Mrs. Naggy where are you?

I have always held a certain reverence for the British and their glorious tenure on the world stage. Having gone through Elementary school in the early 60’s I was part of the last generation in Canada to feel a bond with the Empire. I remember listening to radio programs and watching NFB films that discussed the benefits and the civilizing effect of British Imperialism on undeveloped parts of the world.

I was also greatly inspired by a little old woman who was a frequent supply teacher throughout my years before High School. Mrs. Naggy would hold me spellbound with her stories of travel and adventure across the Empire. Having worked in Africa, India and China, she instilled a feeling that the world was in good hands and that we should all be proud of our righteous cause. We would discuss weighty questions such as; does the sun ever set on the British Empire or what makes a Dervish whirl. Strangely it never occurred to me that none of my fellow students were as enthralled as I was and that most of them thought Mrs. Naggy was a boring old fool.

Today I can’t help but feel sadness that most have lost a romantic view of the world (if they ever had one) and with it the confidence to make the world a better place. Surely the benign values that motivated our forefathers still hold true.
- A free market of ideas where one could argue any religious or secular philosophy.
- A free market of commerce without barriers guaranteed by the ‘Rule of Law’.
– A heroic view of Man struggling against nature and ignorance.
God, Gold and Glory!

There is a strange type of human being that distains any form of greatness or success. These people will always present a greyish alternative argument that lacks clarity in every aspect except what they are against. It is a form of localism where a banal existence is to be preferred over competence and vision. Freedom with its endless alternatives is a grave threat to the provincial mind with its desire for order and control. From the “Little Englanders” of the 19th century to the Liberal Party of Canada this view of the world is accepted by an embarrassingly large constituency.

Fear of competing on a level playing field without constraints empowers this group to openly propose such abominations as; outlawing private healthcare, aboriginal “self-government” (paid for with other peoples money) or asymmetrical federalism. This is unearned elitism at its very worst. Their plan is simple: purport to speak for any group that is perceived to be disadvantaged and use the power of Government to redistribute wealth to maintain control.

The world is full of ‘localists’ who seek special dispensation for their charished supplicants. The United Nations - a gathering of localists - has become one gigantic lobbying effort for the redistribution of power and wealth. Short-term advantage is sought by most nations at the expense of any semblence of moral principles and long-term benefits.

I have to believe that most of us do not want to loose our freedom. We are ready to defend our Ideals because we will die in slavery without them. The motivation that drove Mrs. Naggy’s generation can be ours again if we can only comprehend our true self-interest.

US votes for Self-Preservation

Is it my imagination or do many people think that tactics win elections? It would appear that one way to evade the real reason that your side lost is to claim that you were beaten by the “get out the vote” organization of your opponent. Perhaps you were ‘out-spent’ or they used ‘dirty tricks’. There are some who believe that the other guys were able to mobilize and herd their sheep to the poles more competently than we could move ours.

This paternalistic view of the world is taken for granted by most commentators who then heap praise on campaign managers that pull off feats of logistical brilliance. The pundits have moved away from ideals and lofty goals to a cynical view that skilful manipulation of the great unwashed is the only valid route to victory. Of course none of the people who espouse this theory consider themselves one among the masses.

It is one thing to understand the base instincts of our society, but to aspire to them is another thing all together. This is the very essence of where we are headed. The Europeans have gotten there before us and have degenerated into a nihilistic despondency. They are now helpless against any determined group of true believers. They are truly ready to compromise on any aspect of their existence. Without an ideal or rational philosophy to believe in, a dark emptiness will pervade the soul of a nation. The vacuum will be filled by the bizarre and the fanatical.

Disarming the population of its moral structure has been the strategy of the left for the past two hundred years. If one is to accept forced wealth redistribution, special treatment for certain groups, and abhorrent behaviour masquerading as cultural quaintness one must be morally emasculated.

It is heartening to learn that moral ideals were one of the compelling reasons for the Republican victory in 2004. This is not a religious revival as many will say, but a move toward self-preservation. The confidence in what America stands for is still alive in just over half the population. Other once proud nations i.e. Canada and the United Kingdom have slipped below that plurality.

I suggest that it was not skilful manipulation of the electorate that won the US election of 2004, but the self-confidence generated by the desire to attain our most cherished ideals.

So lets keep chivalry alive! Lets believe in the goodness of Western Civilization. No one is perfect, but we must have a direction to follow even when we fall. As a Hobbit once said “There are some things worth fighting for”.

Don't paint Republican Voters as Religous Zealots.

Who would a 'Free-market Capitalist', who also happens to be an atheist, vote for in the US election? If you listen to the media you would not think it would be the Republican party. A party which is portrayed as the lone preserve of the seemingly ever increasing devout evangelical Christians.

The fact of the matter is that most Republican voters hold traditional American or British values that include individualism, which means responsibility for ones actions and fair-play. They feel that the primary role of the state is to protect their freedom from foreign and domestic encroachment.

These people will not vote for a party that is dominated by special interest groups that seek to use the government as a means of extracting resources for their pet projects.

Many of those who hold deep religous beliefs that are not inline with the avant-garde will, of course, gravitate toward a party that will protect their right to exist and give them a forum for their views.

It is wrong to paint the Republican Party as an organization dominated by some shadowy organization called the religous right. Look at the GOP track record over the past four years. It has been a steady push in the direction of traditional values - not particular religous demands.

So there you go - This whole thing comes down to the same old battle - Individualism vs. Special Interests.