Concepts with Shawn Whatley

Nihilism, Relativism, Western Civilization & Leo Strauss w Dimpee Brar #103

Conservatism is experiencing a renaissance in the West. It is gaining a new self image beyond its historic passion for economics.
Dimpee Brar has entered the scene in high gear. Over the last few months she has written provocative pieces at a rate of roughly one every two weeks. She's been on panels, podcasts, and interviews. I hope she can maintain her output!
A few of her articles include:
Why Islam seeks shelter under the banner of the Left. The Federalist
A NATO that doesn't support U.S. action shouldn't exist. The Federalist
Churches are burning, and the the lie fuelling it still holds. The Daily Wire
Western Civilization is under siege in Canada, activist warns. National Post
Blood & soil vs post-nationalism misses Canada's real identity. Western Standard
 
The tide is turning, and old ideas are resurfacing in the mainstream. 
Let me know what you think of this episode!
Thanks again,
Shawn
 
Chapters and AI Summary:
 
Host Shawn Whatley interviews Diimpee Brar, Director of Engagement at Allies for a Strong Canada and a prolific columnist, about defending Western civilization and Canada’s founding principles. Brar describes moving from studying neuroscience to the humanities, encountering what she calls nihilism in academia, and being “redeemed” by Allan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind, which led her to political philosophy and Leo Strauss. She defines nihilism as meaninglessness and argues that modern democratic decline expresses itself as relativism, erasing distinctions between good and bad and enabling fanatics to rule, particularly in Canada. The conversation covers liberalism versus conservatism, the friend–enemy distinction, and Brar’s view of the 1839 Durham Report as a founding document emphasizing one nation and assimilation through education. They also discuss Islam and the “Red-Green” alliance, and end with Brar identifying Nietzsche as a dangerous thinker and noting debates about Strauss, Judaism, and atheism.
00:00 Mission to Defend the West
01:19 Meet Dimpee Brar
03:40 Why She Entered Politics
05:59 From Neuroscience to Humanities
07:24 Bloom and Strauss Awakening
09:09 What Nihilism Means
10:55 Relativism and Fanatics
12:30 Where She Fits Ideologically
17:39 Friends and Enemies Debate
21:36 Durham Report and Assimilation
28:39 Liberalism Then and Now
31:35 Tolerance and Islam Question
34:49 Is Liberalism Too Thin
37:28 Is Liberalism Still Real
38:53 Natural Rights vs Identity Rights
40:56 Debate as a Sign of Life
43:09 Red Green Alliance Explained
45:40 Islam and Liberal Blind Spots
49:35 Auxiliary Militia and Iran Warning
52:34 Women Freedom and Defense
56:19 Nietzsche and Relativist Language
01:01:20 Strauss Judaism and Revelation
01:04:58 Straussians Political Theology Wrap
01:11:25 Final Thanks and Farewell

Why Conservatives Need Culture, Harold Innis, and National Cohesion (w/ Prof. John Bonnett) #102

Most civilizations prioritize space or time. They either choose empire and expansion (space) or permanence (time). 
Durable civilizations choose both.
Harold Innis was a giant in Canadian academia in the early 20th century, but most people have never heard of him. He offers deep and helpful insights on civilization, progress, and culture. Professor John Bonnett wrote his thesis on Innis and introduces us to his work.
We discuss a draft article Bonnett has written on Innis. Once it's published, I'll try to update this with a link.
Thanks for checking this out!
Shawn
 
Chapters and AI summary:
 
The host interviews Brock University professor and Innis scholar John Bonnett about an upcoming article arguing that conservatives are renewing a focus on culture as essential to Canadian national cohesion, especially as digital technology and AI disrupt society much like the printing press did. Bonnett explains Harold Innis’s importance to Canadian thought (influencing McLuhan and praised by George Grant), his “staples” analysis of Canada’s development, and his communication theory that technologies shape cognition and impose costs. Drawing on Innis, they discuss historical anxieties about new media, the dangers of information overload destabilizing politics, and “monopolies of knowledge” created by space- or time-biased media that can trap cultures and reduce innovation. Bonnett outlines adaptations—expressive and cognitive diversity, combinatorial thinking, democratizing cultural institutions like the Canada Council, and using digital/augmented-reality landscape art to renew culture.
00:00 Why Culture Matters
01:19 Meet Professor Bonnett
05:00 Which Conservatives
08:08 Why Innis Matters
13:17 Where To Start Reading
16:05 This Happened Before
22:07 Too Much Information
26:02 Monopoly Of Knowledge
33:41 Three Ways To Adapt
40:42 Democratizing Culture Policy
48:14 Digital Landscapes Project
57:17 Conservatism And Social Glue
01:00:11 Closing Thoughts And Thanks

Free Expression, Beauty, State Control. Christine Van Geyn on Maple’s Garden & Pandemic Panic #101

Christine Van Geyn captured the central debate around freedom of expression vs state control and put it into a children's book. 
As Interim Executive Director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation, Van Geyn has the deep knowledge and experience required to explain the essential elements of free expression in a short book titled, Maple's Garden: A Canadian Freedom of Speech Story.
We also discuss her other books, Pandemic Panic, and Free Speech in Canada.
Thanks for checking this out!
Shawn
Chapters and AI summary
Shawn Whatley interviews Christine Van Geyn, interim executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation, about her children’s picture book Maple’s Garden, inspired by the Mississauga case involving Wolf Ruck and Ontario rulings that a naturalized garden can be protected expression reflecting subjective views of beauty. They discuss how governments and bylaws can overreach by enforcing aesthetic standards, the difference between harmful invasive or dangerous plants and taste-based complaints, and why free expression protects disagreement. Van Geyn also explains her co-authored book Pandemic Panic as a documented record of civil liberties impacts, cases, and “memory-holed” incidents from COVID-19, including the Freedom Convoy and the Emergencies Act challenge. The conversation ends with a primer on Charter Section 2(b), Section 1’s Oakes test, and concerns about human rights tribunals being used to penalize speech, citing cases in BC and Ontario’s Emo flag dispute.
00:00 Parents vs State Power
00:36 Why Free Speech Matters
01:30 Meet Christine Van Geyn
04:20 Why She Wrote Maples Garden
06:23 The Garden Case Explained
09:43 Kids And The Hidden Animals
11:37 Beauty Versus Weeds Debate
18:53 Invasive Plants And Real Harm
21:25 Where The State Draws The Line
29:33 Teaching Beauty Without Force
30:46 Kids and Creativity
31:29 Who Decides Beauty
33:03 What Is Beauty
34:25 Why This Kids Book
37:56 Illustrator and AI Art
41:14 Pandemic Panic Overview
42:59 Recording Pandemic Abuses
46:44 Charter and Human Rights
48:43 Oakes Test Explained
52:00 Human Rights Overreach Cases
01:01:08 Forced Endorsement by Tribunal
01:05:34 Defending Disagreement
01:08:43 Closing and Call to Action

Conservatism as a Coalition: NatCons, Trump, Media, & Bright Lines w Liberalism | Josh Lewis #100

How do we unify the very different voices on the non-Left? Do our differences mean we are doomed to a soft tyranny of centralized messaging?
Josh Lewis has been wrestling with this, and many other issues, for the last 9 years on his podcast, Saving Elephants. He's hosted many of the biggest influencers in American conservatism, including a number of voices from Canada and Europe.
The conservative movement is a jigsaw puzzle. Conservatives need to distinguish themselves from all the factions on the Left, while also retaining the distinct shapes of each puzzle piece. For conservatives, this is a conversation without end. If we grow tired of it, the coalition will fracture.
Of course, we can't talk about American politics without talking about Trump -- plenty of that in this episode too.
Thanks so much for checking this out! Let me know what you think.
Shawn
 
Chapters and AI summary: 
In the 100th episode of Concepts, host Shawn Whatley welcomes back Josh Lewis, founder of the Saving Elephants podcast, to discuss the coalitional nature of American (and Canadian) conservatism and how to handle disagreements within the movement. Lewis outlines enduring conservative factions—libertarians, traditionalists, and anti-communists—while exploring the rise and uncertainty of NatCon and post-liberal currents, Trump’s role as both aberration and lasting influence, and what Trump reveals about leadership, courage, and cultural “rot.” They also talk about why Lewis chose podcasting, where millennials and younger generations get information, how “bridge” institutions translate ideas, and competence as a key voter demand. The conversation culminates in proposed bright lines between liberalism and conservatism and reflections on how to appropriately mark America’s 250th anniversary.
00:00 Can Ideas Fix Politics
00:22 Episode 100 Welcome
02:06 Conservatism Is A Coalition
02:53 Nash Three Legged Stool
04:47 NatCon Moment And Trump
09:20 Avoiding Sectarian Purges
10:25 Handling The Crazy Uncle
13:49 Why Josh Chose Podcasting
18:34 Millennials News Habits
23:51 Scaling Ideas Beyond Nerds
29:42 Why I Stay Calm
31:02 What Voters Want
32:57 Competence Before Culture
34:35 Populism Versus Leadership
35:34 Trumpism After Trump
39:09 Courage And Character
42:16 Integrity And White Collar Crime
43:24 Ideas Versus Reality
45:22 Liberalism And Conservatism
50:36 Freedom Has A Purpose
54:48 America At 250
58:01 How To Celebrate A Nation
59:40 Closing Thanks

Identity Politics as an Incomplete Religion | Joshua Mitchell: American Awakening #99

Professor Joshua Mitchell is courageous. He argues for his positions even when they go against the grain of politically acceptable thought.
Mitchell says conservatives have done a good job at addressing the debt and tradition economies. We are strong on fiscal policy, and we stand up for the debts we owe to our fathers. But we are almost completely blind to the more profound, urgent, and critical debt of guilt. Conservatives are blind to spiritual debt.
The Left understands guilt and spiritual debt. It's their main focus. Criticize them for having bad data or for emotionalizing things, but the Left addresses an inescapable issue that the Right seems to miss entirely.
I'd love to hear what you think of this episode. It's deep in places but also pointed and provocative.
Thanks again for listening!
Shawn
Links:
American Awakening
https://americanreformer.org/2026/03/whither-the-reformation-in-america/
Chapters and AI summary:
Shawn Whatley interviews Georgetown political theorist Joshua Mitchell about his book American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time and his article on the Reformation in America. Mitchell argues the West’s turmoil is fundamentally a religious crisis, with identity politics functioning as a quasi-Christian, “incomplete religion” seeking purity and redemption without a Christian solution. He contrasts a “regime of competence” with a post-1989 suspension of history, critiques the feminization of public life as mercy detached from justice, and outlines three “economies” humans inhabit: payment, tradition, and spiritual debt. He contends conservatives focus on the first two while lacking language for the third, leaving the left to politicize guilt, stain, and redemption. Mitchell offers three futures—endless incomplete religions, Nietzschean rejection of Christian categories, or a return to Christianity—and emphasizes America’s covenantal Protestant imagination as key to overcoming identity politics.
00:00 Religious Crisis Frame
00:34 Show Intro Guest Setup
02:05 Is Woke Dead
03:02 Competence After 1989
04:53 Mercy Justice Feminization
07:09 Manliness Debate
09:20 Incomplete Religions Thesis
14:24 Nietzsche Tocqueville Futures
19:20 Three Economies Explained
24:00 Identity Politics As Religion
27:09 Tocqueville Self Interest
33:04 America Protestant Catholic Moment
34:53 Covenantal America Returns
35:56 Protestant Revival Warning
37:41 Host Rapid Fire Topics
41:16 Burke Simplicity Trap
43:37 Purity Stain Politics
47:43 Spiritual Economy Turn
50:20 Religion That Fits
55:00 France Religion Showdown
58:51 Aristotle Versus Plato
01:02:47 Covenant Beyond Nietzsche
01:03:45 Next Book Farewell

Conservatism’s Drift Toward Battle | Elizabeth Corey on Culture and the Contemplative Life #98

Professor Elizabeth Corey says conservatism is about far more than fighting. In fact, its major emphasis lies outside politics altogether.
Corey offers a thick view of intellectual conservatism. She invites us into something challenging and deep. 
I tried to push her on whether she was asking too much. Was her approach practicable? Should we never ever fight? What role does conflict play in a conservative philosophy?
Professor Corey does not shy from these issues. She sees them as real questions for her students, but also in her own life.
Let me know what you think of this episode! Thanks so much for checking it out.
Shawn
Links:
https://lawliberty.org/podcast/conservatisms-lamentable-drift/
https://lawliberty.org/a-quiet-refusal-to-compromise/
Beautiful Losers
https://essays.quotidiana.org/hazlitt/pleasure_of_hating/
Michael Oakeshott on Religion, Aesthetics, and Politics
Chapters and AI summary:
 
Host Shawn Whatley welcomes Baylor University honors program director and political science professor Elizabeth Corey to discuss her concerns that modern conservatism has become increasingly adversarial, reducing politics to winners and losers and neglecting culture, education, and the “realm of experience” beyond the friends-enemies dichotomy. Drawing on thinkers such as Oakeshott, Scruton, Pieper, Kirk, and Aristotle, Corey argues for understanding tradition as learned “practices” and for balancing the active and contemplative lives, resisting the urge to instrumentalize knowledge. They address internal conservative pluralism and the Philadelphia Society’s big-tent approach, the role of humility and charity in debate, and Corey’s reading of Laura Field’s Furious Minds on MAGA-linked institutions like Hillsdale and Claremont. Corey also discusses Hazlitt’s “pleasure of hating,” her First Things piece on admiring, and her forthcoming book The Heart of Learning.
00:00 Modern Conservatism as Battle
00:31 Meet Professor Elizabeth Corey
04:18 A Drift Toward Conflict
10:07 Hot Button Politics vs Real Life
12:03 Is Culture Enough
14:51 Tradition as Practices
20:54 Active Life vs Contemplation
26:29 Oakeshott on History and Modes
29:37 Defining Conservatism Today
33:25 Big Tent Debates and Economics
36:14 Life Beyond Economics
37:01 Avoiding Sectarian Right
39:04 Humility and Big Tent
41:02 Pluralist Conservative Case
44:32 Do Ideologies Still Matter
48:24 Furious Minds and MAGA
50:46 Hillsdale and Claremont
54:21 Pleasure of Hating
58:52 Heart of Learning
01:02:24 Can Admiration Survive

Free Speech in Canadian Law Schools? Tim Haggstrom on Runnymede, Rule of Law, and Tim vs U. Sask #97

Tim Haggstrom doesn't just promote theory. He bears the personal scars of legal practice. He leads an organization focussed on legal theory, while fighting (personally) for free speech.
This caught me off guard. I thought Tim was simply an exemplary leader of a noteworthy organization. I had no idea that he was also personally up to his neck in litigation about the legitimacy of race-based scholarship.
You won't meet a nicer, more thoughtful guy. Tim goes out of his way to ring-fence his own case from the organization he represents. You need to know about the Runnymede Society. The Society appears even more worth, and necessary, when you hear about Tim's case, at the end of the episode.
Let me know what you think!
Thanks again
Shawn
Chapters and AI Summary:
 
Host Shawn Whatley interviews Tim Haggstrom, National Director of the Runnymede Society, about whether freedom of speech exists in Canadian law schools and how students learn “no-go zones” on contentious issues. Hagstrom explains Runnymede’s founding in 2016 amid concerns about insufficient debate over constitutional change, citing the Supreme Court’s 2015 Saskatchewan Federation of Labour decision on a Charter right to strike, and outlines the Society’s mission to promote constitutionalism, the rule of law, and fundamental freedoms through debates it does not adjudicate. They discuss taboo topics, civil discourse, and competing views of the rule of law, interpretation, legal neutrality, and substantive equality (including the 2020 Fraser case). Hagstrom then recounts his personal judicial review against the University of Saskatchewan after being found guilty of non-academic misconduct following letters defending dialogue and critiquing race-based policies, linking the dispute to university commitments to decolonization and anti-racism training.
00:00 Free Speech in Law School
00:22 Meet Tim Haggstrom
04:23 Why Runnymede Started
07:10 Tim’s Path to Runnymede
09:47 Campus No Go Zones
13:42 Staying Relevant and Civil
16:28 Sacred Cows Debate Example
19:05 Tim’s Lawsuit Teaser
21:53 Why Institutions Matter
25:24 Network Formation and Skills
31:03 Rule of Law Explained
37:26 Law Without Translation
38:53 Bridge Norms Example
41:33 Courts Versus Legislatures
44:13 Thick Rule of Law
45:57 Rodriguez To Carter
48:46 Living Tree Origins
50:19 Can Law Be Neutral
51:09 Substantive Equality Debate
56:05 Runnymede Student Plug
56:59 Saskatchewan Case Begins
01:05:41 Critical Social Justice Claims
01:10:11 Campus Speech Outlook
01:13:09 Protect Legal Tradition

Conservatism vs. Liberalism (and Neoconservatism) | Shawn Whatley #96

Update on the quest to define conservatism! After almost 100 episodes, I see a way to articulate conservatism coming into view. I hope to capture it all into a short book/long essay later this year.
In the meantime, I offer a recap of liberalism and contrast it with conservatism. I also touch on inheritance, myth, and experience as themes within conservatism.
I also tackle a summary of neoconservatism. Neocons remain the main opinion shapers on the non-left in Canada. Their eminence has waned in America, but it remains strong in Canada.
We end with a review of upcoming guests.
Looking forward to hearing what you think!
Thanks again
Shawn
 
Chapters and AI summary:
 
Host Shawn Whatley shares a scheduling update amid a busy summer and looks ahead to the podcast’s 100th episode, then continues his effort to define conservatism by contrasting it with liberalism. He critiques George Grant’s thin definition of liberalism and Grant’s claim about the impossibility of political conservatism, and instead uses Fukuyama/John Gray’s four-part account of liberalism (individualism, egalitarianism, universalism, meliorism) to frame key conservative objections: the involuntary obligations of life (especially family), equality before law alongside excellence, particularism over universal political templates, and prudential skepticism about reform. He adds conservative emphases on inheritance, regional myth/self-understanding, and shared experience. He then outlines three waves of neoconservatism—its origins, post–Cold War central-planning and interventionist tendencies, and a 2016-era “never-Trump” internationalist turn—before previewing upcoming guests Josh Mitchell, Tim Hagstrom, and Elizabeth Corey.
00:00 Big Questions Intro
00:14 Podcast Schedule Update
01:26 Defining Liberalism
04:56 Fukuyama Four Pillars
06:54 Conservative Pushback
10:45 Tradition Myth Place
13:51 Thin vs Thick Politics
14:58 Neoconservatism Origins
17:04 Second Wave Neocons
20:53 Third Wave Never Trump
22:41 Guests and Wrap Up

Supreme Court vs. Provinces | Jodi Bruhn: Notwithstanding Clause & Canadian First Principles #95

Jodi Bruhn offers a sobering take on Canada. Professor Bruhn is an expert on governance and constitutional thought. She says we might not appreciate the significance and potential fallout from the Supreme Court wading in the Notwithstanding Clause.
We discuss civics education and whether there's an increased appetite for first principles.
Thanks for checking this out!
I look forward to your comments.
Shawn
Chapters and AI summary:
Host Shawn Whatley interviews Dr. Jodi Bruhn about renewed interest in first principles, civics, and regime analysis in her University of Lethbridge courses, contrasting first-year and fourth-year students’ ability to identify clashing political principles behind current events. They discuss political science versus political philosophy, including critiques of Straussian textualism, and consider thinkers such as Aristotle, Voegelin, Bergson, and Carl Schmitt. Bruhn warns that the Supreme Court of Canada hearing cases involving the notwithstanding clause signals a misunderstanding of legislative supremacy and could provoke a political showdown with provinces like Quebec and Alberta, potentially risking Canada’s dissolution. They examine constitutional change constraints, separatism’s uncertain outcomes, leadership and ethical decay under unwritten constitutional conventions, demagoguery, and Bruhn’s account of Tamara Lich’s University of Calgary talk about the trucker convoy.
00:00 Supreme Court Warning
00:52 Meet the Guest
02:52 Teaching First Principles
05:26 Civics and Regimes
07:37 Political Science vs Philosophy
15:31 Teasing Out Principles
18:03 Notwithstanding Clause Clash
21:14 Charter and Judicial Review
23:34 Can Canada Rewind
25:26 Alberta Separation Scenarios
28:41 Schmitt and Conflict Horizon
29:57 Friendship Course Spectrum
31:29 Canadian Founding Enmities
33:27 Hooker and English Middle Way
35:42 Ideology and First Principles
37:31 Alberta Separation and Reconfederation
39:47 Constitutional Mismatch and Corruption
44:51 Demagoguery and Vital Breakthrough
47:33 Reading Bergson and Courage
49:10 Tamara Lich at University
51:11 Teaching Critical Thinking Finale

#94 Tom Flanagan: Friedrich Hayek, Spontaneous Order, Markets, Justice, and the Limits of the State

Tom Flanagan explains why we need Hayek's ideas about spontaneous order, institutions, and the limits of state control. Hayek will frustrate central planners and also anarchists. Libertarians can't depend on Hayek; he's too supportive of traditional institutions.
Professor Flanagan has taught a generation of political science students at the University of Calgary. He's informed so much of what the Right assumes in Canada. He's generous, thoughtful, and resists capture into a neat, political box.
Books mentioned:
Grave Error: How The Media Misled Us (and the Truth about Residential Schools)
Dead Wrong: How Canada Got the Residential School Story So Wrong
Articles mentioned:
Settler-Neoliberalism: Tom Flanagan and Friedrich Hayek on the Prairies | Canadian Historical Review
Was Hayek a Gnostic? - VoegelinView
 
The long reach of the Calgary School | C2C Journal
 
Let me know what you think!
Thanks again,
Shawn
 
Chapters and AI summary
Host Shawn Whatley interviews political scientist Tom Flanagan about Friedrich Hayek, focusing on spontaneous order versus top-down organization and the state’s proper role in enforcing rules without directing outcomes. Flanagan explains spontaneous order through examples like language, markets, common law, and even skiing etiquette, and argues modern governments often create chaos by trying to control systems such as Canadian healthcare through price and quantity setting, producing persistent shortages and waitlists. The conversation explores Hayek’s assumptions about property, justice as a feature of fair process and intention rather than outcomes, and practical questions about unintended consequences in politics. Flanagan also discusses Canada’s formation through sovereignty claims, treaties, and force, defending treaty-making as broadly just for its time. He contrasts Hayek’s limits on “spiritual problems” with Voegelin’s strengths and notes he is not an Alberta separatist.
00:00 Hayek In A Nutshell
01:00 Show Intro And Guest
04:56 Flanagan Meets Hayek
06:08 Spontaneous Order Explained
07:02 Language As Emergence
09:50 Markets And Simple Rules
11:55 State Control And Healthcare
16:55 Ski Hill Rules And Enforcement
22:20 Property Justice And Tradition
27:49 Colonialism And Civilizing Mission
30:28 International Anarchy And Empire
35:40 Treaties and Education
36:51 Hayek Order vs Organization
38:16 Canada Built by Force
39:22 Morris and Prairie Treaties
42:03 Mirage of Social Justice
47:55 Intentions vs Outcomes
49:29 Weber and Policy Consequences
56:17 Hayek Meets Voegelin
01:03:13 Spiritual Pathology Politics
01:04:46 State Supports Spontaneous Order
01:08:28 Alberta Separatism and Wrap