Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Happy Independence Day!

Posted by M. C. on July 4, 2020

Be Inspired!




Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

They Don’t Dare Tell You What July 4th Really Means – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 4, 2020

This is why a Supreme Court ordering localities around is anti-American in the truest sense. It operates according to the opposite principle from the one the American colonists stood for.

(2) Contrary to the modern Western view of the state that it must be considered one and indivisible, the colonists believed that a smaller unit may withdraw from a larger one. Today we are supposed to consider this unthinkable.

So the colonists insisted on strict construction, if you will, while the British held to more of a “living, breathing” view of the Constitution. Sound familiar?


From the Tom Woods Letter:

Independence Day is coming up, and I wonder how many people really get why it matters.

In school, we were told this: “No taxation without representation.”


The real principles were more like the following.
(1) No legislation without representation.

The colonists insisted that they could be governed only by the colonial legislatures. This is the principle of self-government.

This is why a Supreme Court ordering localities around is anti-American in the truest sense. It operates according to the opposite principle from the one the American colonists stood for.

(2) Contrary to the modern Western view of the state that it must be considered one and indivisible, the colonists believed that a smaller unit may withdraw from a larger one. Today we are supposed to consider this unthinkable.

(3) The colonists’ view of the (unwritten) British constitution was that Parliament could legislate only in those areas that had traditionally been within the purview of the British government. Customary practice was the test of constitutionality. The Parliament’s view, on the other hand, was in effect that the will and act of Parliament sufficed to make its measures constitutional.

So the colonists insisted on strict construction, if you will, while the British held to more of a “living, breathing” view of the Constitution. Sound familiar?

So let’s recap: local self-government, secession, and strict construction. Not exactly the themes you learned in school.
And not even what you’ll learn in graduate school.

One day I decided I had to know what my fellow Columbia Ph.D. students thought Independence Day was all about.

What could these left-liberals be celebrating? They don’t favor local self-government, which is what the war was all about. They don’t favor strict construction of the Constitution, while the colonists were insisting on precisely that, in a British context. And they certainly don’t favor secession.

So what the heck did they think it was all about?

Only one person answered me: “There was a distance involved.”

So the problem was that the ruling class was too far away?

“Come on, men, we must continue making sacrifices so that we may someday have exploiters who live close by!”

I don’t think so.

This was a student at what at that time was the #2 academic department in the country for American history.
He and the other students didn’t know five percent of what’s taught in just the American Revolution course alone at my Liberty Classroom.

And for Independence Day, I’m knocking 150 smackers off the lifetime, Master membership.

Will you know more than a Columbia University graduate student if you listen to these history and economics courses, taught by me and by people I trust, in your car?

Yes, but that’s not saying much — trust me.

More to the point, you will take direct aim at the educational malpractice we all suffered from.

Our newest faculty member, by the way, is ex-leftist Michael Rectenwald, who intends to blow the lid off postmodernism and the other isms in his forthcoming course for us.

You’ll need coupon code FIREWORKS (all caps).

This offer fizzles out like a bottle rocket at midnight on July 4, so click away:


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

US police departments under pressure to end training programmes with Israel | Middle East Eye

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

Still, before being fired and charged over the incident, all four officers had been employed by the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), which participated in a 2012 training conference in Minneapolis that was held by the FBI and Chicago’s Israeli consulate. 

“Every year we are bringing top-notch professionals from the Israeli police to share some knowledge,” Deputy Consul Shahar Arieli said at the time, as quoted by Mint Press News.

The video of a white police officer kneeling on the neck of George Floyd, an unarmed African American, for nearly nine minutes as he slowly died, gasping for air, has struck a familiar chord with many Palestinians and anti-occupation activists.

Since his death in late May, footage of Floyd pleading: “I can’t breathe” and “they’re going to kill me,” has emerged alongside videos and stills of Israeli security forces taking similar positions over the necks of unarmed Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and besieged Gaza Strip.

The Israeli police force has tried to distance itself from any perceived similarities, issuing statements denouncing what happened and stating that its officers are not trained to use knee-to-neck techniques.

But photographs taken as recently as March have shown Israeli forces using the same restraint on unarmed protesters just yards from the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City.

The damning imagery has revived complaints against US programmes that send American police officers to train under Israeli law enforcement and military officials, as nationwide calls for defunding and abolishing American police departments have taken hold.

Palestinian Americans draw stark comparisons of US and Israeli uses of force

Read More »

Since the early 90s, hundreds of law enforcement officers, including police officers and agents from the FBI, CIA, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), have either been sent to Israel through police exchanges, or attended summits within the US that were sponsored by Israeli lobby organisations.

Police forces from Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, California, Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Georgia, Washington state and others have participated in the training, including one that took place in Minneapolis, the city where Floyd was killed.

Leading human rights groups have denounced the exchange programmes, warning that Israeli police standards and tactics only serve to exacerbate racial profiling and police brutality in the US.

“With a long record of human rights violations, Israeli security forces are an incredibly problematic training partner,” Patrick Wilcken, Amnesty International USA’s researcher for arms control, security and human rights told MEE.

Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesperson, rejected criticisms of the training scheme, telling MEE that the police exchanges in Israel provide American forces with valuable information on how to “prevent and respond” to attacks.

“The learning and sharing has saved many lives both in Israel and overseas throughout the years,” Rosenfeld said.

“The organisations that are calling out, specifically in the US, against law enforcement learning and sharing are weakening the nation’s preparedness to respond to terror attacks, hate crimes and extremists who break the law.”

‘Policy or practice?’

Since Floyd’s death, second-degree murder charges have been levied against Derek Chauvin, the officer who had his knee to Floyd’s neck, while the other three are facing charges of aiding and abetting.

Rosenfeld called the incident “sad” and said that “there is no procedure that allows an officer of the Israel police department to carry out an arrest by placing a knee on the neck of a suspect”.

Still, before being fired and charged over the incident, all four officers had been employed by the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), which participated in a 2012 training conference in Minneapolis that was held by the FBI and Chicago’s Israeli consulate.

“Every year we are bringing top-notch professionals from the Israeli police to share some knowledge,” Deputy Consul Shahar Arieli said at the time, as quoted by Mint Press News.

MEE reached out to the MPD several times to inquire as to whether Chauvin was one of the 100 Minnesota police officers that participated in the training. The MPD did not respond to requests for comment, but before he was fired Chauvin was a training officer at the department, having worked there for the past 18 years.

MEE also reached out to the Israeli consulate in Chicago for comment, but failed to receive a response.

For his part, Rosenfeld said that no training exchange with Israel’s police forces would “involve such a measure” like the one Chauvin used against Floyd.

“It doesn’t exist in any [Israeli] police textbook,” he said.

But Fady Khoury, a Harvard Law School civil and political rights attorney with Adalah legal centre for minority rights in Israel, said textbooks and bylaws cannot negate the physical evidence of such tactics being used by Israeli officers on the ground.

“There is plenty of documentation out there of violent arrests that involve kneeling on detainees’ heads and necks,” Khoury said.

“We have seen this not only in the occupied territories when soldiers perform arrests, but inside Israel by police officers as well.”

Days after Floyd was killed, Mohammad al-Qadi, a Palestinian marathon runner from the occupied West Bank, posted several pictures depicting uniformed Israelis arresting Palestinians by using knee-to-throat techniques similar to the one that resulted in Floyd’s death.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Farce or Freedom This Fourth? – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

Livestock are examined for signs of “sickness” – corralled and forcibly injected with various substances. They are chuted along the desired path, which isn’t one of their choosing. They have little to celebrate and so do not.

We have an opportunity celebrate this weekend – if we can find the independence to assert our freedom. By not allowing ourselves to be treated like livestock, corralled and herded and everything but actually gelded – which we might as well be, if we do allow it.

This weekend will either be the Fourth of July or the Farce. You will know by whether you see Americans celebrating their obedience or their freedom. You will be able to tell which it is by whether you can see their faces.

Free people look the part. They do not wear the same government-decreed uniform. A sea of the Face Diapered Demoralized, standing six feet apart on X marks the spot – perhaps with plexiglass partitions in between – isn’t a picture-portrait of freedom. To describe such a pathetic spectacle of fear-induced obedience as people “celebrating their freedom” is like describing a quadriplegic as “differently abled.” Not even the dignity of editorial honesty – much less the dignity of men, which is being systematically attacked for reasons which by now ought to be as clear the July sun.

Free people are free to smile – and be seen smiling. They do not obediently stand on X marks the spot or stand six feet apart just because a sign said so. For the same reason they wouldn’t do jumping jacks because a sign (or a government Gesundheitsfuhrer) said so.

What meaning does “freedom” have if you are not free to get together with friends and others who choose to get together with you to peacefully enjoy each others’ company – and see each others’ faces?

Livestock are examined for signs of “sickness” – corralled and forcibly injected with various substances. They are chuted along the desired path, which isn’t one of their choosing. They have little to celebrate and so do not.

We have an opportunity celebrate this weekend – if we can find the independence to assert our freedom. By not allowing ourselves to be treated like livestock, corralled and herded and everything but actually gelded – which we might as well be, if we do allow it.

Assert your right to smile – and to see others smile. To breath freely. To shake the hand of a friend – or give a friend a hug – if the two of you aren’t afraid to. Without fear of what the fearful feel when they see you do so. Let them get therapy. Do not permit them to organize your reality around their psychological debility.

Let the uniform gather six-feet-apart and X marks-the-spot, looking the same and conveying the same without expression. Their faces hidden but their souls revealed.

Obedience uber alles.

These are the people of the Farce of July, who will celebrate it in their own pathetic way. In the same way that the people of North Korea tear their hair out whenever a Dear Leader departs – while also looking all the same, having the same uniforms and the same expressions. In the same way that Stalin’s chicken ran back to Stalin after its rough plucking – Stalin’s crumbs being more desirable to the pathetic bird than its self-respect.

Self-respect requires deciding for oneself. If one submits to every decision of others then to speak of the “self” is absurd. You haven’t got one.

It requires standing up for yourself by not tolerating the abuse of yourself, nor of others by dint of your manly example. Which isn’t a trait that only men can summon. It is a trait asserted by free human beings of both sexes – and one lacking in the moral eunuchs of the faceless, who stand where they are told on X marks-the-spot.

Free men and women stand wherever they like. They get-together with whom they like, whenever they like and as close as they like. They look at one another and can see one another. They smile and they laugh – visibly, openly.

This is how they celebrate their freedom.

It is how Americans once did – and can, again.

Which – if they do – will mean their children can.

There is no law, duly passed, compelling them to stand six feet apart and X-marks-the spot. Nor to efface their faces by donning a Demoralization Diaper as the price of being allowed to stand on X-marks-the-spot and six feet apart. Just the orders of the Gesundheitsfuhrers and the timorous tyranny at second-hand of the accomplices of commerce – the stores and other adjuncts of the government (what they have become) demanding six-feet-apart, X-marks the spot and the uniform demoralization of the Diaper.

Ignore the Gesundheitsfuhrers. Ignore the signs in front of stores and elsewhere that insist you are obliged to do as you are told just because they say so.

Say otherwise.

Do otherwise.

Gather with the not-uniform this weekend to mark the Fourth. Stand and sit where you like. Light fireworks, if you have them. The real ones that fly and explode. Free people do that sort of thing to. Don’t just remember what it was like. Bring it back to life.

Do not participate in the farce. The pathetic pantomime of doing-as-you’re-told in order to be allowed to do anything. This unmanly going-along to get-along. We don’t want any trouble here, said Ned Beatty.

But he got some.

Let’s give it instead.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Want to Kill the Economy Again? Keep Threatening More Lockdowns. | Mises Institute

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

Ryan McMaken

The first time governments imposed business closures in the name of fighting the spread of COVID-19, the job market imploded.

Forty million Americans lost their jobs, and at least 20 million of those are still unemployed. Income in America fell to such low levels that federal tax revenues fell by more than 50 percent year over year in April and remained down more than 25 percent in May. These are losses of historic proportions.

It remains to be seen if the country even began anything that could realistically be called a “recovery” in June. After all, new unemployment claims were still at over a million new applicants according to the most recent data. That’s still off-the-charts bad. Nonetheless, we continue to hear about how, any day now, we’ll see evidence of a “V-shaped recovery” in which jobs and economic growth will come roaring back.

But now we’re already seeing governments—by which I mean a small cadre of governors and unelected bureaucrats who currently rule by decree—announcing another round of business closures and ongoing government regulations that micromanage every aspect of a business’s daily interactions with customers.

This is likely to greatly slow any V-shapred recovery that might have been forming, and it will give businesses reason to further put off plans for implementing efforts at recovering from the economic crash experienced in April and May.

This is due to businesses being physically barred from hiring in many cases, but it’s also due to “regime uncertainty.”

Regime uncertainty is a wealth-killing, job-killing phenomenon in which business and property owners cannot plan for the future because of capricious, unpredictable, and incoherent government interventions.

This has happened a number of times in the past in the United States, an in each case, it prolonged economic depressions.

As shown by economic historian Robert Higgs, regime uncertainty was a significant factor in the long duration of the Great Depression. It again became a factor during the so-called Great Recession, when the US government began implementing a veritable smorgasbord of new regulations and bailouts.

During these periods, there were few limits on government action and the legal environment was prone to be substantially changed on short notice and in a succession of fits and starts.

Not surprisingly, under these conditions, businesses became reluctant to engage in new plans for expansion, employment, or investment.

Now, thanks to the coming “second round” of state lockdowns, businesses are once again in a similar position.

For example, yesterday Colorado governor Jared Polis announced that the governor’s office was once again shutting down bars and nightclubs, after only a few weeks of being allowed to remain open. This comes after a tiny uptick in new cases in the state.

What was the legal process for dictating to these businesses that they must now remain closed? There was none. For all we know, Polis just decided in the shower yesterday morning that it “felt right” to close down bars again. There is no debate, no checks and balances, no period for public comment. We live in a world where a politician can simply decide to shut down businesses whenever the mood strikes him.

Polis certainly isn’t the only politician of this type.

Governors in a number of states have taken similar actions, from California to New York to Texas and Florida. Bars, and other businesses, are again being closed by government edict. Or as in New York, they are not being allowed to open at all.

Some observers might shrug and say “well, it’s only bars and a small minority of businesses. It’s no big deal!” This might be true to some extent were other businesses able to obtain any useful information on the likelihood that they too will be shut down. After all, just because it’s “only” bars being closed now doesn’t mean it won’t be all restaurants, barbershops, and offices later.

And how might businesses get this information for planning purposes? It’s not as if any objective standards or guidance are offered by the secretive junta of bureaucrats that decides a business’s fate.

A business could ask, “At what number of new cases/hospitalizations will you extend new business closures?” But the business is unlikely to receive any answer, because it is clear that governments have established no objective standards of any kind. These government planners apparently decide business closures based on personal whims or on political pressure. What’s worse, these changes can occur without any warning at all. Even after months of talk about plans for dealing with COVID-19, governments have yet to announce or establish any standard at all by which to judge whether business closures or lockdowns are necessary. Exactly how many COVID-19 deaths or hospitalizations are necessary to “trigger business closures”? Virtually no government is willing to say. The only governor who appears to have even suggested an actual numerical standard is Greg Abbott of Texas who claims:

As I said from the start, if the positivity rate rose above 10%, the State of Texas would take further action to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

But even in this case, government action is vaguely defined only as “further action.” That could mean virtually anything. So business owners are left just guessing what governments might do next without anything we might call “due process” or even a “legislative process.” It’s just a matter of a single man or woman issuing diktats about whether or not a business owner is allowed to use his or her property. Moreover, just because it’s someone else’s business today, doesn’t mean it won’t be your business tomorrow. That’s the nature of regime uncertainty. One round of regulations now doesn’t mean there won’t be something quite different and far worse coming down the line soon.

Under these conditions, there is little reason to assume there will be a V-shaped recovery. After a period of only one month of “reopening,” governments are already enacting new business shutdowns and claiming the authority to engage in these shutdowns indefinitely. It’s as if the system were designed to maximize regime uncertainty and destroy employment and income. For business owners, there’s no end in sight.

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Universal Basic Income: A Critique – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020


Due to the pandemic, the government is giving out $1,000 to all who qualify for it. This program is the equivalent of a temporary Universal Basic Income program. If Covid 19 continues, the Trump administration’s policy will more and more come to resemble UBI. What is the permanent version of this program? UBI has the advantage of simplicity: $12,000 per year to all, from the richest to the poorest. Even some erstwhile supporters of the free enterprise system have been taken in by the siren song of this proposal.

It is time, then, for a critical review of this initiative.

First, it will promote laziness and reduce labor force participation. If people can scrape by with this relatively modest amount of money in their pockets, why go to work so as to help others? Why become a dishwasher or house-cleaner when you can indulge yourself in poetry, tv watching, computer gaming or day-dreaming? Investment in human capital, the be-all and end-all for rising to the middle class, will have taken a shot to the solar plexus.

Second. it will increase immigration on the part of poor and thus presumably not very productive folks. A highly skilled worker from abroad is not likely to line up at our borders for this amount of money, but to a poverty stricken person on the fence, this offer is likely to tip him over into crossing our borders.

Third, while the UBI is pegged at a low level, experience suggests it can be radically raised. The income tax was introduced at 3% of earnings, and look at it now. There is at present a group supporting so-called “welfare rights.” A UBI “rights” organization is sure to follow. How can we be so callous as to offer everyone such a pittance? The voting bloc for expanding its scope will be immense. It will include all “low information” voters who do not realize that the money has to come from somewhere.

Fourth, while these funds are now promised to all and sundry, it can always in future be taken away from dis-favored groups. This possibility, even if not carried out, gives the government more and more power over the populace, at a time when a move in the very opposite direction is more in keeping with economic freedom. Do we really need more people dependent upon the largesse of the all-loving state?

Fifth, some argue that the UBI is an improvement over the present system. It penalizes no one from obtaining a job. True enough. But the extreme likelihood is that it will not replace welfare as we know it, but, rather, be added to present disastrous policies.

Sixth, given that this new “rag in the bag” will raise taxes (or further enhance deficits) some of our most productive citizens will migrate to other countries. It is no accident that people are leaving the likes of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, California, etc., and moving to low tax states such as Florida, Texas, Arizona. Do we really want to introduce this tendency on the national level?

Seventh, UBI will not cure poverty, as claimed by its adherents. The way to enrich ourselves, says Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations, is through more capital goods, based, in turn, on savings, based, in further turn, on economic freedom. This program leads us in the very opposite direction.

Eighth, what’s the point of taxing millionaires like Bernie Sanders and Bill Gates, and then turning around and giving them back some of their cash? These transfers are costly. More money will thus flow into the pockets of those living in the very richest counties in the U.S., near Washington D.C. The only benefit is publicity.

UBI will further rend the fabric of the social order, not improve it. As for the present scheme, according to Milton Friedman, there is nothing as permanent as a temporary government program. Better to phase this out as soon as possible, now that it has begun, which never should have been the case in the first place.


Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Huge COVID case-counting deception at the CDC « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

For this piece, we have to enter the official world (of the insane)—where everyone is quite sure a new coronavirus was discovered in China and the worthless diagnostic tests mean something and the case numbers are real and meaningful. Once we execute all those absurd maneuvers, we land square in the middle of yet another scandal—this time at our favorite US agency for scandals, the CDC.

The Atlantic, May 21, has the story, headlined, “How could the CDC make that mistake?”

I’ll give you the key quotes, and then comment on the stark inference The Atlantic somehow failed to grasp.

“We’ve learned that the CDC is making, at best, a debilitating mistake: combining test results that diagnose current coronavirus infections with test results that measure whether someone has ever had the virus…The agency confirmed to The Atlantic on Wednesday that it is mixing the results of viral [PCR] and antibody tests, even though the two tests reveal different information and are used for different reasons.”

“Several states—including Pennsylvania, the site of one of the country’s largest outbreaks, as well as Texas, Georgia, and Vermont—are blending the data in the same way. Virginia likewise mixed viral and antibody test results until last week, but it reversed course and the governor apologized for the practice after it was covered by the Richmond Times-Dispatch and The Atlantic. Maine similarly separated its data on Wednesday; Vermont authorities claimed they didn’t even know they were doing this.”

“’You’ve got to be kidding me,’ Ashish Jha, the K. T. Li Professor of Global Health at Harvard and the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, told us when we described what the CDC was doing. ‘How could the CDC make that mistake? This is a mess’.”

“The CDC stopped publishing anything resembling a complete database of daily [COVID] test results on February 29. When it resumed publishing test data last week [the middle of May]…”

First of all, the CDC’s basic mission is publishing disease statistics on an ongoing basis. Reporting partial data flies in the face of what they’re supposed to be all about.

But the big deal, of course, is combining results from two different tests—the PCR and the antibody—and placing them in one lump.

I’ve read the Atlantic article forwards, backwards, and sideways, and it appears the experts believe only PCR viral tests should be used to count the number of COVID cases.

So here is a takeaway I find nowhere in the Atlantic article: COMBINING THE TWO TESTS WILL VASTLY INFLATE THE NUMBER OF CASES.

I’m not talking about categories like “rate of infection” or “percentage.” I’m talking about plain numbers of cases.

Some PCR tests will indicate COVID and some antibody tests will indicate COVID, and adding them together will pump up the number of cases. You know, that big number they flash on TV screens a hundred times a day.

“Coronavirus cases jumped up again yesterday, and the grand total in the US is now…”

THAT number.

The number media and government and related con artists deploy to scare the people and justify lockdowns and use to stop reopening the economy.

The brass band circus with flying acrobats and elephants and clown numbers.

Therefore, I’m not characterizing what the CDC is doing as a mistake. They’ve managed to create the illusion that absolute case numbers are higher than they should be.

Somehow, these “mistakes” always seem to result in worse news, not better news. The “errors” are always on the high side rather than the low side.

Case in point: the computer prediction of COVID deaths in the UK and US made by that abject failure, Neil Ferguson, whose track record, going back to 2001, has been one horrendous lunatic exaggeration after another. His 2020 projections of 500,000 COVID deaths in the UK and two million in the US were directly used to justify lockdowns in many countries.

The CDC, back in 2009, stopped reporting the number of Swine Flu cases in the US—while still claiming that number was in the tens of thousands. I’ve written in great detail about the scandal, which was exposed by then-CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson. The CDC stopped counting cases, because the overwhelming percentage of tissue samples from patients was coming back from labs with no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu. And yet, in a later retrospective “analysis,” the CDC claimed that, at the height of the “epidemic,” there were 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US.

Going all the way back to 2003 and SARS, the CDC and other public health agencies around the world hyped the dangers to the sky; the final official death count, globally, when the dust cleared? 800.

There is a tradition of lying on the high side, blowing up figures in order to create the illusion of destruction.

CDC? Mistake? The agency is certainly incompetent. But that’s just the beginning of the story.

The only time they say there is no danger is when they’re lying about the effects of vaccines.

My headline for the Atlantic article would read: SO HOW MANY COVID CASES SHOULD WE SUBTRACT TO GET THE ACTUAL NUMBER?

And the first paragraph would go this way: “Just when governors are trying to reopen their economies, a gigantic case-counting deception at the CDC is taking the wind out of their sails. The millions of Americans suffering financial devastation could be pushed back into a hole. Who is screaming to high heaven about THAT on the nightly news? No one. Why not?”



* (video: “CDC Admits Mistakes in Covid Case Numbers,” 7/1/2020)



Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

John Bolton – Traitor to Common Decency — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on July 2, 2020

 Tom Luongo

There are few men in modern American history more venal than Former National Security Adviser John Bolton. Calling Bolton a relic of the Cold War in his outlook on foreign policy is a kindness.

Bolton is a dangerous and pathetic creature whose entire life is an example of how incomplete men with a talent for violence can rise in a late-stage cesspit of political corruption.

He is simply someone who has never been in a fight in his life who lusts for the power to kill, main and destroy anyone who dares challenge him. A pathology he’s had the dubious distinction of being able to act out in the real world on more than one occasion.

This will, hopefully, be the last article I write about his cretin because once his last fifteen minutes of fame are used up attacking President Trump in slavish interview after interview supporting his book, Bolton will be finished in Washington D.C.

This book is his gold watch for being a lifelong soldier in the service of the American empire and the neoconservative/neoliberal dream of global conquest. $2 million, a handful of residuals and a final victory lap for a life spent in pursuit of the subjugation of those he considers sub-human.

President Trump’s recent tweet about Bolton is a masterful bit of brevity being the soul of wit.

And while Bolton spent the balance of his career in D.C. working nominally for Republicans, his lust for war served both parties equally well. That war lust was in service of the empire itself when Bolton was fired, and he turned against President Trump.

He was welcomed as a Hero of the Resistance by Democrats intent on impeaching the President after he was fired last year, one of the few good moments in Trump’s nearly four years at the helm of U.S. foreign policy. Given his involvement with Fiona Hill and Eric Chiaramella, the whistleblower whose testimony created the impeachment charges, Bolton really could be thought of as the architect of that process.

So, it’s no surprise that his book is welcomed as the gossip event of the summer by the media. But remember, this is a guy who refused to testify against Trump for Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff and that’s because he would have never stood up to cross-examination.

This is because, ultimately, John Bolton is a coward. And he’s the worst kind of coward. He’s the kind of man who deals underhandedly while hiding behind rhetoric in controlled environments to pursue his fever dreams of suppressing the Untermensch.

What we know now, thanks to Bolton’s unwillingness to keep his trap shut, is that things were as we suspected while he was in the White House. Every event that occurred was an excuse for Bolton to tell Trump to go to war. And every time Trump was led up to that trough to drink, he backed away causing Bolton’s mustache the worst case of sexual frustration.

Worse than that, Bolton sabotaged any hope of détente with Russia, North Korea and improving the situation in the Middle East. While he was right to hate Jared Kushner’s Deal of the Century for Israel/Palestine, he was instrumental in getting Trump to stay in Syria rather than turn over what’s left of its suppression to the people who actually want it to continue – Israel and Saudi Arabia.

In the end Bolton is really the best example I can come up with for the monolithic thinking that permeates D.C. Despite his best instincts, Trump took Bolton on because the potential talent pool is so thin.

Anyone with original ideas, such as Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, are more valuable in their current position rather than coming into an administration that is hamstrung by a permanent bureaucracy unwilling to change, or in open revolt.

There’s no profit for them to make the jump even if they wanted to.

This point has been in effect since before Trump took office when he wouldn’t stand behind his first National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, who is still embroiled in the worst The Swamp can throw at a person.

Progressives, liberals and anti-imperalists I implore you to stop allying with this creature of The Swamp in his quest to do damage to a president you hate. Because by doing so you are strengthening the very people who are the architects of the empire you believe you are fighting against.

Because that’s who John Bolton wrote this book for.

He didn’t write it for you.

Bolton will ultimately be a foot note in the history books. A man whose only claim to fame was failing to allow a president to make some peace with North Korea and set the U.S. on a path to complete alienation with the rest of the world.

Because of the neoconservatives’ intense war lust, as embodied by Bolton, it pushed Trump, already an arch-mercantilist, even farther along the path of using economic pressure to force change on the world stage.

But, as I’ve been saying for years now, that is a strategy just as ruinous in the long run for the U.S. as Bolton’s cowardice urging use of a military — which he refused to serve in — to do his dirty work for him.

These are both expressions of an empire which refuses to accept that it is in decline. And it has invited the chaos now evident in cities all across the U.S. as our wealth has been squandered on endless wars for regime change overseas while building a regulatory police state at home.

That helped pushed the militarization of our local police, further putting them in conflict with a domestic population growing more desperate and reactionary on both sides of the political aisle.

Bolton’s projection of all the U.S.’s ills onto countries with no real ability to harm us physically ultimately was not only his undoing with Trump but the U.S.’s undoing as a leader of the post-WWII order.

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Putting Out the Fire With Lighter Fluid – Taki’s Magazine

Posted by M. C. on July 2, 2020

Steve Sailer

After race car driver Bubba Wallace’s NooseCAR debacle last week, it would have taken somebody truly dumb and publicity-crazed to breathe life into this week’s even more absurd hate-crime allegation: biracial 18-year-old Althea Bernstein’s assertion that four “classic Wisconsin frat boys” squirted lighter fluid on her and set her ablaze by tossing a lighter into her car in downtown Madison, Wis., during an Antifa riot.

While nobody in the national press has dared express any skepticism about this hilariously unlikely tale, it hadn’t been getting the giant push that would have been expected if anybody of any importance were convinced this whopper were true.

After all, if Bernstein’s yarn about roving racist frat boys in Hawaiian shirts randomly incinerating a Jewish-Unitarian Woman of Color actually happened, it would be gigantic news, far bigger than, as Joe Biden would say, what’s his name—Pink Floyd? Boy George?—that drugged-up bouncer who wound up dead while resisting arrest and suddenly became history’s greatest saint, or that drunk driver who got himself shot after stealing a cop’s Taser and lighting him up with it.

But, c’mon… Frat boys setting a semi-black girl on fire in super-liberal Madison is, obviously, Tawana Brawley/Jackie Coakley-level hate hoaxery, a silly teenager’s attempt to improvise an excuse for being where she shouldn’t have been.

Showing more caution than is typical in these circumstances, the national press reported Bernstein’s claims with a straight face, but then did only the minimum to follow up on them. Most newspapers just ran an initial wire service report, then a brief article about Bernstein’s appearance Friday on ABC’s Good Morning America.

No progressive pundit has yet written up Bernstein’s tall tale yet, presumably in the hope that when law enforcement eventually debunks it, nobody will remember it the way too many citizens remember Jussie Smollett.

But then, just as the Althea Bernstein story was being allowed to quietly fade away over the weekend, that special someone—Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, wife of Prince Harry—stepped forward to make a really futile and stupid gesture to keep this latest Hate Hoax from being allowed to be forgotten the way the cooler heads in the media had wished.

“A lot of people will believe anything these days as long as it is inspired by antiwhite racism.”

By Monday, society, fashion, and Jewish magazines like Town & Country, ELLE, Cosmopolitan, and Forward were all over the story.

As I’ve often pointed out, progressive Madison has some of the biggest racial disparities in the country, in part because the U. of Wisconsin attracts smart whites, but also because Madison, like nearby Milwaukee, has unusually dysfunctional blacks due to Wisconsin’s high welfare in the 1970s having attracted single mothers.

But Miss Bernstein has a more complicated background than the typical Madison African-American. The black sportswriter Jason Whitlock pointed out recently that “many of the highest-profile and irresponsible celebrity racial justice warriors are mixed race, half white and half black,” such as Jussie Smollett, Colin Kaepernick, and Bubba Wallace. Whitlock went on:

Imagine being half black, half white and raised by the white side of your family. You’re immersed in white culture and sensibilities but society assigns you a black classification and you’re treated as the second coming of Nelson Mandela. You love your family. You know your family loves you. But society at large rejects the white half of you.

That’s going to create some bitterness.

That’s going to create a heightened level of sensitivity around race that’s difficult to manage and interpret in your teens, twenties and thirties….

There’s no fight for rights. It’s a group of millennials publicly sorting out their feelings and looking for the approval of white society.

White love is the cure for all that ails them.

And pretty soon you are talking on the phone to Prince Harry.

Miss Bernstein claims she wasn’t at the infamous riot that was going on in downtown Madison at 1 a.m. on Wednesday, June 24; she was just driving next to the riot.

That night the leftist Mostly Peaceful Protesters toppled two statues that had long been icons of Madison progressives—abolitionist Union Army hero Hans Christian Heg and “Forward,” a female symbol of progress designed by a woman sculptor in 1895—and they beat up a gay Democratic state senator, Tim Carpenter.

Most frighteningly, around 1 a.m. a week ago, the moment Bernstein says she was being attacked with lighter fluid, the Madison mob set fire, using lighter fluid, to the City County Building, home to the jail and the 911 call center. The call center had to be evacuated, but at least the fire was put out before the 180 inmates burned to death.

This set off a squabble between political leaders of the liberal Dane County, where Trump won only 23 percent of the vote, and extremely liberal Madison. The county officials were outraged that the city leaders had let BLM/Antifa set their mutual building on fire.

The coincidence that both the alleged arson and the documented arson involved lighter fluid has not been much remarked upon. (You can see a security-camera photo of a rioter spraying the jailhouse with the kind of lighter fluid used to get charcoal burning here.)

I don’t know what the real story is behind young Miss Bernstein’s politically correct fiction about homicidal frat boys and lighter fluid, but let me make a few wild surmises.

Perhaps her mom wouldn’t let her take the car unless she promised not to go to the riot. But riots sound like fun when you are 18, especially after going stir-crazy during the lockdown. And, of greatest importance for an 18-year-old girl, at a riot there are always boys.

By the way, for ten weeks, as you may recall, the Establishment told everybody that the current pandemic was the worst thing in the history of the world. But then in late May the conventional wisdom suddenly forgot about the virus and switched to the death of George Floyd as the most important event ever, so therefore young people should form vast mobs and Mostly Peacefully Protest. Is it any surprise that the number of new coronavirus cases in Madison has quadrupled over the past week?

But bad things tend to happen at riots, such as arson and, say, blowback from arson. While it can be exciting watching somebody try to burn down the county jail, lighter fluid and flame make a volatile combination. People can get hurt.

But getting burnt during the mob’s arson spree can be not just painful, but legally worrisome. Lighting fires may seem like summer-camp fun and games, but setting civic property on fire is a felony. And witnesses to felonies can be subpoenaed.

So before you go to the emergency room, you would need a scenario, a plotline involving lighter fluid.

Granted, four right-wing frat boys shouting the N-word and setting you on fire during a Black Lives Matter riot is a truly stupid story. But a lot of people will believe anything these days as long as it is inspired by antiwhite racism.

Now, I don’t know if any of my speculation is true. But you have to admit that something like this is more plausible than the spiel Meghan and poor Harry fell for.

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

bionic mosquito: The Ideal of Humility

Posted by M. C. on July 2, 2020

…in the West we have traded the Christian religion for the bastardized religion witnessed on the streets in the last month.

The whole secret of the practical success of Christendom lies in the Christian humility, however imperfectly fulfilled.

Heretics, Gilbert K. Chesterton (eBook)

In this chapter, Chesterton is examining H.G. Wells and his book, A Modern Utopia.

When one rids himself of the idea of merit – merit in the Christian sense – one frees himself for all possibilities: “…the soul is suddenly released for incredible voyages,” as Chesterton puts it. This humility – taking ourselves lightly, while seeing the possibility of unmerited triumphs – is taken by many as something sinister:

Humility is so practical a virtue that men think it must be a vice. Humility is so successful that it is mistaken for pride.

Humility is lost on the modern man – the man immersed in the scientism that has afflicted all of the globe. This causes him to look in all the wrong places:

He is still slightly affected with the great scientific fallacy; I mean the habit of beginning not with the human soul, which is the first thing a man learns about, but with some such thing as protoplasm, which is about the last.

There is so much in this one sentence. I will only summarize one aspect: we live in a story, not in the details of facts too trivial for the concern of most. People live in and act on a narrative, not in an idea – and for sure not in the most obscure and hidden reaches of an idea. If this isn’t obvious today – with the narrative of destruction and evil that turns ordinary men into sycophants demanding mask wearing and abnormal men into burning and looting everything in sight – then it will never be obvious.

Certainly for the new atheists – those like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Daniel Dennett – the game is up. Religion (a narrative) is a permanent condition for humans – in the West we have traded the Christian religion for the bastardized religion witnessed on the streets in the last month.

What is left to us, therefore, is just one question: which, or what type, of religion. One that aims at peace – albeit, always moving in fits and starts – or one that aims to destroy. There will be no inventing a “religion that is not a religion” of peace. It is a hopeless and even futile quest. Why?

Ephesians 6: 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

I have been seeing this verse pop up a lot lately in the dialogue. I have been using it more often myself. If the last 125 years of history didn’t convince you that the powers we battle are both dark and spiritual, then hopefully the last 125 days finally has. If this doesn’t humble you – knowing where and what the battle is – nothing will. If it doesn’t cause you to understand where and how this fight must be fought, you deserve your fate.

Returning to Chesterton and those afflicted with the scientific fallacy:

In his new Utopia [Wells] says, for instance, that a chief point of the Utopia will be a disbelief in original sin.

Oh my. What a controversial term: “original sin.” I am fine if you choose a different term and a different way to describe the fallen nature of man – all men and all women. Pick any standard of “good” that you want, and then start explaining why no one meets it perfectly. In other words, whether one takes the concept to mean we are all damned because of Adam and Eve, or whether one believes we all, inherent in our nature, will fall short of a standard of good, you end up in the same place.

If he had begun with the human soul—that is, if he had begun on himself—he would have found original sin almost the first thing to be believed in.

Again, get past what you think you know about the term. We all fall short of the “good.” By focusing on protoplasm, we lose sight of the nature of man. This exposes completely the utopia of Progressivism based on scientism. They tell us that man is perfectible, and his perfection will be brought on by…man. Both parts of that sentence lead us to hell.

This utopian vision, Chesterton points out, is universal – therefore fully cosmopolitan. It is borderless and boundaryless in every sense of these words. All must be included; none may be excluded. Not excluded from your country, not excluded from your income and wealth, not excluded from your values, not excluded from your home, not excluded from your private life, not excluded from your body.

The only thing to be excluded is exclusion – in other words, no borders and no boundaries. (Watch this 18-minute video by Jonathan Pageau – it will be the best 18 minutes you spend on understanding the religiosity and symbolism and new world religion of inclusivity as demonstrated in the last four months of insanity.)

Which brings us back to the utopian vision of Wells. From the Wikipedia description of this utopia:

The world shares the same language, coinage, customs, and laws, and freedom of movement is general. Some personal property is allowed, but “all natural sources of force, and indeed all strictly natural products” are “inalienably vested in the local authorities” occupying “areas as large sometimes as half England.” The World State is “the sole landowner of the earth.” Units of currency are based on units of energy, so that “employment would constantly shift into the areas where energy was cheap.” Humanity has been almost entirely liberated from the need for physical labor: “There appears to be no limit to the invasion of life by the machine.”

The abolition of man. No boundaries, no borders. No one or no thing or no value or no idea may be excluded…except exclusion. As Chesterton describes it:

But I think the main mistake of Mr. Wells’s philosophy is a somewhat deeper one, one that he expresses in a very entertaining manner in the introductory part of the new Utopia. His philosophy in some sense amounts to a denial of the possibility of philosophy itself. At least, he maintains that there are no secure and reliable ideas upon which we can rest with a final mental satisfaction.

Then, citing Wells:

“Nothing endures, nothing is precise and certain (except the mind of a pedant) …. Being indeed! —there is no being, but a universal becoming of individualities, and Plato turned his back on truth when he turned towards his museum of specific ideals.”

“There is no abiding thing in what we know.”

Except, as Chesterton notes, the abiding thing we know that nothing is…abiding. It is true, Chesterton says, that the North Pole may be unattainable; but this doesn’t mean that the North Pole does not exist. (At the time of Chesterton’s writing, the physical North Pole had not been achieved, but I believe the metaphorical understanding of these words is more meaningful.)

Plato turns his back on Wells. It is true that manifest and material things change; what does not change is the abstract quality, the invisible idea. Plato’s Form of the Good.


Returning to humility…with this humility – a recognition of the unmerited, gaining merit only through the perfect sacrifice – comes the greatest courage:

It is only the last and wildest kind of courage that can stand on a tower before ten thousand people and tell them that twice two is four.

We need many such humble men and women today. Instead, the primary response when presented with evidence that contradicts the prevailing narrative is either a blank stare or a scream: “everybody’s doing it.”

Or a bullet. Jesus Christ, Plato’s Form of the Good made manifest as Aristotle demanded, showed the way – what was necessary. It’s scary, I know.

Jordan Peterson would respond when asked why he is speaking out on issues in a manner that offers him nothing but abuse in reply: Yes, there is a cost to speaking out; there is, at times, a greater cost not to speak out.

Now is most definitely one of those times.

Posted by

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »