MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Armed Venezuelan Prison Gang In Denver Highlights Map Of US Sanctuary Zones To Avoid Amid Migrant Crisis

Posted by M. C. on September 4, 2024

Pennsylvania

Allegheny County

Berks County

Bucks County

Chester County

Delaware County

Lancaster

Lehigh County

Mifflin County

Montgomery County

Montour County

Northampton County

Philadelphia

Washington County

Tyler Durden's Photo

by Tyler Durden

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/armed-venezuelan-prison-gang-denver-highlights-us-map-no-go-sanctuary-zones-amid-migrant

Law-abiding Americans should be made well aware of the cities, counties, and states that have laws, ordinances, and policies that obstruct immigration enforcement and shield illegal alien criminals from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This is because the Biden-Harris administration has imported the third world into the first world, and with that comes elevated risks of violent crime and chaos.

Footage of the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua members raiding an apartment building with at least one AR-style rifle and pistols in the northern Denver suburb of Aurora shocked the nation last week about how quickly sanctuary cities run by far-left Democrats can spiral out of control after rolling out the red carpet to illegals. 

BREAKING: The Mayor of Aurora, Colorado just CONFIRMED that Venezuelan illegal migrant gangsters have indeed taken over several apartment complexes and have pushed out property managers to EXTORT rents from the tenants directly

He also BLAMED the Kamala-Biden regime and said… pic.twitter.com/Vj0P7ceHg4 — George (@BehizyTweets) August 29, 2024

And now spillover risks?

BREAKING: Masked gang waving AR-style rifle attacks a home in a Denver suburb. 0 arrests.

Coming to a neighborhood near you: pic.twitter.com/3Kn75Pt4Ux — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 2, 2024

Let’s not forget sanctuary city NYC…

The big picture understanding is that sanctuary cities have imported millions of illegal aliens, some of which are prison gang members and have zero respect for first-world laws. Defunding the police has also been pushed nationwide by Democrat lawmakers, and with that comes the risk that local municipalities could become quickly overwhelmed. 

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

BRICS Games: An alternative to the decline of the Olympic Games?

Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2024

Raphael Machado

Nonetheless, in many other countries, the broadcast of the Opening was interrupted during this profanation or was only shown after editing.

But observing the 2024 Games, held in June 2024 in Kazan, Russia, it becomes clear that they have taken on an entirely different scope. With 2,851 athletes from 54 national delegations competing in 27 sports, the BRICS Games are beginning to show strong potential to become one of the main (if not the main) sporting competitions on the planet.

Strategic Culture Foundation

The recently concluded Paris Olympics may go down in history as the worst modern Olympic Games since their revival by Pierre de Coubertin.

Problems began even before the events started, with the banning of Russia and Belarus due to Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine (a defensive action in light of Ukrainian plans to assault the Donbass). If the decision is already questionable concerning Russia, it is even more so regarding Belarus, which is not even a participant in the operation.

Simultaneously, with unsurpassed hypocrisy, the International Olympic Committee authorized the participation of Israel, a country engaged in implementing genocide in Gaza, with daily bombings that have already claimed tens of thousands of civilian lives.

The IOC’s stance demonstrated that the same rules do not apply to the entire international community and that some countries, apparently, have more rights than others.

The Opening Ceremony, in turn, generated truly global controversy. It would be excessive to discuss the event in detail, but while most host countries have so far strived to present the “essence” of their own culture and identity — with examples including the Rio, Beijing, Moscow, and Athens Games — very little authentically French was seen in this Opening.

Except for the decapitation of Marie Antoinette, a controversial and relatively recent event (considering France has over 2,000 years of history since the Gauls), the Ceremony was marked by a celebration of contemporary postmodern Western values: sexual and gender diversity, cosmopolitan multiculturalism, ultra-feminism, and human rights. Nothing more. As a crowning moment, there was a woke and “trans” reenactment of the Last Supper, situated on a bridge over the River Seine, under which delegations from numerous countries had to pass, as if submitting to the religious profanation imposed by woke dogmatism.

If the Opening Ceremony caused discomfort and astonishment among conservative audiences in European, North American, and Ibero-American countries, the only government that lodged a formal protest was Iran, which summoned the French ambassador in Tehran to express Iranian indignation over the religious disrespect displayed in Paris. Nonetheless, in many other countries, the broadcast of the Opening was interrupted during this profanation or was only shown after editing.

Meanwhile, on social media, users made comparisons between this Opening and those of other Olympic Games, especially Beijing’s, indicating that France fell far short of expectations.

It would already be terrible if these were the only problems. But controversies continued throughout the Games.

Triathlon athletes and some others had to swim in the River Seine during their events — but the Seine is notoriously extremely polluted. The Paris government, led by Mayor Anne Hidalgo, had promised to clean the river and claimed, a few days before the Opening, to have completed the cleanup. However, several athletes fell ill after their events. Shocking scenes showed athletes swimming next to a sewage outlet in the River Seine.

In boxing, an even bigger controversy involved two individuals, Imane Khalif from Algeria and Lin Yu-Ting from Taiwan. These two had been banned from competitions by the International Boxing Federation after failing a sex verification test. Nonetheless, they were authorized to participate in the Olympics since the only sex verification required by the IOC is the declaration in the passport. As the only test used by the IBF involves verifying sex through chromosomes, many believe that in both cases it may be pseudo-hermaphroditism, where a person has sexual characteristics of both sexes simultaneously, including organs. In such cases, which almost always involve a “woman” with internal testicles, they would have gone through male puberty. It is not surprising, therefore, that both Imane and Lin won gold medals in their respective events. The case also sparked indignation worldwide.

Worse still, but not surprising, was the treatment given to Chinese athletes not only by the IOC but also by delegations from some Western countries and certain journalists.

The Chinese swimming champion in the 100m freestyle, Pan Zhanle, was ignored by Australian Kyle Chalmers even on the podium and, according to him, also before the competition, as well as by American Jack Alexey. He was also bumped by a photographer who didn’t even apologize. The coach of bronze medalist Wang Shun was snubbed by French gold medalist Leon Marchand. A photographer intentionally broke the racket of table tennis player Wang Chuqin. American tennis player Emma Navarro also insulted Chinese tennis player Zheng Qinwen, saying she did not respect her.

There are several other cases, but these are compounded by broader attacks from the media and social networks.

Media attacks generally rely on claims that Chinese victories in various sports are due to doping. Australian coach Brett Hawke commented that “it was not humanly possible” for Pan Zhanle to win the 100m freestyle event with such an advantage.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Mark Zuckerberg Admits FBI Lies Caused Facebook to Suppress 2020 Hunter Biden Reporting

Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2024

And Covid info too. What do you expect when they are financed by the security state?

Crocodile tears.

Glenn Greenwald

Be seeing you

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

Why Kamala Harris Will Not Bring Prices Down… Her Plan Needs Inflation

Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2024

Inflation is the way in which the government tricks citizens into believing that administrations can provide for anything. It disguises the accumulated debt, quietly transfers wealth from the private sector to the government and condemns citizens to being dependent hostages of government subsidies.

Tyler Durden's Photo

by Tyler Durden

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/why-kamala-harris-will-not-bring-prices-down-her-plan-needs-inflation

In a recent interview with CNN, Kamala Harris said that Bidenomics is working and that she is “proud of bringing inflation down.”

However, the Bureau of Labor Statistics published the latest CPI at 2.9%, despite annual inflation being 1.4% when she took office. Inflation is a disguised tax and accumulated inflation since January 2021, when the Biden-Harris administration started, has increased more than 20%.

Of course, Democrats blame inflation on the war, the pandemic, and the science-fantasy concept of “supply chain disruptions.” No one believed it, because most commodities have declined and supply tensions disappeared back to normality, but prices continued to rise.

As a result, Harris invented the concept of greedy grocery stores and evil corporations to blame for inflation and justify price controls. Is it not ironic? She blames grocery stores and corporations for inflation, but when price inflation drops, she proudly takes credit.

The reality is that the Kamala Harris plan, like all interventionist governments, creates and strives for inflation. Inflation is a hidden tax. Governments love it and perpetuate it by printing money through deficit spending and imposing regulations that harm trade, competition, and technological creative destruction. Big government is big inflation.

Inflation is the way in which the government tricks citizens into believing that administrations can provide for anything. It disguises the accumulated debt, quietly transfers wealth from the private sector to the government and condemns citizens to being dependent hostages of government subsidies. It is the only way in which they can continue to spend a constantly depreciated currency and present themselves as the solution. Furthermore, it is the perfect excuse to blame businesses and anyone else who sells in the currency that the government creates.

Kamala Harris will do nothing to cut inflation because she wants inflation to disguise the monster deficit and debt accumulation. In the latest figures, the deficit has soared to $1.5 trillion in the first ten months of the fiscal year. Public debt has soared to $35 trillion, and in the administration’s own forecasts, they will add a $16.3 trillion deficit from 2025 to 2034. It is worse. The previously mentioned figure does not include the $2 trillion in additional debt coming from Kamala’s economic plan.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Do We Finally Have a Peace Ticket?

Posted by M. C. on August 29, 2024

Having JD Vance as VP is not a good sign.

The Ron Paul Liberty Report

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Condoleezza Rice Won’t Learn

Posted by M. C. on August 29, 2024

If a better future is truly our goal, we must learn the lessons of failed interventionism. We must learn from the endless wars where lives have been discarded like losing lottery tickets. We must realize that if we attempt to export freedom to the world at the point of a gun, not only will we fall short of this goal, we will inevitably stain our souls with innocent blood.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/condoleezza-rice-wont-learn/

by James Wile

assignment 59 cf ds 32356 06 secretary condoleezza rice visiting the heritage f57a29 1024

Condoleezza Rice recently wrote an article entitled “The Perils of Isolationism” in Foreign Affairs giving her thoughts on the United States’ place in the modern world. As the title implies, the article’s main theme is her fear that the United States will abandon its role as the global hegemon and turn inward. She claims a return to isolationism will result in Russia, China, and other tyrannical governments overrunning the world and oppressing its inhabitants.

Theoretically, this article should present a convincing argument. Rice served as national security advisor and secretary of state under George W. Bush, so she should be a foreign policy expert. Unfortunately, the biggest takeaway from the article is that Rice learned nothing from the failures of the Bush administration. She presents her case for more interventionism without meaningfully addressing the undeniable devastation caused by U.S. interventionist policies. The result is an article that reads like a fairy tale meant to comfort readers who wish to remain blissfully removed from reality.

Few passages demonstrate this lack of self-awareness more than Rice’s appraisal of U.S. involvement in the Middle East. When describing the benefits of the post-World War II global order, Rice displays what can only be described as denialism by writing, “As the United Kingdom and France stepped back from the Middle East after the 1956 Suez crisis, the United States became the guarantor of freedom of navigation in the region and, in time, its major stabilizing force.”

It is disturbing that any member of the Bush administration could describe the U.S. as a “major stabilizing force” in the Middle East. Decades of the American “stabilizing” the Middle East led to 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our nation’s history. The Bush administration’s answer to this attack was not to focus on bringing the attackers to justice but rather to topple the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq. The United States paid a hellish price in money and lives in a vain attempt to spread democracy, but the result was a less stable Middle East. The Barack Obama administration expanded the destabilization by bombing and blockading even more countries despite his campaign promise to end forever wars.

Rice seems to hope her readers are willing to forget or ignore these foreign policy disasters. I can think of no other reason she would expect anyone to believe the U.S. has been a “stabilizing force” in the Middle East. The U.S. has stabilized the Middle East about as well as ten shots of Tequila would stabilize the decision-making skills of a college freshman.

“The Perils of Isolationism” presents equally egregious views on the war in Ukraine. Rice makes it clear that deterring further Russian aggression is paramount, but she continues to show her complete lack of self-reflection by writing, “The question of postwar security arrangements for Ukraine hangs over the continent at this moment. The most straightforward answer would be to admit Ukraine to NATO and simultaneously to the European Union.”

This reasoning could seem plausible if we lived in a different timeline where the “Nyet Means Nyet” memo of 2008 was never leaked. CIA Director Williams Burns wrote this memo when he was the ambassador to Russia and sent it to Rice when she was secretary of state. In this memo, Burns says in no uncertain terms that further NATO expansion, especially to Ukraine, runs the risk of inciting a military reaction from Russia. After watching the events leading up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine unfold just as Burns had predicted they would, it is preposterous to think admitting Ukraine into NATO could be a path to security. But Rice, choosing denial over self-reflection, clings to the idea of NATO expansion.

It is a poetic irony that earlier in Rice’s article she laments that Vladimir Putin is able to rely on a “poorly informed population” when she obviously aims to benefit from her readers’ inability or unwillingness to question the regime-approved narratives.

When Rice looks at the global stage as a whole, she sees us standing on the brink of a Third World War. According to Rice, it would be a costly error for the United States to “turn inward” at this dire hour. But as I read her account of the international scene, I see the rising tension as an inevitable consequence of American meddling in the affairs of other nations.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Why the Free Market Is Hard to Defend

Posted by M. C. on August 29, 2024

The free market exists because of something no one likes to be reminded of: scarcity.

As Hayek showed, government control over the means to human flourishing leads inevitably to government control over the ends of human flourishing.

Nathan W. Schlueter

Under steady pressure from post-liberal and populist voices, Republican party leadership seems to have taken a surprising turn against the free market and towards interventionist policies—protectionism, industrial policy, regulations, welfare, and labor unions—more traditionally associated with the Left than the Right.

The truth is that the free market is not easy to defend. That is not to say it is indefensible. To the contrary, there are many strong arguments in favor of it, including the scope it gives to human freedom and creativity; the innovation and wealth it generates; and the incompetence, injustice, and dangers of undue government interference and control.

But most people find it difficult to understand and appreciate these arguments when faced with the immediate advantages of government intervention. The problem is not logical, it is psychological. Instead of an explicit rejection of the free market, we have witnessed the steady growth of well-intentioned anti-market attitudes and policies, which cause real but hidden harm while nudging us along what F. A. Hayek famously called The Road to Serfdom.

We can see why the defense of the free market is so difficult and yet so important by juxtaposing it with other domains of human action. The common good of a healthy political association is not simple. It includes at least three spheres that exist in a dynamic and uneasy tension with one another: civil society, the free market, and government.

This seemingly clear division can be very misleading, since all of these spheres, and their corresponding activities and habits, overlap and intersect in ways that are difficult to distinguish. Each sphere has its own distinctive purpose, activity, and “logic” or mode of practical reasoning. And one consequence of this complex reality is that human beings must learn, and learn to apply, different standards of evaluation and behavior to different domains in their lives.

Put most simply, civil society is the sphere where persons pursue the “intrinsic” goods—goods we have reason to want for their own sake—that constitute happiness and flourishing. Civil society is the space of genuine leisure; not merely entertainment, but worship, marriage, family, friendship, and culture. It operates by a “logic” of generosity, commitment, caregiving, and charity.

The free market is the sphere of “instrumental goods”—goods such as money that we only have reason to pursue for the sake of other goods—where persons acquire the means for their flourishing by exchanging their time, labor, resources, and other instrumental goods. It operates by a “logic” of negotiation, calculation, and thrift.

Finally, government is the sphere that provides the overall framework within which the other two spheres can operate well. Government also helps prevent encroachments by the other spheres and provides goods that are difficult or impossible for the other spheres to provide. Government operates by a “logic” of common deliberation and collective action on behalf of the common good, backed by coercive power. 

Each of these spheres provides something distinctive that cannot be provided by the others. Left alone and in isolation from the others, each is prone to expand beyond its due limits, harming people and the common good. The challenge is to make all three work together and correct one another in the way that best promotes human flourishing. The constant ideological temptation is to reduce them to one. Totalitarian ideologies such as communism and fascism attempt to absorb civil society and the market into government. Libertarianism tends to reduce government and civil society to the logic of the market. More subtly, theocracy seeks to subordinate both government and the market to a unified vision of civil society determined by religious authority and doctrine. 

Of these three spheres, the free market is the most difficult to defend. And that difficulty is not simply the result of market excesses or externalities, like manipulative advertising, a surplus of cheap, ugly products, or pollution. The difficulty is intrinsic to even a healthy market. The reasons have to do with scarcity, utility, impersonality, self-interest, and complexity. These words typically cause a negative emotional reaction. Yet each word expresses a reality we rely upon every day, and which we must humbly acknowledge and accept in order to flourish.

First, the free market exists because of something no one likes to be reminded of: Scarcity. Human beings are very needy. Nature does not spontaneously provide food, clothing, and shelter, much less the time or instruments of leisure like books and musical instruments.

Second, the primary advantage of the free market is its usefulness in helping overcome scarcity. We all like and need useful things, but as Aristotle repeatedly observes in his Nicomachean Ethics, the useful is not beautiful. Beauty consists in a gratuitous overflow of being that attracts our wonder and admiration, whereas the useful is merely necessary.

True, the market unleashes astonishing creativity and energy. Ayn Rand is a mediocre novelist, but her romantic entrepreneurs remind us of the kinds of human greatness that can find a place in the free market, and of the gratitude we should have for their efforts. Still, in the end, for most people, the market is about “getting and spending,” in which all too often “we lay waste our powers.” 

Third, the logic of the free market is impersonal. If the first two elements did not elicit immediate negative reactions, this one is sure to do so.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

It’s Obvious That Democracy Itself Does Not Equal Freedom

Posted by M. C. on August 29, 2024

Power doesn’t lie where you think it does.

The Ron Paul Liberty Report

Be seeing you

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

Third-party candidates file to run for Pa. governor, Senate

Posted by M. C. on August 29, 2024

Keystone, Libertarian and Green candidates join Pennsylvania races for U.S. Senate and governor

As a result, Democrats in Pennsylvania have a history of going to court to challenge the paperwork of Green Party candidates to get them off the ballot.

Meanwhile, Republicans in Pennsylvania have a history of going to court to challenge the paperwork of Libertarian Party candidates for the same reason.

This post is old. John C. Thomas is the Libertarian candidate from PA for US Senate.

John C. ThomasU.S. Senatehttps://www.votejohnthomas.com/
Nickolas CiesielskiTreasurerhttps://nickcforpa.com/PAView
Reece SmithAuditor Generalhttps://www.votereece.com/PAView
Robert CowburnAttorney Generalhttps://cowburnforag.com/PAView

https://www.wtae.com/article/pennsylvania-governor-senate-libertarian-keystone-party-candidates/40760360

MARC LEVY Associated Press

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) —

Pennsylvania third-party candidates for governor and U.S. Senate have filed paperwork ahead of a Monday deadline to get on the Nov. 8 general election ballot, potentially making a crucial difference in the high-stakes races.

Keystone Party candidates for governor and U.S. Senate have filed voter signatures, while a Libertarian Party candidate has filed for U.S. Senate, according to the state’s online candidate list.

A spokesperson for the Green Party said the organization filed paperwork Monday for its candidates for governor and U.S. Senate.

Pennsylvania’s threshold for third-party candidates to qualify for the ballot is 5,000 signatures of registered voters.

A Fox News poll conducted in late July showed Democrats polling higher than Republicans in the two races.

For governor, Democrat Josh Shapiro was outpolling Republican Doug Mastriano, 50% to 40%. For U.S. Senate, Democrat John Fetterman was outpolling the Republican nominee, Dr. Mehmet Oz, 47% to 36%.

The Senate race in Pennsylvania could help determine political control of the closely divided Senate as the parties vie for the seat being vacated by the retiring Republican Sen. Pat Toomey. The race for governor has major implications for the future of abortion rights in Pennsylvania and how the election is administered in 2024 in the presidential battleground state.

A third-party candidate’s draw in a general election, while usually very small, could help tilt a close race between the major party candidates.

As a result, Democrats in Pennsylvania have a history of going to court to challenge the paperwork of Green Party candidates to get them off the ballot.

Meanwhile, Republicans in Pennsylvania have a history of going to court to challenge the paperwork of Libertarian Party candidates for the same reason.

Christopher Borick, an assistant professor of political science at Muhlenberg College in Allentown, said there are prominent examples – such as in the 2016 and 2000 presidential elections – of third-party candidates possibly helping to tilt elections.

“That’s the most certain element of third-party impact,” Borick said…

Be seeing you

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

Telegram CEO Arrested: The Fight Is Against Privacy

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2024

And it’s a fight for our future.

NBTV Media

This week, the arrest of Telegram’s CEO, Pavel Durov, by the French government sent shockwaves through the global community. The charges against him represent a direct and unprecedented threat to the right to privacy worldwide. In this week’s newsletter, I want to look specifically at the final three charges: They epitomize this alarming assault on privacy:

Providing cryptology services aiming to ensure confidentiality without a certified declaration,

Providing a cryptology tool not solely ensuring authentication or integrity monitoring without prior declaration,

Importing a cryptology tool ensuring authentication or integrity monitoring without prior declaration.

Yes, you read that correctly, three of the charges against Pavel Durov are for “unlicensed” cryptography.

It amounts to the criminalization of privacy.

Cryptography — like a digital lock and key — allows us to have privacy in the digital world. Apparently, in France, you need a license to be allowed enjoy privacy or build privacy tools. This is terrifying and egregious overreach.

As Phil Zimmermann once explained, he first created PGP (the world’s most widely used email encryption tool) in the 90s because it’s precisely the government that we need encryption to protect ourselves against:

“The need for protecting our right to a private conversation has never been stronger. Democracies everywhere are sliding into populist autocracies. Ordinary citizens and grassroots political opposition groups need to protect themselves against these emerging autocracies as best as they can. If an autocracy inherits or builds a pervasive surveillance infrastructure, it becomes nearly impossible for political opposition to organize, as we can see in China. Secure communication is necessary for grassroots political opposition in those societies.”

— Phil Zimmermann

It’s not about whether you do or don’t like your current government; it’s about safeguarding your right to push back if you ever disagree. Private communication is what allows us to dissent, protest, and fight for change without fear of reprisal. When encryption requires government approval, it defeats its purpose of shielding individuals from surveillance and control. This gives the government the power to determine who can have privacy, undermining freedom. Criminalizing privacy tools disempowers individuals and centralizes control, paving the way for tyranny. Without privacy, all other freedoms are at risk.

NBTV is funded by the community, not sponsors. To keep up-to-date with our latest privacy tips and support our advocacy for digital rights, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

With this declaration of war against privacy from the French government, the need for robust end-to-end encryption in our communication is more important than ever. However, despite Pavel being charged for using cryptography in Telegram, and despite Telegram marketing itself as private and encrypted, it’s one of the last apps I’d recommend if you’re looking for private communication.

I have a video diving deep into why you shouldn’t use Telegram for private communication, and I encourage you all to watch, but here are two big points from the video to understand:

  • Telegram doesn’t support end-to-end encryption for group chats.
  • Telegram, by default, doesn’t include end-to-end encryption for one-on-one DMs.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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