You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Canadians have come to embrace their country as a “postmodern state”—a nation that downplays its history and makes few demands on its citizens, allowing them to find their allegiances where they may—in their region, their ethnic heritage or the language they speak. The notion of a Canadian national identity, with shared responsibilities and a common purpose, is considered out of date, even a disadvantage in a borderless world of transnational economies, resurgent regions and global immigration. In his timely and provocative book Who We Are, Rudyard Griffiths argues that this vision of Canada is an intellectual and practical dead end. Without a strong national identity, and robust Can...
Faced with yet another minority government, Canadians clearly cannot decide who we want as a leader. In Who We Are: A Citizen's Manifesto, Rudyard Griffiths injects a welcomed passion into the future of Canadian politics and what it means to be Canadian. He explains the notion of a national identity at a time when Canadian nationalism and unity are a government priority, following the Harper government's creation of a sub-ministerial cabinet portfolio with the title Canadian Identity. Clearly and thoughtfully, Griffiths addresses global warming, immigration and an aging population, and argues that the "Canada lite" model leads to a dead end: irrelevancy on the world stage and divisive strife at home. He reminds us of who we are, what we've accomplished and why a loyalty beyond the local and personal is essential for Canada's survival.
In Western societies, the capitalist system is facing a level of distrust not seen in decades. Economic inequality is rampant. Life expectancy is falling. The environment is being destroyed for profit. Political power is wielded by wealthy elites and big business. For capitalism's critics, it is clear that the system is not designed to help average people. Their solution is a top-to-bottom reform of the "free market" along more socialist and democratic lines. For proponents of capitalism, however, this system has been the greatest engine of economic and social progress in history. Not only has capitalism made all of us materially better off, its ideals are responsible for everything from women's rights to a cleaner environment to political freedoms. The answer to society's current ills is more capitalism, more economic freedom, and more free markets. The twenty-fifth semi-annual Munk Debate, held on December 4, 2019, pits editorial director and publisher of the Nation Katrina vanden Heuvel and former finance minister of Greece Yanis Varoufakis against Harvard professor Arthur C. Brooks and New York Times columnist David Brooks to debate whether the capitalist system is broken.
"You're telling me I'm being sensitive, and students looking for safe spaces that they're being hypersensitive. If you're white, this country is one giant safe space." -- Michael Eric Dyson Is political correctness an enemy of free speech, open debate, and the free exchange of ideas? Or, by confronting head-on the dominant power relationships and social norms that exclude marginalized groups are we creating a more equitable and just society? For some the argument is clear. Political correctness is stifling the free and open debate that fuels our democracy. It is also needlessly dividing one group from another and promoting social conflict. Others insist that creating public spaces and norms ...
The Munk Debates is Canada's premier international debate series, a highly anticipated cultural event and feast of ideas. Launched in 2008 by philanthropists Peter and Melanie Munk, these debates bring together some of the world's greatest thinkers to discuss the most pressing political, social, and cultural issues that are shaping the course of world events. This volume includes an Introduction by Peter Munk and the first five debates in the series: British historian and bestselling author Niall Ferguson, top-ranking American diplomat Richard Holbrooke, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, and human rights scholar and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Samantha Power discuss global sec...
The twenty-third semi-annual Munk Debate, held on November 2, 2018, pits Stephen Bannon, the CEO of the Donald Trump presidential campaign, against columnist and author David Frum to debate the future of liberalism against the rising tide of populism. Throughout the Western world, politics is undergoing a sea-change. Long-held notions of the role of government, trade and economic policy, foreign policy, and immigration are being challenged by populist thinkers and movements. Does this surging populist agenda in Western nations signal a permanent shift in our politics? Or is it a passing phenomenon that will remain at the fringes of society and political power? Will our politics continue to be shaped by the post-war consensus on trade, inclusive national identity, and globalization, or by the agenda of insurgent populist politics, parties, and leaders? The twenty-third semi-annual Munk Debate pits former Donald Trump advisor Stephen K. Bannon against columnist and public intellectual David Frum to debate the future of the liberal political order.
Is it time to reaffirm our liberal values? Or are we seeing the birth-pangs of a new era? Two great thinkers debate the question burning behind headlines across the world. ‘No civilization, no matter how mighty it may appear to itself, is indestructible.’ –Niall Ferguson ‘We do not need to invent the world anew. The international order established by the United States after World War II is in need of expansion and repair, but not reconception.’ –Fareed Zakaria Fears of a globalized world are rampant. Across the West, borders are being reasserted and old alliances tested to their limits. Could this be the end of the liberal order or will the major crises of the twenty-first century strengthen our resolve?
The twenty-fourth semi-annual Munk Debate, held on May 9, 2019, pits former Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs H. R. McMaster and Director for Chinese Strategy at the D.C.-based Hudson Institute think tank Michael Pillsbury against former President of the United Nations Security Council Kishore Mahbubani and president of one of China’s top independent think tanks, the Center for China Globalization, Huiyao Wang to debate the threat of China to the liberal international order. Increasingly in the West, China is being characterized as a threat to the liberal international order, one that must be overcome through economic, political, technological, and even military mean...
It is possible to overcome barriers to minority success in Canada. The stance of this book is that new immigrants, refugees and international students do not have to settle for underachievement despite the cultural and structural disadvantages they face in Canada. The fact is, the unequal social structure of Canada has some cracks, and many minorities have used strategic resources to open up these cracks and achieved tremendous upward social mobility in Canadian society from the margins. These documented minority successes in Canada in the face of systemic marginalization provide lessons and hope for new immigrants, refugees and international students. The economic, political, social and cul...
‘Men are so last century. They seem to have stopped evolving. The Mad Men world is disappearing and the guys are struggling to figure out the altered parameters of manliness.’ Maureen Dowd ‘Do women get anything from men being obsolete? Do we win by triumphing in work, education, the economy, politics and business, while retaining homemaking and child rearing? If that happened then we will be doing everything! Are men obsolete? No! I won’t let you be you f*****s!’ Caitlin Moran Are Men Obsolete is an essential and entertaining read for anyone interested in what happens next in the great gender discussion. Maureen Dowd, Caitlin Moran, Camille Paglia and Hanna Roisin debate whether modern man is past his sell-by-date, and, if so, what does that mean for women?