
Here is a damning piece written by Victor David Hanson on the relationship between Nazi appeasement in the 1930s and Islamist appeasement today. Many thanks to my ole friend at Albertanicus for introducing me to Hanson’s site, it’s superb!
I will be attending (DV) the Windsor Liberty Seminar in about two weeks time. It will be held on Saturday, March 11th, 2006 at the University of Windsor (Katzman Lounge). It is hosted by The Freedom Project and The Institute for Humane Studies.
Speakers will include: Dr. Steven Horowitz, Prof. of Economics at St. Lawrence University; Dr. Lydia Miljan, Prof. of Poli-Sci at the University of Windsor; Dr. Jan Narveson, retired Prof. of Philosophy at the University of Waterloo; Mr. Gerry Nicholls, VP of the National Citizen’s Coalition and Dr. Pierre Desrochers, Prof. of Geography at the University of Toronto.
The agenda for the seminar can be found here.
I think it will prove to be a valuable event and will hopefully help the cause of a conservative agenda in Canada. My hope is that there will be a good turn out and that many will profit from the insights these speakers will share.
“In every government there must be somewhat fundamental, somewhat like a magna charta, that should be standing and unalterable…that parliaments should not make themselves perpetual is a fundamental.”
(Speech to Parliament, Sept. 1654)
When confronting Islam, we in the west must remember that we are not in a battle over race or ethnicity. Nor are we engaged in a war about Americans vs. Arabs, or white skin vs. brown. If the lines were drawn here we would not be fighting a legitimate battle. Instead we would be racists. If any confrontation with Islam deteriorates to that level, then the battle is already lost. Rather, the battle with Islam is a battle of ideas – a clash of worldviews. It must be an intellectual assault that will eventually win the day.
[HT: Michelle Malkin]
Everybody needs to go to this blog now! It is the blog of the parents of Charlotte Wyatt, a two year old girl with brain damage, whom British doctors have decided to pull from life-support. This blog explains the story of their fight to keep Charlotte alive.
[HT: Ezra Levant]
Mark Steyn’s recent article in The Chicago Sun is chilling. Writing about the west’s failure to expose Islam as it really is, a religion founded and based upon violence and terror, is nothing new. Each time it tends towards running a chill down my spine, but nothing too serious. But when it gets to the point that the west won’t even report about racist murders against Jews, it gets even scarier. It is as if western, plurastic newspapers don’t even know what news is.
[HT: Between Two Worlds]
Evangelical (I use the term loosely) publishing house Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., has posted an interview with social critique/philosopher/theologian David Wells.
Here is a good quote:
Historian Carl R. Trueman, in his regular Reformation21 column “The Wages of Spin,” has published his thoughts on the recent protests in the Islamic world over cartoons depicting Mohammed. True to fashion, Dr. Trueman’s writes with a powerful and colourful wit. Whether you agree with him or not, he’s sure to entertain.
Here’s a brilliant quote from the first paragraph:
Living in Toronto I am often confronted with the issue of firearms control. Whether it’s in the paper, on the news or the topic of friendly conversation, the escalating crime-rate and the suggestion of a gun-ban is front and centre.
After a series of shootings in Toronto, especially the Boxing Day shooting that saw the life of a fifteen year old girl taken, the call for banning all guns was heard for miles around. It became an issue for Paul Martin on the election trail, garnering the support of Ontario Premiere Dalton McGuinty and Toronto Mayor David Miller.
Recently The Strand, a newspaper published by students at Victoria College, University of Toronto, published a cartoon depicting Jesus Christ embracing and kissing Mohammed. Many conservatives have been lauding this as a great act of free speech. Included in this is Adam Daifallah, which I must admit is quite a surprise. I am currently reading an excellent book that he co-authored entitled Rescuing Canada’s Right in which he appears to be highly intelligent and forward thinking when it comes to conservative issues. The Strand’s publishing of this cartoon may be an act of free speech, but it is also an act of cowardice.
“I had rather have a plain russet-coated captain that knows what he fights for, and loves what he knows, than that which you call a gentleman and is nothing else.”
(Letter to Sir William Spring, 1643)
Much like sixteenth and seventeenth century England, Canada has been ruled for over a decade by those who do not reflect the values of their people. As King Charles I believed that his rule was untouchable via the “divine right of kings,” the Liberal Party of Canada has believed that they would always remain in power, via their “culture of entitlement.” As the Parliamentary armies toppled the king, the Liberal Party has been removed from their high horse to exist among the lowly commoners. Read the rest of this entry »