By Matthew Hayward: It's high time we address a common error: calling the United States a 'democracy.' This isn't just about getting a term wrong; it's about misrepresenting the very essence of our government. We are a constitutional republic, where elected representatives make decisions within a framework designed to protect individual rights, unlike a direct democracy where the majority has the final say. This isn't just semantics. It's about understanding and respecting the structure that defends our liberties from majoritarian impulses. Republicans, politicians, and public figures should lead by example and use 'republic' to describe our system. I often hear phrases like 'saving our democracy' or 'threats to our democracy' in political discourse, especially from liberal commentators. These phrases oversimplify and misrepresent our complex system. Let's encourage everyone, especially those in influential positions, to use accur...

 By Matthew Hayward  Gaslighting or projection? When someone or a group of people are called a fascist, barred from public speech, struck off ballots, forced off social media, or intimidated at venues like school board meetings, it's worth asking some questions. It's not about intellectual disagreement but about using names like right-wing extremist, bootlicker, and fascist. Fascinatingly, those who use "fascist" seem to mirror fascist qualities themselves, seeking to silence, debate, and descent. This misuse of "fascism" veers away from its true meaning, turning political dialogue into a battleground of labels rather than a forum for real discussion. In a similar vein, terms like equality and inclusiveness, while noble in intent, are often co-opted in a way that paradoxically fosters exclusion and uniformity of thought. Proponents of these ideals sometimes manifest an intolerance for dissenting viewpoints, ironically contradicting the ethos of inclusivity a...

Often, the American conversation is stuck in a never-ending loop, repeating the same tired debates. But the reality is, the tracks we're replaying aren't even the ones we should be listening to. Instead of discussing the root causes, philosophical underpinnings, and societal implications of our policies, we often argue over them. It's time to shift our attention and focus our debate on the fundamentals. Abortion Rights: A Societal Reflection Consider the perennial issue of abortion. It's a subject that incites heated debates and strong emotions, yet the conversation almost always centers on the policy itself. Should it be legal? Under what circumstances? What restrictions should there be? These questions, while important, ignore the more profound issues at play. At its core, the debate on abortion is really a philosophical discourse on the sanctity of life, women's autonomy, societal responsibilities, and the role of government in personal decisions. Our discussions...

These are not debates! By Matthew Edward Hayward on Saturday, November 12, 2011     There has not been a true debate in my lifetime. Are there any history buffs that care to share how long it has been since there were actual debates? What happens today is nothing more than cookie-cutter propaganda and showmanship. A substantive and philosophical dialog cannot take place in the current settings. The candidates do not get enough time to speak, and they often fail to use the time they get to answer the questions; instead, they artfully attempt to gain emotional appeal. They often banter with one another and toss around catchphrases and slogans. The whole thing is disgusting. They don’t all get asked the same questions, nor do they get equal time to speak. Sadly, many Americans are uninformed beyond reading the newspaper and watching their propaganda box. People either do not know how to do their own research or are too lazy to do so. Most of us sub...