MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Where Is Congress on Ukraine’s Membership in NATO? – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on February 4, 2022

What amazes me is that American parents of children who are 17 years of age to 24 years of age are so blasé about all this.

In any event, I wouldn’t bother with sending a letter to President Biden or your congressman to express your opposition to NATO’s absorption of Ukraine. You would only be wasting your time. You would be better off sending your letter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff

https://www.fff.org/2022/02/02/where-is-congress-on-ukraines-membership-in-nato/

by Jacob G. Hornberger

Given all those pious pro-democracy pronouncements by U.S. officials, I’d like to ask what might be considered a discomforting question: Where is the U.S. Congress when it comes to deciding whether Ukraine becomes a member of NATO?

The answer to that question might be even more discomforting than the question itself: In a country that purports to be a representative democracy, Congress has no role in making that decision.

And yet, the issue of whether Ukraine joins NATO necessarily involves the lives of American citizens. That’s because if someone attacks Ukraine after it becomes a NATO member, the U.S. government is is duty-bound to enter the war on behalf of Ukraine. That means that as soon as Ukraine joins NATO, the lives of American soldiers are automatically pledged to Ukraine’s defense.

Given that Ukraine’s membership automatically embroils the United States in such a war, why doesn’t the U.S. Congress have a role in determining whether Ukraine becomes a NATO member or not? Shouldn’t the elected representatives of the people be involved in any decision that involves war?

Indeed, where does the declaration-of-war requirement provided in the Constitution fit into all this? Our ancestors called into existence a system in which the United States could not go to war without a formal declaration of war by Congress. Yet, obviously someone has figured out a clever way to avoid that constitutional requirement. As a practical matter, the NATO system trumps that constitutional protection. As soon as Ukraine is attacked, the United States is automatically at war, declaration of war or not.

What amazes me is that American parents of children who are 17 years of age to 24 years of age are so blasé about all this. Wouldn’t you think that they would be organizing protests against Ukraine membership, given that it is the lives of their children that are being pledged for the defense of Ukraine? From what I read, most people can’t identify Ukraine’s location on a map. I’m willing to bet that most Americans also don’t personally know any Ukrainians. 

Let’s say, for example, that Ukraine joins NATO and then Russia invades Ukraine. The United States is now duty-bound to wage war against Russia. In the event of such a war, it is a certainty that the Pentagon will issue an order for conscription, this time for both young men and young women. Those young people will be ordered to report to a military facility and trained to fight, kill, and die. Such a war would necessarily entail lots of casualties. 

How can the parents of children in that draft age group be so blasé about the situation? Do they really place a higher value on Ukraine than they do the lives of their own children? That’s hard to believe. And yet, where are the organized protests against admitting Ukraine into NATO?

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the same principle applies to all the other nations in NATO, including the former Warsaw Pact countries. By absorbing them into NATO, the lives of young American citizens have been pledged to come automatically to their defense in the event they are attacked, without any congressional participation in the matter. 

So, if it’s not Congress is who making the decision on when the country goes to war, who is making that decision? Once again, the answer is discomforting. My hunch is that many Americans don’t want to hear it. The answer is the Pentagon. The generals are the ones running the federal government, at least when it comes to foreign affairs. 

The scheme works like this: Ostensibly, NATO bureaucrats from the existing member nations decide who will become a new NATO member. As a practical matter, however, it is the Pentagon calling the shots, given that U.S. officials provide the lion’s share of the money to fund this Cold War dinosaur. Thus, if the Pentagon decides that it wants to admit a new member into NATO, such as Ukraine, all the other NATO bureaucrats immediately fall into line and support the decision. 

One of the most insightful books that has been written in the recent years is National Security and Double Government by Michael Glennon. Any American who isn’t afraid to confront reality about what is going on in America owes it to himself to read this book. Glennon’s thesis is a discomforting one. He says that it is the national-security segment of the government — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — that is actually running the government and that the other parts of the government are simply serving in support. Glennon is a professor of law at Tufts University and has served as counsel to various congressional committees. 

An ominous aspect to all this is that in the 1950s and 1960s, when the president, the Congress, and the judiciary were still in charge of the federal government, there was nothing the Pentagon and the CIA wanted more than a war with Russia. One can only wonder whether that Cold War mindset still holds sway today.

In any event, I wouldn’t bother with sending a letter to President Biden or your congressman to express your opposition to NATO’s absorption of Ukraine. You would only be wasting your time. You would be better off sending your letter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

This post was written by: Jacob G. Hornberger

Be seeing you

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

What Matters Most to Nations and Peoples? – LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Posted by M. C. on February 4, 2022

Consider. If the birth rates of the ethnic groups that historically have made up the nations of Europe are now below replacement levels, 2.1 children per woman, these peoples will become minorities in their own countries and eventually die out.

Extinction beckons.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2022/02/patrick-j-buchanan/what-matters-most-to-nations-and-peoples/

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Speaking in Conroe, Texas, last weekend, former President Donald Trump accused his successor of allowing millions of migrants to enter the country illegally across our Southern border.

“The most important border … for us is not Ukraine’s border but America’s border,” thundered Trump.

“Before Joe Biden sends any troops to defend a border in Europe, he should be sending troops to defend our border right here in Texas.”

Thus did Trump not only frame a compelling issue for the fall election; he has framed an issue that touches on one of the great and deepening divides of our time.

Which matters more — the defense of our country from an invasion of migrants from the Third World, or the defense of the borders of distant nations that have little or nothing to do with the security or survival of the United States?

Why should who rules the Russified Donbas be America’s concern?

This “border issue” feeds into other Republican issues.

For the border crossers seen on national TV appear to be mostly young men, who will likely contribute to the crime crisis of shootings and killings plaguing America’s cities.

Illegal immigration is also the ways and means by which illegal drugs enter the United States. Last year, 100,000 Americans, most of them young, died of overdoses, with two-thirds of these Americans succumbing to fentanyl that is produced in China and comes through Mexico.

Trump’s framing of the issue as between the foreign borders we defend and America’s border that we do not also divides the GOP.

The interventionist wing of the party seeks a confrontation with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, while America First nationalists urge a refocus of U.S. troops and resources to our own bleeding southern border.

And illegal migration is rising as an issue not only in the United States but across Europe.

In France, the four leading presidential candidates — incumbent Emmanuel Macron, nationalist Marine Le Pen, the center-right candidate Valerie Pecresse and the far-right candidate Eric Zemmour — are all making the invasion of Europe an issue, and taking a tougher line.

Over the same weekend that Trump spoke in Texas, the leaders of two NATO nations that border Ukraine headed to Madrid for a gathering titled “Defend Europe.” The threat that brought them to the Spanish capital was not Russia’s military presence on Ukraine’s borders.

Reports The New York Times:

“Instead of tackling the Russian threat to Europe’s eastern frontier, the meeting attended by the prime ministers of Poland and Hungary, Mateusz Morawiecki and Viktor Orban, focused on what the populist leaders cite as their most pressing threats: immigration, demographic decline and the European Union … ”

“France’s far-right presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, an outspoken fan of the Kremlin, was also at the two-day conclave … ”

“A declaration issued after the Madrid gathering made no mention of Ukraine. … It instead stressed the need to form a united front in favor of ‘family policies,’ Christianity and keeping out immigrants. The European Union, the statement said, had become ‘detached from reality,’ leading to ‘demographic suicide.’”

In brief, while Western elites are alarmed about the borders of Ukraine and Kremlin encroachments, much of Europe is more concerned about its own moral, cultural and demographic decline — abortion, LGBT rights, low birth rates and the death of Christianity.

Europe is in danger of dying, these people believe.

These Europeans are concerned that the nations and peoples their ancestors and fathers knew are going out of existence. Their greater fear is not of Putin’s Russia but of an EU superstate whose dominance leads inexorably to the decline and disappearance of distinct ethnic nations.

To the leaders of Hungary and Poland and the traditionalist and populist right-wing parties of Europe, nationality matters more than political systems.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban, for example, does not regard Putin’s Russia as an enemy of his country, and provides economic incentives for Hungarian families to have more children.

Consider. If the birth rates of the ethnic groups that historically have made up the nations of Europe are now below replacement levels, 2.1 children per woman, these peoples will become minorities in their own countries and eventually die out.

Extinction beckons.

Why should the inhabitants of these nations care about the borders of other countries, if their own countries are slowly passing away?

And why should the future inhabitants of Europe from Africa and Asia in year 2100, who will inherit, populate and rule these lands, care about the old borders created by the history of yesterday’s Europeans?

As the peoples of Europe are divided between those who fear demographic death in the long run and those who fear autocratic Russian dominance in the near term, so, too, are Americans divided.

Our ruling class, to whom the world struggle is between autocracy and democracy, are willing to fight for the triumph of the latter over the former.

The other half of America is more concerned with the character and composition of their own nation, present and future, which also appears to be passing away.

Patrick J. Buchanan is co-founder and editor of The American Conservative. He is also the author of Where the Right Went Wrong, and Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War. His latest book is Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever See his website.

Be seeing you

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

The Media Outlets Demanding Joe Rogan’s Removal from Spotify Spread Far More Disinformation

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

https://rumble.com/vtunof-the-media-outlets-demanding-joe-rogans-removal-from-spotify-spread-far-more.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Glenn+Greenwald&ep=2

Glenn Greenwald

Rumble — To justify their efforts to pressure Spotify to remove Joe Rogan, employees of media corporations claim to be deeply concerned by the “disinformation” he is spreading. Yet nobody spreads disinformation more aggressively, destructively or recklessly than these media corporations, strongly suggesting some different motive in wanting Rogan silenced.

Be seeing you

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

Biden’s Free Masks Are Here! Do You Want One?

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

When government promises you something for free, it’s a good idea to look that gift horse in the mouth. Now that the free government facemasks have arrived in stores, this advice is doubly important. Rep. Massie has Tweeted a hilarious photo of your “free” masks. Also today: Republican Party old-liners are freaking out over Tucker Carlson’s refusal to get on board with war on Russia.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Fingerprint unlocking: Is it secure?NO!

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

The fifth amendment does not prevent the man from forcing you to finger unlock.

Fingerprints aren’t data banked? suuuuuure.

Using a fingerprint to unlock electronic devices and even homes is very common these days. Fingerprint security is incredibly convenient, but is it more or less secure than using a pin or password? It turns out fingerprints are more like usernames than passwords: they’re unique, static, and identifiable as belonging to you. We dive into some of the vulnerabilities you need to be aware of with biometric security, and the best ways to protect your devices.

Be seeing you

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

Parler – Former ACLU Director calls out group’s new selective stance on free speech

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

The ol’ mare ain’t what she used to be.

ACLU’s former Executive Director Ira Glasser

Former ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser A group often praised for its work in defending citizens’ civil liberties, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has become the subject of criticism for its current stance on free speech and when it’s considered okay to defend it.

The ACLU’s former Executive Director Ira Glasser appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher to discuss the nonprofit’s changing position on free speech.

“They just produced a couple years ago new guidelines for their lawyers to use when deciding what free speech cases to take,” Glasser said. “In other words, before they defend your free speech, they want to see what you say.

Glasser, with Maher, acknowledged that all organizations change over time. Still, since no one else like the ACLU is defending free speech, the government will inevitably be left to decide.

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

How the Left Defends Communist Totalitarianism | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

https://mises.org/wire/how-left-defends-communist-totalitarianism

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Silent War

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

By allowing anarchy to flourish, through passive policing, inequalities under the law, disbanding with bail bonds, they are imploding the legal foundations of the fair and just society people believed they lived in, immolating the social contract, and showing there is no justice or fairness through this global oligarch-funded madness.

https://thegoodcitizen.substack.com/p/the-silent-war

Good Citizen

Part 1 of 2

Jisas Yu Holem Han Blong Mi


The Silent War

Did you think this war was gonna fit in with your world, your ideas? (Hacksaw Ridge)
Our war is a silent war. It cannot be measured in armaments or deployments, on geographical or topographical maps that show no discernable divisions, no potential battlefields. It is by nature a deceptive war, cloaked by belligerents who fly under the radar of populations and deploy their armaments into the bloodstream of innocents ill equipped to recognize their body as targets, having been sufficiently softened up by a lifetime of psychological disinformation shelling to their minds. These belligerents hide among their targets, masquerading as their trusted betters. They hide in plain sight on the boards of companies, in the administration of hospitals, at the captured agencies of governments, in the halls of Congress and Parliaments of the west and beside the overworked fiat printers of central banks, the greatest weapons of mass social destruction modernity has yet produced. They are the enemies of free peoples the world over. Their agenda is death and in the absence of it a subjugation to an engineered world of post humanist dystopia of their design and for their benefit.

In Silent Wars you do not recognize the enemy because you do not comprehend the war. You cannot discern the terms of battle. You are mocked and derided for entertaining conspiracies that dare recognize all its elements that have you surrounded. The victims who cannot see the frontiers of battle will suffer the brunt of the worst bombardments. There will be no nurses station, no infirmary, no last rites for the volunteers who were conscripted out of fear, and submitted through coercion the greatest sacrifice of war, their lives unawares. They will wear no scars, bear no pain, win no honors or valiant parades posthumously. Their cries of suffering will be callously ignored by the institutions entrusted with rescuing them. Their widows or widowers will receive no letters of gratitude, no flags, no benefits or pensions. There will be no trace left that they were ever a casualty of a Silent War on humanity with no autopsy, and a death certificate that shrouds their status on behalf of the global evil that presently dominates all fronts.

Mortality is the great equalizer when the combatants are congruent on the terms of battle. There is no equalizer in a Silent War waged by forces hiding in plain sight performing as public servants of the self anointed ‘expert class’, who have captured minds as flags using psychological operations to deceive and coerce. The lies and propaganda are everywhere packaged as facts, data, science and truth, all unassailable weapons that must be blindly embraced by the captured minds, who will amplify them toward capturing further flags to be absorbed into the coalition of the hypnotized willing.

Now that war is upon us again, those needed to face it and fight it are noticeably absent. Absorbed by the very machine that will eat them, they do not even recognize an enemy, the stakes, the terms of battle for they have already passively surrendered as volunteers for the cannon fodder brigade. They are working on behalf of the enemy and against their own interests and the futures of ones they love and hold dearest.

There are no schools of study for Silent War tacticians to be prepared for battles on these fronts. The guidebooks for this war are in the great tombs of literature that already line our shelves, the words of writers like Orwell, Huxley, Plato, Aristotle, Mill, Locke, Hobbes, Paine, von Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, Aquinas, Aurelius and Seneca to name but a few. They are in books of behavioral psychology, a preferred weapon of management, the great global evil. These can be found in staples of propaganda studies, media and communications, logic and reason, political and social philosophy. Only damn fools would omit the gospels here, the teachings of Christ, the wisdom in doctrines of Buddhism, Hinduism’s dharma or ‘way of life’, Shinto’s orientation of ourselves among the natural world. There is no shortage of human knowledge or wisdom and guidance in written words that cannot be utilized to our benefit from all cultures of the world, from all faiths. It is the open mind, powered by objective reason, never closed to updating its software of new ideas nor fearful of challenging his own beliefs that will be in the greatest numbers possible, the fiercest brigade of resistance to global tyranny the world has ever known. They seek to seize these weapons with censorship and controlled demolitions of information and knowledge wherever it rises in sufficient numbers to challenge their power and undermine their agenda.

Are you a Good Citizen?

Evil In Plain Sight

悪因悪果 (evil cause, evil effect)
This great evil. Where’s it come from? How’d it ‘still into the world? What seed, what root did it grow from? Is this darkness in you too? (The Thin Red Line)

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Between the Lines

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

Steve Sailer

Did the famous decade of pop music that followed the Beatles’ 1964 British Invasion spread leftist ideas? Many think so. For example, economist Tyler Cowen writes:

People tuned into the radio, in part, for ideas, not just tunes. But the ideas that spread best were attached to songs. Drug use spread, in part, because famous musicians sang about using drugs. Anti-Vietnam War themes spread through songs, as did many other social movements.

But did leftist lyrics inculcate leftist ideas? If so, it ought to be easy to name scores of well-known politically relevant songs from this immensely famous era of pop music.

A striking paradox is that only a tiny number of the best-known lyrics of the era were overtly political, with some even being on the right. For instance, Lynyrd Skynyrd topped Neil Young’s whiny “Southern Man” with “Sweet Home Alabama.”

The Beatles’ two most famous politically explicit songs are “Taxman,” in which George complains about high taxes, and “Revolution,” in which John disses Maoism and mostly peaceful protests. “In summary, if you ask me to sum up in a single word what the lyrics of 1964–1973 were most about, I’d say: girls.”

This is not to say that Lennon and McCartney were apolitical. One revelation of Peter Jackson’s eight-hour Get Back documentary about the 1969 recording of the Let It Be album is that John and Paul avidly followed politics in the newspapers in a slightly middle-aged fashion.

But in his songs during his pre-Yoko prime, the contrarian John tended to wax anti-politics and pro-drugs:

You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We’d all love to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow

Strikingly, Paul was the more serious-minded liberal thinker of the pair. As early as 1965, he sat down for two lengthy sessions with the ancient philosopher Bertrand Russell to learn why Russell opposed the Vietnam War, and came to agree with him. (By the way, McCartney has the shortest known living handshake link to Napoleon: Paul shook Earl Russell’s hand, who was raised by his prime minister grandfather who had interviewed Bonaparte on Elba in 1814.)

For example, Paul demoed a song during the Let It Be sessions called “Commonwealth” scoffing at Enoch Powell’s opposition to immigration from the now-almost-forgotten British Commonwealth of former imperial possessions.

But the Beatles didn’t go ahead with it. They mostly avoided releasing topical political songs, just as George’s friend Eric Clapton didn’t write his anti-immigration views into “Layla.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

The Pharma Revolution Is Being Televised

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2022

The twist in this fourth stage of the pharma revolution is that now unvaccinated persons have been cast as “the enemy,” with all that this implies, up to and including calls to restrict their movement and access to social spheres. Thus we find leaders such as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau asking unfacetiously, with no apparent irony, whether unvaccinated persons should be “tolerated.” 

by Laurie Calhoun

Marketing is essentially the art of persuading people to buy what they would not have bought, left to their own devices. This is achieved through manipulating either desires or perceptions of need. People who do not watch television are exposed to much less advertising of consumer products than are people who do. Similarly, the less time one spends surfing the internet, expressing either explicit or implicit interest in buying possible products, the fewer items there will likely be in one’s various shopping carts, not only because marketers now target people with ads catering to their preferences, but also because one will be exposed to fewer advertisements overall. Big corporations have enormous marketing budgets because advertising works: people often buy what they have been persuaded to believe that they should buy, choosing products with familiar names or whose alleged virtues have been extolled to them through one means or another.

The conspicuous consumption induced by mass market advertising campaigns may or may not be a vice, but it would be difficult to deny that people do not believe themselves to need a product which they do not know to exist. Correlatively, if they do not believe themselves to suffer from a particular disease, then they will not typically seek out a medical treatment for it. Before 1997, direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceutical products was prohibited in the United States, as it is still today throughout most of the world. The presumption against the direct promotion of drugs to patients themselves is grounded in the concern that untutored persons might be persuaded, purely on the basis of seductive advertisements, to pursue treatments of which they have no need.

Throughout history it has been regarded as the role of doctors to recommend possible courses of treatment to patients who require medical intervention. Modern pharmaceutical companies naturally vie for the attention of doctors, in the hopes that they will choose their products over those of competitors. Physicians are the primary readers of journals and magazines featuring articles relaying the results of clinical trials interwoven with advertisements summarizing the virtues of newly manufactured drugs, along with others still under patent. Since 1997, however, patients themselves have been targeted by drug ads as well, through not only television and radio broadcasts but also the internet. The marketing logic which governs new products in general governs pharmaceutical products in particular.

One must first be informed that a disease exists before attempting to ascertain whether one exhibits its symptoms and should undergo a course of palliative treatment. Healthy people do not usually spend their time fretting over diseases, and throughout most of the twentieth century, people who spent their days poring over medical encyclopedias in order to determine what possible ailments they might possibly suffer from were widely regarded as hypochondriacs, who used medical pretexts to seek out attention and treatment when in fact there was nothing physically wrong with them. Likewise, most parents do not pore over reference books to identify diseases ascribable to their ostensibly healthy children. When the FDA (under the influence of the pharmaceutical industry) lifted the ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of medical products, everything changed, as patients began to request from their doctors pills which they had learned about through commercials specifically designed by marketing departments to maximize sales.

The medical interventions which a doctor is inclined to recommend have always been determined in part by reigning scientific beliefs regarding which diseases exist and can be eliminated or alleviated. Medical conditions, however, are partitioned and diseases delineated by conventions which transform over time. What were for many years deemed “pathologies” sometimes come to be recognized as lifestyle choices or even normal biological conditions. Homosexuality used to be considered an illness by the medical profession, but today that is no longer the case.

Conversely, moving one’s legs around in the middle of the night was not recognized fifty years ago as a mental disorder. Today, however, “Restless Legs Syndrome” (RLS) has an entry in the latest edition of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). A wide range of medications are said by their manufacturers to address this “ailment,” making it entirely possible for a person to conclude on the basis of a television commercial that he or she suffers from RLS and requires psychotropic medication.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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