At a free speech panel last summer, an audience member asked: “How would you apply the question of free speech to radical Islamic preachers like Anjem Choudary and people like that, who are calling for the downfall of the West and sometimes directly inciting violence? Should they be silenced? Or should they be free to say what they feel?”
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is dizzyingly complicated. In this talk, Elan Journo — author of an upcoming book on the conflict and America's stake in it — looks at how intellectuals conceptualize and debate the issue, and spotlights the distinctive value of an Objectivist perspective on it.
In the months since I released the first episode of my Rise & Fall podcast, focusing on Islamic totalitarianism, there have been several terrorist attacks around the world perpetrated by Islamic totalitarians.
The Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Salman Rushdie Affair, September 11th and the Charlie Hebdo Massacre. Are we in the Western world doomed to more and more attacks by Islamic totalitarians? And what can anyone do about it? The answer might surprise you.
In this panel, ARI authors Elan Journo and Steve Simpson discuss the subject of their books, why they concentrate on issues like free speech and Islamic totalitarianism, how ARI’s predictions over the years illustrate the power of the Institute’s distinct philosophic perspective and what everyone can do.
When people hear it said that Islam is America’s philosophical enemy, they often recoil at the mistaken implication that the police may therefore arrest anyone who adheres to that religion. But there is a crucial distinction, argues Peter Schwartz, between a philosophical enemy and a political enemy.
When you look around the globe, the Islamist movement is far from defeated. On the contrary. The movement is strong materially, in its ability to inflict harm, to control territory, to subjugate people. And, what’s more significant: it is strong in its morale, exhibiting an astounding confidence.