MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

ACLU Declares Second Amendment ‘Racist,’ Launches ‘War on Bill of Rights’ | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

In fact, racist gun control goes back further than the constitution. Perhaps the first known attempt at disarming citizens in the new world occurred in 1751 when the French Black code was enacted requiring colonists to “stop any blacks, and if necessary, beat any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a cane.”

This attempt to disarm blacks was repeated under United States’ rule 50 years later when the U.S. purchased the Louisiana territory. According to a paper published in the Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy:

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/aclu-declares-second-amendment-racist-launches-war-on-bill-of-rights/

by Matt Agorist

For years, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, has chosen to stand against those who would attack our Constitutional rights. Even the Free Thought Project has been supported by the organization when a California sheriff attempted to force us to delete an article that was damning to his organization. Over the past several years, however, there has been a sort of rift happening inside the organization, with your right to self-defense right in the center of it.

While they have been vehemently fighting for the right of transgender athletes to compete in sports, the ACLU has largely chosen to remain silent on the Second Amendment. Though they have supported most every amendment in the bill of rights, their position on gun rights has remained ambiguous and nuanced—perhaps deliberately. But that all changed this week when they ran an article with an embedded podcast that claimed the Second Amendment is rooted in racism.

As Gleen Greenwald points out:

The ACLU is now waging war on the Bill of Rights.

ACLU’s position on the Second Amendment has always been nuanced: it’s an important constitutional protection, but one that’s collective, not individual.

Now they’re full on proclaiming parts of the Bill of Rights to be racist.

The ACLU is now waging war on the Bill of Rights.

ACLU’s position on the Second Amendment has always been nuanced: it’s an important constitutional protection, but one that’s collective, not individual.

Now they’re full on proclaiming parts of the Bill of Rights to be racist. https://t.co/1lhED1FImu

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 26, 2021

Without a single fact to back up their claims, an article on the ACLU’s website claimed “Anti-Blackness determined the inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights, and has informed the unequal and racist application of gun laws.”

As those who have read history understand, this is not true at all. In fact, it is the exact opposite. Gun control—not gun rights—was pushed with the impetus of anti-Blackness behind it.

Nowhere in the Second Amendment does it say anything about the color of one’s skin determining their ability to own a weapon. However, slave-owning and racist lawmakers throughout history have attempted to disarm black citizens which is the exact opposite of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

When the first U. S. official arrived in New Orleans in 1803 to take charge of this new American possession, the planters sought to have the existing free black militia disarmed, and otherwise exclude “free blacks from positions in which they were required to bear arms,” including such non-military functions as slave-catching crews.

The Ku Klux Klan often times attempted to enact similar “Black Codes” that barred the newly freed slaves from exercising their basic civil rights. One such example of these new laws was an act passed in the state of Mississippi that stated:

no freedman, free negro or mulatto, not in the military service of the United States government, and not licensed so to do by the board of police of his or her county, shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk or bowie knife, and on conviction thereof in the county court shall be punished by fine

This law clearly flies in the face of the Second Amendment, yet the ACLU takes their stance anyway.

After the passage of these laws, numerous studies concluded that the newly freed slaves had essentially been rendered defenseless against groups like the Ku Klux Klan. Disarming them, essentially made them slave once again — after their Second Amendment rights were removed.

Contrary to the ACLU’s inaccurate assertion, it wasn’t the Second Amendment that sought to disarm black people, it was attacks on it—which were similar in kind to what the ACLU is doing right now.

When Republican congressmen passed the Freedman’s Bureau Bill attempting to secure the right to bear arms for Blacks in the south, the Supreme Court overturned it in what was known as The Cruikshank decision. This decision emboldened groups like the Klan, who in turn began gaining control over local governments to pass racist new laws. As Reason magazine noted:

In deference to the Fourteenth Amendment, some states did cloak their laws in neutral, non-racial terms. For example, the Tennessee legislature barred the sale of any handguns except the “Army and Navy model.” The ex-Confederate soldiers already had their high quality “Army and Navy” guns. But cash-poor freedmen could barely afford lower-cost, simpler firearms not of the “Army and Navy” quality. Arkansas enacted a nearly identical law in 1881, and other Southern states followed suit, including Alabama (1893), Texas (1907), and Virginia (1925).

As Jim Crow intensified, other Southern states enacted gun registration and handgun permit laws. Registration came to Mississippi (1906), Georgia (1913), and North Carolina (1917). Handgun permits were passed in North Carolina (1917), Missouri (1919), and Arkansas (1923).

Pro-Black groups have been advocating against these attacks and racist interpretations of the Second Amendment for decades.

In 1966, California law did not attack the Second Amendment like it does today and it actually allowed citizens to open carry firearms. The Black Panthers exercised this freedom by organizing armed patrols to follow police and ensure they performed their duties professionally. The following year, thirty panthers staged an armed protest in front of the California state house declaring, “The time has come for black people to arm themselves.”

The protest frightened former California Governor Ronald Reagan who, in response, worked with the NRA to support the 1967 Mulford Act. The act lead to California having arguably the strongest gun laws in the nation. As Adam Winkler, the author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms , later noted:

“The law was part of a wave of laws that were passed in the late 1960s regulating guns, especially to target African-Americans.”

Again, it was not the gun rights that were racist, as the ACLU would lead you to believe, it was gun control.

Fortunately, the National African American Gun Association, NAAGA, does not hold the same opinion as the ACLU. This group, which was officially started and launched on February 28, 2015, in honor of Black History Month with a single chapter in Atlanta, has grown to more than 75 chapters nationwide with more than 30,000 members.

Thankfully, according to NAAGA, most Black folks don’t agree with the ACLU’s stance on the right to self-defense.

According to NAAGA, the perception and reality of African Americans owning guns is changing. In 2012, the Pew Research Center conducted a national survey and found that only 29% of African-American households viewed guns as positive. In 2015, that same survey showed a dramatic jump to 59% where now a majority of African-American families see guns as not only a positive thing but, in many cases, a necessity. In today’s society, every member of our community, if they want, can legally purchase a gun. African Americans in record numbers are now joining gun clubs, going to the gun range, participating in outdoor hunting, and even participating in competitive shooting events. Single Black women are now one of the fastest growing demographic groups in the African-American community who are purchasing guns for protection. The future is bright for active firearm ownership within our community now and for years to come.

If you would like to know how all gun control is racist, listen to our podcast with Maj Toure, who educates people in urban communities on their Second Amendment rights and responsibilities through firearms training, when he says, “Black Guns Matter.”

This article was originally featured at The Free Thought Project

Be seeing you

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

The Most Shameful Conservative Attack on Drug Legalization – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

One, drugs have not been legalized, so it is impossible to say that drug legalization is a disaster.

But drugs are illegal, so how could legalizing them be responsible for conditions that already exists?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/laurence-m-vance/the-most-shameful-conservative-attack-on-drug-legalization/

By Laurence M. Vance

Christopher Bedford is against drug legalization. He is really against drug legalization. He is so against drug legalization that he penned the most shameful conservative attack on drug legalization that I have ever read—and I have read a lot of conservative attacks on drug legalization during the time that I have written over 100 articles on the drug war.

Beford is the author of the article “Drug Legalization Is a Disaster, and Your Leaders Don’t Care About You,” published by The Federalist.

I had actually never heard of Bedford until I came across his article. According to his bio:

Christopher Bedford is a senior editor at The Federalist, the vice chairman of Young Americans for Freedom, a board member at the National Journalism Center, and the author of The Art of the Donald. His work has been featured in The American Mind, National Review, the New York Post and the Daily Caller, where he led the Daily Caller News Foundation and spent eight years. A frequent guest on Fox News and Fox Business, he was raised in Massachusetts and lives on Capitol Hill.

Let’s begin at the beginning with the title: “Drug Legalization Is a Disaster, and Your Leaders Don’t Care About You.” Just the title is enough to dismiss this article as the ravings of an incorrigible drug warrior.

One, drugs have not been legalized, so it is impossible to say that drug legalization is a disaster. It is true that 36 states have legalized the medical use of marijuana, 27 states have decriminalized the possession of marijuana, and 18 states have legalized the recreational marijuana. But marijuana is still illegal on the federal level, the possession of marijuana that is not a criminal offense is a small amount, the legalization of marijuana for medical or recreational use is full of regulations and restrictions, and it is only marijuana that has been “legalized”—not cocaine, not heroin, not fentanyl, not meth, not LSD, not ecstasy.

And two, who doesn’t know that our “leaders” don’t care about us? They care about themselves, their power, and their next election. We have never meant anything to them but a dollar, a vote, and a serf to be told how to live our lives. Who would waste his time writing an article about how our “leaders” don’t care about us? And who would waste his time reading it?

Now we can move on to the first paragraph:

America has been fighting a war on drugs for decades now, and for almost as long we’ve been told by the left and many libertarians on the right that the best way to end the war is to surrender. Legalizing drugs, they say, would solve a bunch of our country’s problems, including high rates of imprisonment, fatherlessness, crime, cartel activity, excess overdose deaths, budget deficits. The list goes on.

First of all, America has not been fighting anything. The federal government is the entity that declared war on drugs, not America or the American people—two things that should never be confused with the federal government.

Second, very few on the left want to end the war on drugs. Many of them want to legalize and tax and regulate marijuana, but not all drugs or even any other drug. When the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate during the first two years of Obama’s presidency, they could have easily legalized some or all drugs on the federal level, yet they didn’t even attempt to legalize marijuana. Neither President Biden nor any other Democrat who ran for president called for the legalization of drugs. Drug freedom is not a tenet of liberalism.

Third, there are no libertarians on the right. Libertarianism is neither left nor right, as Walter Block has famously said. There are Republicans, conservatives, and constitutionalists who are libertarian-leaning, but most of them would eschew the label libertarian and reject some of libertarianism’s precepts.

Fourth, the way to end the war on drugs is to end it. This is a one-sided war. There is no one or no thing to surrender to. There are no drugs storming America’s beaches, dropping from the skies, invading from Canada, jumping out of trees, coming up out of the ground, or trying to break down our doors. The federal government should just acknowledge that the war on drugs has been a disaster for individual liberty and property rights, has failed to stop the availability and use of drugs, has misdirected and corrupted law enforcement, and is a monstrous evil that has ruined more lives than drugs themselves and simply end it.

Fifth, legalizing drugs would help solve a bunch of our country’s problems because it is the drug war that is responsible for a part of the problems. High rates of imprisonment? Partly because of the war on drugs. Fatherlessness? Partly because of the war on drugs. Crime? Partly because of the war on drugs. Cartel activity? Partly because of the war on drugs. Excess overdose deaths? Partly because of the war on drugs. Budget deficits. Legalizing and taxing drugs, even at astronomical levels, would not end budget deficits. These are caused by profligate members of Congress and state legislators who squander the taxpayers’ money. Libertarians don’t believe that the government should legalize drugs so that the drugs can be taxed to alleviate budget deficits. Libertarians don’t believe that drugs should be taxed at all. And yes, the list does go on. Ending the drug war would unclog the judicial system, cut down on violence, reduce unlawful searches and seizures, restore financial privacy, stop hindering legitimate pain treatment, and protect civil liberties.

The rest of the article goes on to blame drugs for “ripping apart your city, your town, your neighborhood” or “your friends, your siblings, your children”; homelessness; encampments “completely overrun by filthy, barely clothed muttering madmen”; walkers on trails reeking of human waste “menaced by junkies on couches blocking the trail and underneath the bridges”; carjackings; the public harassment of women; unemployment; estrangement from families; robberies; and filth-covered lawns.

But drugs are illegal, so how could legalizing them be responsible for conditions that already exists?

Bedford may have written some other things that are worth reading, but when it comes to the subject of drugs he has lost his mind. He has not only written the most shameful conservative attack on drug legalization, but the most stupid one as well. He is an embarrassment to real conservatives.

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society.

Be seeing you

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

CDC to Withdraw Emergency Use Authorization for RT PCR Test Because It Cannot Distinguish Between SARS-CoV-2 and the Flu

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/cdc-to-withdraw-emergency-use-authorization-for-rt-pcr-test-because-it-cannot-distinguish-between-sars-cov-2-and-the-flu/

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The CDC quietly announced last week that it was withdrawing its request to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Most of the public is probably unaware that similar to the current COVID-19 injections that are not yet approved by the FDA, but only given Emergency Use Authorization, so too the hundreds of diagnostic tests that supposedly detect COVID-19 are also NOT approved by the FDA, but only authorized via an EUA.

What is the reason the CDC is withdrawing its EUA request for the Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel?

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.

CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. (Source.)

Caitlin McFall, writing for Fox News, is the only one in the corporate media I could find that even reported this, and the few reports I found in the Alternative media so far have been mostly inaccurate.

McFall reports:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) urged labs this week to stock clinics with kits that can test for both the coronavirus and the flu as the “influenza season” draws near.

The CDC said Wednesday it will withdrawal its request for the “Emergency Use Authorization” of real-time diagnostic testing kits, which were used starting in February 2020 to detect signs of the coronavirus, by the end of the year.

“CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives,” the agency said.

The U.S. has reported more than 34.4 million cases of the coronavirus since the pandemic began in 2020 and more than 610,000 deaths.

But while cases of COVID-19 soared nationwide, hospitalizations and deaths caused by influenza dropped.

According to data released by the CDC earlier this month, influenza mortality rates were significantly lower throughout 2020 than previous years.

There were 646 deaths relating to the flu among adults reported in 2020, whereas in 2019 the CDC estimated that between 24,000 and 62,000 people died from influenza-related illnesses.

The CDC urged laboratories to “save both time and resources” by introducing kits that can determine and distinguish a positive test for the coronavirus and flu. (Source.)

So there you have it. The CDC just basically admitted that many of the COVID-19 cases this past year could not be distinguished from “flu cases.” No wonder flu cases decreased to zero in so many places. See:

Health Officials Admit that Only Those Vaccinated for the Flu are Getting the Flu This Year

The ending of the EUA for the Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel will not happen until the end of the year, December 31, 2021, and the CDC recommends that laboratories start transitioning to other types of COVID-19 diagnostic tests that have been given an EUA by the FDA here.

At the time of publication of this article, the FDA has issued 251 EUAs for COVID-19 diagnostic tests since April 1, 2020. The vast majority of them are for the RT-PCR tests, including about 20 that were just issued EUAs since the beginning of this month, July, 2021.

The cash cow for these tests and the hundreds of companies that got rich selling them will now have to move on to the next phase to be able to cash in.

Diagnostic Testing Fraud: Controlling the Masses and Medical Kidnapping

We have been covering the corruption in the medical diagnostic testing field for the better part of a decade now, and we exposed it early on in the COVID-19 Plandemic last year as well.

Here are some of our previous articles from last year exposing the fraud of COVID-19 diagnostic testing.

Not a Single COVID-19 Test is FDA Approved – Do We Really Know Who has COVID-19 and Who Does Not?

Roche CEO: COVID19 Tests “Not Worth Anything – Two of us could do it Overnight in the Garage”

FAIL: The Exact Same COVID Test will Produce Different Results Depending on the Laboratory

When we started MedicalKidnap.com back in 2014, we learned that fraudulent diagnostic testing was a common way for doctors and hospitals to order children be removed from their homes.

Often they create false drug test positive results to remove children from their parents.

Alabama Lab Owner Arrested for Falsifying Results of Drug Tests Used to Medically Kidnap Children

The worst offender, by far, in medically kidnapping children by use of a medical diagnostic test, is within the field of radiology and finding “proof” of child abuse simply by looking at x-rays.

This whole field has developed a recent new class of pediatricians “certified” as “Child Abuse Pediatricians,” and the lucrative jobs of these doctors depend on them finding abused children and putting them into the lucrative child trafficking network known as “foster care.”

We have actually published an eBook on this topic, or you can look up individual cases on our MedicaKidnap.com website to learn how this evil system works.

When it comes to diagnosing “influenza,” we have exposed the fraud there as well, as pre-COVID-19 the CDC simply used estimates of cases of the flu, since they cannot verify actual numbers each year by diagnostic testing.

Annual Flu Deaths Scam Unwittingly Exposed and Replaced by the COVID Deaths Scam

So COVID-19 allowed them to just further exploit the fraud of diagnostic testing to create fear and panic, and achieve their goals of enslaving the public and rolling out their experimental mRNA injections.

With this latest announcement by the CDC that they are now going to retire the RT-PCR Diagnostic tests and replace them with other tests that can now test both COVID and influenza, it is pretty easy to see what their game plan is for later this year.

Just about everyone in the U.S. will be able to be tested “positive” for something by this Fall when the flu season starts.

This will be the “Hegelian principle” implementation for 2021. The government creates the problem, and then they create the solution, which we know now is more “vaccines” for everything in life that ails us, and try to punish those who don’t want to play their game.

I’m ready. Are you?

Be seeing you

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

Homeschooling Is Surging, and Especially in Homes the Left May Find Troubling – RedState

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

These professors are concerned that parents will make teaching children what the left wants them to learn impossible, and Elizabeth Bartholet, a Harvard Law School professor and director of its Child Advocacy Program, warned that kids are in danger of teaching their children “conservative Christian beliefs” specifically.

https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2021/07/27/homeschooling-is-surging-and-especially-in-homes-the-left-may-find-troubling-n417015

By Brandon Morse

The COVID-19 pandemic brought with it a myriad of consequences to our society, but not every effect was negative. One such result was a dramatic increase in homeschooling, and especially in households that the left may not like.

According to the Associated Press, parents took their children’s education into their own hands and found that their children seemed to be performing much better under their own tutelage than under the public school system’s. The surge itself was confirmed by the U.S. Census Bureau that reported homeschooling more than doubled between March and September of 2020, going from 5.4 percent to 11 percent.

The biggest jump of all? The AP reported that black households skyrocketed from the single digits to the double. What’s more, some are motivated by religious reasoning:

Black households saw the largest jump; their homeschooling rate rose from 3.3% in the spring of 2020 to 16.1% in the fall.

The parents in one of those households, Arlena and Robert Brown of Austin, Texas, had three children in elementary school when the pandemic took hold. After experimenting with virtual learning, the couple opted to try homeschooling with a Catholic-oriented curriculum provided by Seton Home Study School, which serves about 16,000 students nationwide.

The Browns plan to continue homeschooling for the coming year, grateful that they can tailor the curriculum to fit their children’s distinctive needs. Jacoby, 11, has been diagnosed with narcolepsy and sometimes needs naps during the day; Riley, 10, has tested as academically gifted; Felicity, 9, has a learning disability.

“I didn’t want my kids to become a statistic and not meet their full potential,” said Robert Brown, a former teacher who now does consulting. “And we wanted them to have very solid understanding of their faith.”

Another parent in a black household, Angela Valentine, felt the need to keep homeschooling her child due to her son, Dorian, being the only black child at a school. The isolation he was experiencing was getting to him and so she now teaches him about black history and culture while homeschooling.

“I felt the burden of making the shift, making sure we’re making the right choices,” Valentine said. “But until we’re really comfortable with his learning environment, we’ll stay on this homeschool journey.”

Homeschooling also allows parents to conform the learning to their children’s needs instead of the children having to conform to the one-size-fits-all style of learning public schooling forces on children. AP reports one parent has a child with Down syndrome and noticed that her progress at home was better than her progress in virtual learning. They ended up doing the same for her son Noah, and the classes went so well that they decided to continue for the next few years.

“He told me he was learning so much more at home than he ever did in school,” Osgood told the AP. “He said, ‘School is just so chaotic — we don’t get very much done in any particular class. Here, I sit down, you tell me what to do, and minutes later I’m done.’”

Other families have weighed in, noting that their children excelled better at home, and learned far more than they did at public school.

While this is all well and good, parents should likely not get comfortable. Many are just getting into the homeschooling life but they should be aware that there is a war on homeschooling going on. Many on the left would rather see homeschooling made illegal, and Harvard professors are already making the case for this as mainstream media sources applaud and echo them.

(READ: Homeschooling Is One of the Left’s Worst Nightmares So Expect a Long Fight)

These professors are concerned that parents will make teaching children what the left wants them to learn impossible, and Elizabeth Bartholet, a Harvard Law School professor and director of its Child Advocacy Program, warned that kids are in danger of teaching their children “conservative Christian beliefs” specifically.

Right now, American parents are at war with many educational bureaucracies attempting to push left-leaning ideological extremism on their children through Critical Race Theory. As RedState has previously covered, the people leading the CRT charge have direct connections to top members of the Department of Education, and the movement is on to create radical leftist ideologues out of your children.

Brandon Morse

Senior Editor. Culture critic, and video creator. Good at bad photoshops.

Be seeing you

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

Harvard downplays role in no-whites-allowed music seminar sponsored by Nike | The College Fix

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

https://www.thecollegefix.com/harvard-downplays-role-in-no-whites-allowed-music-seminar-sponsored-by-nike/

Decision comes after federal civil rights complaint

Harvard University has downplayed its role in a music academy for racial minorities after a University of Michigan-Flint professor filed a federal civil rights complaint.

“This program discriminates on the basis of skin color by operating exclusively for BIPOC individuals only and illegally excluding and discriminating against non-BIPOC individuals on the basis of skin color,” Professor Mark Perry wrote in his complaint against the “No Label Academy at Harvard.”

Etc

Be seeing you

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

bionic mosquito: When Private Property Isn’t

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

Yet, even at this extreme, try not paying property tax on the property, or income tax on the privately earned income, etc.  The property isn’t purely private in the sense of the owner have complete control over use and disposition.

At the other extreme…libertarians and Austrian economists will use the phrase “crony capitalism.” Instead, it has been “earned” via government connection.

http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2021/07/when-private-property-isnt.html

Posted by bionic mosquito

My comment, at the Mises site:

[From the author of the piece]: “This does not mean that someone cannot be prevented from accessing certain venues or activities when their rightful owners set preventive sanitary rules….”

BM: Libertarians must really get past this kind of thinking. Does anyone believe that airlines, social media companies, mainstream media companies, any large company of any type is a private company in any meaningful sense? How quickly and suddenly they bow to government dictates no matter how draconian, and what punishment will befall them if they don’t. Willingly or through coercion, they do the state’s bidding.

The piece was about forced vaccinations.

There is much about private property that isn’t private.  At one extreme – consider it the closest to a libertarian ideal: we have property, acquired via voluntary transaction; either produced from other materials, acquired in trade, developed in code, etc.  Yet, even at this extreme, try not paying property tax on the property, or income tax on the privately earned income, etc.  The property isn’t purely private in the sense of the owner have complete control over use and disposition.

At the other extreme…libertarians and Austrian economists will use the phrase “crony capitalism.”  If this phrase is to mean anything, it has to indicate that the private property (necessary for a system of capitalism) has not been earned or acquired in a manner that fits the above definition of private property: acquired via voluntary transaction.  Instead, it has been “earned” via government connection.

Examples of this abound: perhaps the most obvious is banking, especially money center banks.  Others include military contractors, pharmaceutical companies, airlines, tech and social media companies, mainstream media, etc.  It could also include any company or industry that petitions the state for something (as opposed to petitioning the state to not do something or to stop doing something).

These crony capitalist companies do the state’s bidding.  They lobby for funds, lobby for regulations, and in exchange, they pay the piper by dancing to his tune.  They realize the consequences of just saying no.  Why do such a thing, when saying yes pays so well?  Can the property that results from such an arrangement be described as “private”?

There is a large area in between, of course.  The most unfortunate, and taken from the last sixteen months: any church or small business that did not enforce or abide by state mandates faced the potential of being crushed, and its pastor or owner faced prison.  One cannot call this property “private,” though through no transgression of the owner.

But the entities that hold property via crony-capitalism can in no way be considered holders of private property.  They are extensions of the state, really not much different than the military, department of (in)justice, the various spy agencies, etc.

Conclusion

Libertarians really need not make the caveat, as was done in the statement I cited at the opening of this post.  Instead, the proper caveat should be that much of what is considered private property isn’t. 

Until this is fully embraced and understood, well…we are like the dupe, falling for the con of the shell game.  Complain about government encroachment and defend the so-called private entities that are just as much a means of that encroachment as any government employee.  Yes, such libertarians may be following the right shell, but there is a second one virtually equally as dangerous to liberty.

Be seeing you

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

Nordstream 2’s Hard Lesson in Reality for Everyone

Posted by M. C. on July 28, 2021

As to the pipeline itself, the main sticking point for many people in the U.S. was a combination of leftover Cold War policy of denying Russia any new pipelines into Europe and personal enrichment because of Ukrainian gas transit.

https://tomluongo.me/2021/07/24/nordstream-2s-hard-lesson-in-reality-for-everyone/

Author: Tom Luongo

For more than six years everyone who is anyone in a politically sensitive position in Europe and the U.S. has wrung their hands over the Nordstream 2 pipeline. From the moment it was announced the howls of pain could be heard all around the world.

Those screams were the screams of people who had grown fat and rich on the status quo realizing their gravy train was over.

Now the project is all but complete and the saga coming to an end we have a weak deal between all the major parties to keep some of that gravy train running. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Joe Biden finally buried the hatchet over Nordstream 2.

But the reality was that Nordstream 2 was always going to get completed. I’ve never wavered in my assessment of this.

The reasons were myriad.

The Germans need the gas.

The Germans wanted another political cudgel to use over the recalcitrant Poland and the Baltics.

The Germans need the gas.

Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a board member of the Nordstream 2 consortium who put the deal together.

Oh, and the Germans need the gas.

It wasn’t a tough set of equations to solve here. The major players are Russia, Ukraine, Germany, the U.S. Whose needs are fulfilled by Nordstream 2? Germany’s. Who controls the EU? The Davos Crowd through Germany. Who needs relatively cheap energy to keep popular revolts from overthrowing major governments? Davos.

In the end economics and the reality of positive incentives always force a resolution on people determined to hold back the tide through regulation and arm-twisting creating perverse incentives. Believe me, there’s a broader lesson for all concerned here than just Nordstream 2.

As to the pipeline itself, the main sticking point for many people in the U.S. was a combination of leftover Cold War policy of denying Russia any new pipelines into Europe and personal enrichment because of Ukrainian gas transit.

But the events of the past decade and the existence of Nordstream 1 saw the dynamic in that relationship shift dramatically.

The U.S clearly does not control the reins over European energy policy and hasn’t for a long time.

The Davos Crowd controls U.S. policy over Europe and damn near everything else at this point, especially with Biden sporifying in the White House and Obama pulling all the strings behind the scene.

That anti-pipeline policy was powerful when the U.S. called the shots in its relationship with Europe. Trump tried to reassert U.S. dominance over Europe and beginning to be successful. But Merkel and others simply waited for his term to end, hoping their incessant meddling in his presidency would weaken him.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Canada’s Left Is Pushing Some Albertans To See the Benefits of Secession | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on July 27, 2021

For the trendy leftists in Laurentian Canada, Alberta is a backwater that has not been sufficiently assimilated into the PC hive mind. To reach such a universalist goal, the Canadian state will likely have to conduct ever more therapeutic interventions to “correct” recalcitrant Albertans’ perceived deficiencies.

https://mises.org/wire/canadas-left-pushing-some-albertans-see-benefits-secession

José Niño

Talks of separatism are not just limited to the United States.

When Canada is brought up in political discourse, it’s usually done to juxtapose its relative stability to the US. Often portrayed as the tamer, more socially stable version of the US, Canada has become a darling of American progressives. Even some American celebrities, caught up in the hysteria of former president Donald Trump’s successful 2016 run, hinted at moving to Canada. Conventional views of foreign countries can be quite misleading, however.

The last few weeks have been rather dicey in Canada. The controversy kicked off after the discovery of the supposed mass graves of First Nations near the former sites of four Canadian Indian residential schools in the provinces of Manitoba, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan. Although there is growing evidence that these discoveries do not point to a genocidal act inflicted on Canada’s indigenous population, the radical Left went about its usual routine by instantly pouncing on the discoveries and using them as a pretext to burn down churches and topple monuments of famous historical figures across Canada.

The Canadian government’s tepid response to this spate of violence has reminded many Canadians of how out of touch Ottawa leaders are with right-wing constituencies in Canada’s western provinces. The latest surge in leftist iconoclasm will likely add further fuel to the separatist fire that has been gestating in the Canadian prairies for some time.

The Canadian Prairies’ Growing Dissatisfaction with the Federal Government

Traditionally, separatism in Canada has been associated with movements within the Francophone province of Quebec to separate from English-speaking Canada and form its own nation. However, parts of Anglophone Canada aren’t seeing eye to eye with Ottawa and its culturally leftist vision, most notably the province of Alberta.

See the rest here

Author:

Contact José Niño

José Niño is a freelance writer based in Austin, Texas. Sign up for his mailing list here. Contact him via Facebook or Twitter. Get his premium newsletter here.

Be seeing you

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

Majority Of Hospitalized Covid Patients In UK Only Tested Positive After Admission: Leaked NHS Data | ZeroHedge

Posted by M. C. on July 27, 2021

Over half of those hospitalized with Covid-19 in the UK only tested positive after admission – suggesting that “vast numbers are being classed as hospitalised by Covid when they were admitted with other ailments, with the virus picked up by routine testing,” according to The Telegraph, citing leaked government figures.

Wonder how many US Covid hospitalizations were only diagnosed post-admission, keeping in mind of course that US hospitals are paid more for Covid patients under the CARES Act.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/majority-hospitalized-covid-patients-uk-only-tested-positive-after-admission-leaked-nih

Tyler Durden's Photoby Tyler Durden

The takeaway? Oft-cited statistics published daily may far overstate Covid hospitalizations – and consequently, pressures on the National Health Service (NHS).

The leaked data – covering all NHS trusts in England – show that, as of last Thursday, just 44 per cent of patients classed as being hospitalised with Covid had tested positive by the time they were admitted. 

The majority of cases were not detected until patients underwent standard Covid tests, carried out on everyone admitted to hospital for any reason. 

Overall, 56 per cent of Covid hospitalisations fell into this category, the data, seen by The Telegraph, show. 

Crucially, this group does not distinguish between those admitted because of severe illness, later found to be caused by the virus, and those in hospital for different reasons who might otherwise never have known that they had picked it up. -Telegraph

In June, UK health officials instructed NHS trusts to provide “a breakdown of the current stock of Covid patients” between those who were hospitalized primarily for Covid and those admitted for other reasons. Thus far, the NHS has failed to publish this now-leaked information.

Breaking it down, out of more than 780 hospitalizations dated last Thursday, 44% tested positive within 14 days prior to admission, while 43% tested positive within two days of admission, and 13% tested positive ‘in the days and weeks that followed’ – including those likely to have caught the virus in the hospital.

“Experts said the high number of cases being detected belatedly – at a time when PCR tests were widely available – suggested many such patients had been admitted for other reasons,” according to the report.

“This data is incredibly important, and it should be published on an ongoing basis,” said Prof Carl Heneghan, director of the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford. “When people hear about hospitalizations with Covid, they will assume that Covid is the likely cause, but this data shows something quite different – this is about Covid being detected after tests were looking for it.”

Heneghan has urged UK officials to be more transparent with this data – including whether or not the virus was the primary cause of hospital admission.

“This needs to be fixed as a matter of urgency,” he said, adding that the currently published data could lead the public “towards false conclusions,” which exaggerate the true level of pressure on the UK medical system.

“Nearly 18 months into the Covid crisis, it is absurd that data breaking down hospital admissions still isn’t publicly available on a regular basis,” said Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of the 1922 committee of Tory MPs. “Counting all patients who test positive as Covid hospitalisations is inevitably misleading and gives a false picture of the continuing health impact of the virus.”

Greg Clark, the chairman of Commons science and technology select committee, on Monday night said he would write to Sajid Javid, the Health Secretary, asking him to publish the breakdown on a regular basis following The Telegraph’s disclosure. 

“If hospitalisations from Covid are a key determinant of how concerned we should be, and how quickly restrictions should be lifted, it’s important that the data is not presented in a way that could lead to the wrong conclusions being drawn,” he said. 

“While some of these people may be being admitted due to Covid, we currently do not know how many. And for those who are not, there is a big distinction between people who are admitted because of Covid and those are in for something else but have Covid in such a mild form that it was not the cause of their hospitalisation.” 

The leaked statistics come from NHS daily situation reports, collected by all hospital trusts in England. -Telegraph

“It creates an impression that all these people are going into hospital with Covid, and that simply is not the case. People are worried and scared and not really understanding the true picture – that is what I find despicable,” one NHS data expert told the Telegraph.

Wonder how many US Covid hospitalizations were only diagnosed post-admission, keeping in mind of course that US hospitals are paid more for Covid patients under the CARES Act.

Be seeing you

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

Why the Left Can’t Let Go of Jan. 6 – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 27, 2021

As of today, Jan. 6 is the biggest and last best stick the Democrats have for retaining control of Congress in 2022.

For if that election is not about the worst day for the GOP of the Trump years, it is going to be about the successes and failures of the first two Biden years.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/patrick-j-buchanan/why-the-left-cant-let-go-of-jan-6/

By Patrick J. Buchanan

To understand what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s select committee investigation of the Capitol Hill events of Jan. 6 is all about, a good place to begin is with the sentencing hearing last week of Paul Hodgkins.

A crane operator from Tampa, Florida, Hodgkins, 38, pleaded guilty to a single count of obstructing a joint session of Congress called to confirm Joe Biden as the next president.

Hodgkins entered the Senate chamber carrying a Trump 2020 flag. He committed no assault, no act of destruction, no act of violence. Yet, he was sentenced to eight months in prison by U.S. Judge Randolph Moss.

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Mona Sedky argued for a sentence of twice that length, a year and a half, because, as she told the judge, “Jan. 6 was genuinely an act of terrorism.”

But is that true? Was Jan. 6 “an act of terrorism” — of the character if not the magnitude, say, of the Oklahoma City bombing?

Hodgkins’ attorney vigorously rejected that depiction. To call Jan. 6 “domestic terrorism,” said Patrick Leduc, is “offensive and gaslighting the country … It was a protest that became a riot, period, full stop.”

Leduc is correct: Jan. 6th was a riot. Had it truly been “domestic terrorism,” as the U.S. attorney claimed, why would she have accepted a guilty plea for a single nonviolent offense?

Why did she not throw the book at the terrorist?

Looking back, what was Jan. 6 in reality?

A huge pro-Trump demonstration of tens of thousands, out of which a mob of hundreds moved on the Capitol, broke police lines, assaulted cops, rampaged and disrupted an official proceeding.

All in all, a shameful disgrace. But 1/6 was not 9/11 or Oklahoma City or Pearl Harbor or the Pulse nightclub or the Las Vegas massacre.

Why is it being hyped like this? Why will the establishment not let go of Jan. 6? Why, half a year on, does it remain an obsession of regime media?

The hype never ends. Daily, we hear establishment politicians and press paint it up as the most awful day in America’s history.

It was, we are told, an “armed insurrection,” “domestic terrorism,” an attempted “coup,” “an act of treason,” “the worst attack on American democracy since the British burned the Capitol in 1814.”

Why did Pelosi recoil from and reject two of House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy’s picks for her select committee — Reps. Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio?

Because the deck is stacked, the fix is in. Pelosi’s committee has been crafted to bring in a third impeachment of Donald Trump and the GOP for posing the greatest threat to American democracy since Fort Sumter.

Issues, arguments and questions Banks and Jordan would have raised would have been off-script and interrupted the agreed-upon narrative.

Indeed, of whom does the select committee consist as it opens its hearings today?

Every Democrat of the committee has voted to impeach Trump for Jan. 6. Both of the Republicans Pelosi put on the committee to provide bipartisan balance — Wyoming’s Liz Cheney and Illinois’ Adam Kinzinger — voted to impeach Trump last January and are the two ranking anti-Trump Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Pelosi has impaneled a jury to try Trump and the GOP for insurrection, every one of whose members has already indicated they believe that Jan. 6 is a historic crime and Trump is guilty.

Why are Pelosi and the regime media doing everything to keep Jan. 6 alive? What are the stakes involved?

As of today, Jan. 6 is the biggest and last best stick the Democrats have for retaining control of Congress in 2022.

For if that election is not about the worst day for the GOP of the Trump years, it is going to be about the successes and failures of the first two Biden years.

And what, as of today, look to be the issues of 2022?

That election will be about the worst outbreak of inflation in a quarter-century to hit the U.S. economy. It will be about Biden’s having presided over a fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, after having declared on July 4, 2021, our independence of the virus.

It will be about the largest invasion of illegals across America’s southern border in the history of the republic — 2 million a year in 2021 and again in 2022, with 300,000 of these “gotaways” who evaded any contact with the Border Patrol.

Among the 4 million anticipated illegals in Biden’s first two years are child molesters, drug dealers and unvaccinated carriers of COVID-19.

The election of 2022 will also be about a wave of shootings, woundings, killings and gun crimes in our greatest cities that have long been governed by liberal Democrats.

The Democratic establishment and its media arm have a vital interest in hyping Jan. 6 and not letting go of it. For Jan. 6, 2021, is their last best hope for holding power after Nov. 8, 2022.

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 »