MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

A new book reveals how harmful the gospel of affirmation amongst mental health therapists is to children who think they’re trans — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on June 7, 2021

Clearly, it should be of interest to professionals working in the field. Whether their professional body – or even the law – allows them to follow the principles suggested in this book is debatable, but they owe it to their patients to push back on the restrictions to their practice. As Evans and Evans assert, “patients with gender dysphoria need services that are protected from political activism; the professionals involved need to be able to work in an environment that is protected from political intrusion.”

Parents and teachers of gender dysphoric children will recognise the behaviours that the authors describe and explain. If we are to help young people in distress, we need to know why they might be distressed. But this book is accessible to a lay readership and needs to be read by a lay readership. Society has a responsibility to children, and we all need to understand what is happening to young people who have been captured by this craze.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/525705-dysphoric-gender-children-trans/

Debbie Hayton

Debbie Hayton is a high school teacher and trade union officer. She teaches science to 11-18-year-olds at a school in central England. As a transgender person, she has written extensively about what it means to be trans and how trans people can be included in society without compromising the rights of other vulnerable groups. Her work can be read in publications from across the political spectrum, where rational scientific debate is allowed and encouraged. Follow her on Twitter @DebbieHayton

Many youngsters who present as gender dysphoric have mental health issues or have suffered abuse or trauma. Yet instead of probing these causes of distress, therapists are expected to accept their patient’s self-diagnosis.

The transgender craze shows no sign of loosening its grip on society. The impact on children and adolescents was discussed empathetically by journalist Abigail Shrier in her superb book, ‘Irreversible Damage’. But what support is there for therapists who work with those young people, in particular those professionals who can see the dangers?

These are scary times. In the UK, a memorandum of understanding (MOU) against “conversion therapy” inhibits counsellors from probing their client’s self-diagnosis of transsexualism. Professionals who should be helping their clients explore and understand their psychological distress are instead expected to affirm whatever their client tells them. Worse, proposed legislation might lead to criminal action being taken against them.

In what is often a febrile environment, a new book by Susan and Marcus Evans examines the situation from a professional viewpoint – the perspective of therapists faced with young clients who have been convinced that they are somehow in the wrong body. ‘Gender Dysphoria: A Therapeutic Model for Working with Children, Adolescents and Young Adults’ is neither “pro” nor “anti” transition. The authors – both experienced practitioners in their field – are cautious, especially regarding young people. They are keen to understand what is happening, rather than merely react to circumstances,

“We understand that to transition is, for some adults, the best way to lead their lives and present to the world,” they write. “Instead, this model concentrates on the individual concerned, to explore and understand what drives and motivates them.”

That is a refreshing approach to gender dysphoric patients, like me. But it was what I experienced 10 years ago; I transitioned before the MOU shackled counsellors to the affirmation model. My own counsellor forced me to consider alternative responses to my transsexualism. At the time I hated it – I wanted to transition and at all costs – but at least I had some idea why I might be doing it, beyond what I picked up on the internet.

At least I was an adult, and able to make informed decisions. The Evans are concerned principally with young people. After spending their working lives in Britain’s NHS, firstly as mental health nurses and latterly as psychoanalytic psychotherapists and clinical lecturers, they speak with expertise and experience, 

“The accuracy of mental-health diagnosis in children is notoriously unreliable prognostically, as children change during the course of their development,” they warn. “Children who are diagnosed with one thing at a particular age may turn out very differently when they reach maturity.”

In what is often a febrile environment, a new book by Susan and Marcus Evans examines the situation from a professional viewpoint – the perspective of therapists faced with young clients who have been convinced that they are somehow in the wrong body. ‘Gender Dysphoria: A Therapeutic Model for Working with Children, Adolescents and Young Adults’ is neither “pro” nor “anti” transition. The authors – both experienced practitioners in their field – are cautious, especially regarding young people. They are keen to understand what is happening, rather than merely react to circumstances,

“We understand that to transition is, for some adults, the best way to lead their lives and present to the world,” they write. “Instead, this model concentrates on the individual concerned, to explore and understand what drives and motivates them.”

That is a refreshing approach to gender dysphoric patients, like me. But it was what I experienced 10 years ago; I transitioned before the MOU shackled counsellors to the affirmation model. My own counsellor forced me to consider alternative responses to my transsexualism. At the time I hated it – I wanted to transition and at all costs – but at least I had some idea why I might be doing it, beyond what I picked up on the internet.

At least I was an adult, and able to make informed decisions. The Evans are concerned principally with young people. After spending their working lives in Britain’s NHS, firstly as mental health nurses and latterly as psychoanalytic psychotherapists and clinical lecturers, they speak with expertise and experience, 

“The accuracy of mental-health diagnosis in children is notoriously unreliable prognostically, as children change during the course of their development,” they warn. “Children who are diagnosed with one thing at a particular age may turn out very differently when they reach maturity.”

Because nobody can cut and run from these sorts of problems, they come with us because they are us. The lie that it is any different has been told so many times that children believe it. Worse, adults who should know better also believe it. Evans and Evans painstakingly analysed Jane’s response to therapy and – with professional expertise – explained it clearly.

There is no simple solution for Jane’s difficulties with life, but human psychology is not simple. We are all complex individuals and each of us has a unique experience of what it means to be human. But together with the other case studies in the book, a picture develops of young people who are in need of being understood, not told that they are somehow born in the wrong body.

This book needs to be read.

Clearly, it should be of interest to professionals working in the field. Whether their professional body – or even the law – allows them to follow the principles suggested in this book is debatable, but they owe it to their patients to push back on the restrictions to their practice. As Evans and Evans assert, “patients with gender dysphoria need services that are protected from political activism; the professionals involved need to be able to work in an environment that is protected from political intrusion.”

Parents and teachers of gender dysphoric children will recognise the behaviours that the authors describe and explain. If we are to help young people in distress, we need to know why they might be distressed. But this book is accessible to a lay readership and needs to be read by a lay readership. Society has a responsibility to children, and we all need to understand what is happening to young people who have been captured by this craze.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Be seeing you

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

Joe Biden: A Dangerously Boring President | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

Posted by M. C. on June 7, 2021

If he stays in office too long, we satirical columnists will have to resign and, worse, actually start working. That is one thing I could not bring myself to forgive. Besides, there is nothing we like better than insulting idiots. We need a president who is completely dumb and offensive, because if not, all this bad blood that flows through the veins of us journalists and starts to clot, swelling and swelling more and more, until our heads explode.

https://spectator.org/biden-boring-president/

by Itxu Díaz

Rod Dreher said it, and I couldn’t agree more. Joe Biden is too boring to hate. We conservative columnists are going through a crisis of agreeability. As far back as I can remember, from Carter to Obama, it’s always been fun to write about Democrat POTUS. You know, Carter had the wits of a piece of dry wood, Clinton made it way too easy for us, and Obama was so incredibly phony that even today I’m convinced he’s a white, blue-eyed redhead. But Biden is different. There’s not much you can say about someone who wakes up every morning trying to remember, with help from his advisers, his own name.

Even the most partisan journalists are having a bad time defending him. You can criticize an idiot or back a madman with all your soul, but it’s exceedingly difficult to show the slightest enthusiasm for someone who has the same personal appeal as those arugula sprouts that hipster restaurants put on their six-story, 10-cheese vegan burgers. And taking into account that he is the president of the most powerful nation in the world, and the most radical of those who have ever held the office, his ability to generate irrelevance is amazing. Biden is so absurd and paradoxical that he is capable of being extreme right and extreme left at the same time, arousing in both cases the same indifference. Whatever he says, his every speech is equivalent to half a dozen sleeping pills.

In just a few months in the White House, he has made incredibly hostile foreign policy decisions and has spoken out harshly against leaders such as Putin, whom he called a “killer,” or Xi Jinping, whom he accused of genocide. Just a few days after taking office he ordered a bombing in Syria, although perhaps he just wanted to ask his secretary for some coffee and pressed the wrong button. A few days ago he made a major economic stab at Spain on account of the Google tax, which has left his admirers in the Spanish social-communist government speechless (with the sin comes the penance). And, generally, according to the logic of the progressive press, Biden has turned out to be much more fascist than Trump. But even that has not granted him half as many headlines as the former Republican president.

No one expects anything from Biden. Not even Biden himself. And that should be exasperating Americans at this crucial moment in history.

In the other ideological hemisphere of his very strange brain, Biden has flirted with the Chinese dictatorship, become friends with Islamism, and already proclaimed twice that white supremacist terrorism is the greatest danger to Americans today — I suppose immediately after Bigfoot, and just before the Bogeyman. The president understands real threats just as well as he understands Catholic doctrine. But whatever the occasion, with Biden the party always ends up resembling one of those most tedious ones in a P. G. Wodehouse novel: “It was one of those parties where you cough twice before you speak and then decide not to say it after all.”

I suppose Uncle Joe could be fun in the lead role of Father of the Bride, as long as his part of the script consists only of grunts and grins. Or maybe he could advertise dental implants for senior citizens. Or shoot a spot about children’s shampoo, following his peculiar habit of sniffing other people’s scalps. But the truth is that as soon as he crosses its threshold, the White House becomes the Gray House. Even the janitors fall asleep. There, this year a fly has been seen yawning for the first time. Even the Chinese spies collapse lethargically inside the closets. No one expects anything from Biden. Not even Biden himself. And that should be exasperating Americans at this crucial moment in history. And it would, if only most hadn’t become catatonic watching the president babble vaguely on television. After all, he only goes viral when he loses his train of thought at some event and anxiously asks his advisers, “Where am I? And what were we here for?” And that is too dramatic for jokes.

If he stays in office too long, we satirical columnists will have to resign and, worse, actually start working. That is one thing I could not bring myself to forgive. Besides, there is nothing we like better than insulting idiots. We need a president who is completely dumb and offensive, because if not, all this bad blood that flows through the veins of us journalists and starts to clot, swelling and swelling more and more, until our heads explode. And even then, all Joe Biden would say is, “What was that? Rockets? What’s going on? Is it the Fourth of July? Ladies, gentlemen — congratulations, everybody!”

Itxu Díaz is a Spanish journalist, political satirist and author. He has written nine books on topics as diverse as politics, music, and smart appliances. He is a contributor to theDaily Beast, theDaily Caller,National Review, theAmerican Conservative,The American Spectator, andDiario Las Américasin the United States, and is a columnist for several Spanish magazines and newspapers. He was also an adviser to the Ministry for Education, Culture, and Sports in Spain. Follow him on Twitter at @itxudiaz or visit his website:www.itxudiaz.com.

Translated by Joel Dalmau

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Medical Bureaucrats to Ontario Doctors: ‘Shut Up or Lose Your Licence’ – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 7, 2021

Second, the CPSO is commanding doctors to breach their pledge to patients to seek out and apply evidence-based medicine in their care and treatment. Instead of a full range of current and emerging evidence from multiple sources, doctors are restricted to applying stagnant information from only one source: the government.

Third, doctors are being ordered to violate their patients’ right to be fully informed before receiving medical treatment. This implies that doctors will also have to violate their own duty to obtain fully informed consent, putting themselves at risk for eventual lawsuits.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/06/karen-selick/cpso-to-ontario-doctors-shut-up-or-lose-your-licence/

By Karen Selick

On April 30, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) announced explicitly a controversial policy that many Ontario doctors had intuitively feared it would adopt. Its Twitter feed, @cpso_ca, contained the framed statement shown below.

CPSO commands Ontario’s doctors not to make any statements that might be considered anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing, or anti-lockdown. It forbids them to promote “unsupported, unproven” treatments for COVID-19. (Unproven by what standards? CPSO doesn’t say.) Doctors are further forbidden to make comments that might encourage people to act contrary to public health orders.

Finally, there’s a naked threat: say the wrong thing and you’ll face “disciplinary action”. This translates into, “We’ll suspend your licence, cut off your income stream and impoverish you.”

This is a horrifying statement from both a medical and a legal perspective.

A courageous group of doctors calling themselves Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth quickly pushed back with this online Declaration. As I write this, 548 doctors and 14,487 concerned citizens have already signed it.

The doctors make these three major objections. First, the CPSO is commanding them to abandon the scientific method, which requires vigorous, open debate in order to test existing theories and improve upon or replace them with more accurate ones. That’s how science advances.

Second, the CPSO is commanding doctors to breach their pledge to patients to seek out and apply evidence-based medicine in their care and treatment. Instead of a full range of current and emerging evidence from multiple sources, doctors are restricted to applying stagnant information from only one source: the government.

Third, doctors are being ordered to violate their patients’ right to be fully informed before receiving medical treatment. This implies that doctors will also have to violate their own duty to obtain fully informed consent, putting themselves at risk for eventual lawsuits. Full information about masks, social distancing and vaccinations is not something you can impart to a patient in a 5-minute office visit. Half the world has spent the past 15 months seeking out information about these subjects, and there’s still plenty of room for debate.

It’s therefore easy to see why doctors are outraged by the new CPSO policy. But as a lawyer, I can see two other problems.

First, the dictates of the CPSO violate the Ontario Human Rights Code. Section 6 of the code says: “Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to membership in any trade union, trade or occupational association or self-governing profession without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex…” [emphasis added].

The CPSO’s threat is a clear statement of its intention to discriminate on the basis of creed. Although some people interpret “creed” as religion, it actually has a broader meaning. If ever anything qualified as a creed, a doctor’s Hippocratic oath would. It requires doctors to use their own judgment for the benefit of their patients and to “abstain from whatever is deleterious.” Doctors also pledge to “give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked.”

Any doctor who has extensively researched the scientific literature on mask-wearing, social distancing, lockdowns and COVID vaccinations will know that there is an increasing body of evidence that all of these practices can do more harm than good. More than 5,100 vaccination-related deaths have this been recorded in the US database called Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), where adverse events are notoriously under-reported. The number in Europe is over 10,000. Doctors can’t “un-see” this information. It forms an important part of the cost/benefit analysis in determining whether or not COVID vaccines are appropriate for their patients.

The CPSO, by threatening the licences of doctors who speak up about these issues, is forbidding them to exercise their creed and discriminating against those that do, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

Doctors also have rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: section 2 rights to freedom of conscience, belief, opinion and expression, as well as section 7 rights to liberty and security of the person. The CPSO statement, with its implicit threat to cut off doctors’ incomes, violates these rights. As the body exclusively empowered by the state to govern doctors’ conduct, there’s no question that the CPSO is an agent of the state and is therefore governed by the Charter.

Other professionals in the health care industry – chiropractors and naturopathic doctors – have told me privately that they too are being bullied into silence and forced to comply with inadvisable practices such as masking.

Eventually, this issue will come before the courts – possibly when a doctor disobeys the CPSO and is facing disciplinary action, or when doctors proactively hire lawyers to sue the CPSO for violating their rights. For me, the moment can’t come too soon.

Karen Selick [send her mail] is a retired lawyer who now works as a freelance writer, editor, and video maker.

Be seeing you

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

‘Public’ (Political) School Madness: Military Supported ‘Vaccination’ of Students in Idaho – garydbarnett.com

Posted by M. C. on June 7, 2021

https://www.garydbarnett.com/public-political-school-madness-military-supported-vaccination-of-students-in-idaho/

By: Gary D. Barnett

I am writing this update as a warning to all parents in this country that actually care about their children. The government (‘public’) school system is atrocious at best, and any that can remove their children from that heinous system should do so immediately. https://www.youtube.com/embed/n0VGhwKyfsg?feature=oembed

In Coeur D’Alene, Idaho during this past week, the Canfield Middle School was used to stage a remote ‘vaccination’ site, apparently set up and authorized by the Idaho Panhandle Health District. This was manned, monitored, and facilitated by the Idaho National Guard. In other words, this was a joint health department, school system, and military operation for a school district approved student vaccination project.

There has been a high level of local concern and rightful outrage due to this insanity, and of course the school district has claimed to have no responsibility for their complicity in this event. In a letter sent to parents, the school attempted to disclaim all responsibility even though this was held at the school, with military supervision, and local police blocking off and guarding the site.

“We are dismayed to see that inaccurate and inflammatory information is being shared about this event. For the record:

1. This is not a school or school district-sponsored vaccination clinic. It is a Panhandle Health District clinic that is being offered outside of Canfield Middle School, as a courtesy to families who have requested access to vaccination.
2. This is a completely voluntary vaccination opportunity for families who chose to get the vaccine. No one is compelled to get the vaccine. Only students whose parents or guardians have opted for them to get the vaccine will participate.
3. The Pfizer vaccine is approved for individuals ages 12 and older. Anyone under age 18 will not be allowed to receive the vaccine unless they have signed consent from a parent or guardian.
4. Members of the Idaho National Guard will be on hand to assist with clinic logistics, as they have been doing for months. Gov. Brad Little dispatched the Guard last November to assist in the state’s vaccination effort. We ask that the public show respect to our Guardsmen as they perform their duties in assisting medical professionals.”

This explanation holds no water, as this was held on school property, and at the school doors, with students being led out by school staff and national Guard troops. The students in the video did not look excited about being injected, and this looked more like a military event than any voluntary procedure.

For the record, the Idaho State Code, Title 39, chapter 28 states:

TITLE 39
HEALTH AND SAFETY
CHAPTER 38
MINORS — CONSENT TO TREATMENT
39-3801. INFECTIOUS, CONTAGIOUS, OR COMMUNICABLE DISEASE — MEDICAL
TREATMENT OF MINOR 14 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER — CONSENT OF PARENTS OR GUARDIAN
UNNECESSARY. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a minor fourteen
(14) years of age or older who may have come into contact with any infectious,
contagious, or communicable disease may give consent to the furnishing of
hospital, medical and surgical care related to the diagnosis or treatment of
such disease, if the disease or condition is one which is required by law,
or regulation adopted pursuant to law, to be reported to the local health
officer. Such consent shall not be subject to disaffirmance because of minority. The consent of the parent, parents, or legal guardian of such minor
shall not be necessary to authorize hospital, medical and surgical care related to such disease and such parent, parents, or legal guardian shall not
be liable for payment for any care rendered pursuant to this section.

This contradiction is stark and obvious, and shows that no consent is required in order for the state thugs to inject, perform surgery, vaccinate, or any other medical procedure that fits under this broad-based code. And of course, any and all procedures by the state and its thugs allows all parents and guardians to be exempt from payment; just another incentive to gain control over children.

Regardless, why is it necessary to bring in military troops to monitor and assume authority over these kids in order to facilitate a ‘voluntary’ procedure? Is it possible for a 14 year old to be intimidated when confronted with military pressure and presence? I can tell you, it is deadly frightening, and these monsters fully understand this tactic.

This is an abomination, and a hard-handed form of trickery in order to inject these kids with toxic poisons meant to harm! It is a form of medical martial law by proxy and Fascist cooperation. If this can happen in a state like Idaho, it can happen everywhere.

Source links:

Canfield Middle School video

Idaho Code, Title 39, Chapter 38

Letter to parents

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Be seeing you

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

Watch “Purpose and meaning” on YouTube

Posted by M. C. on June 6, 2021

https://youtube.com/shorts/jmA8gZQWOMU?feature=share

Be seeing you

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

Why Nation-States Will Die-Off in the Information Age

Posted by M. C. on June 6, 2021

But that situation is rapidly changing as wealth becomes less about material production, and more about information technology, and human capital. These things are extremely mobile, and not very susceptible to plunder. They therefore do NOT require a massive nation states to justify investments.

https://app.getresponse.com/view.html?x=a62b&m=BwBKNO&mc=Ic&s=oHMPjb&u=S6bT5&z=EMqvB7p&

By Joe Jarvis

When was the fall of the Roman Empire? Was it in 410 when the Visigoths sacked Rome, or 455 when the Vandals plundered Rome? Or was it 476, when the last western Roman Emperor was deposed?

Whatever the answer, the people alive on the ground at the time surely did not wake up to a headline saying: “Rome has fallen, commence medieval barbarianism.”

Only later did historians pinpoint certain dates.

It’s possible, therefore, that we are already past the date that will be considered the fall of the American Empire.

Perhaps historians will look back and say that September 11, 2001 marks the sacking of the American Empire. Not because the Twin Towers fell, but because that’s the day rule of law and due process came crashing down as well.

History may shed more light on the silent coup that occurred behind the scenes, which shifted the US governing structure to a relative dictatorship.

Yes, just like in Rome, the appearances carried on. The Senate still passed bills, and the courts still nominally gave fair trials. But the great erosion hit a turning point. From there on out, due process was not required to assassinate enemies of the US, to spy on “potential terrorists”, and even to confiscate property using civil asset forfeiture.

Or perhaps the CIA already took over as dictators in 1963 with the assassination of the last truly elected US President, John F. Kennedy.

Maybe the fall of the American Empire will be seen in terms of the destruction of the US dollar. The 1913 creation of the Federal Reserve, the 1933 debasement of the gold backed currency, and the 1971 total removal of the gold standard from the US dollar are all part of slow downfall.

These are the events which allowed the barbarians who invaded the US government to loot the treasury  culminating in this, perhaps final stage of vast money printing.

It may be more obvious, in hindsight, that the US government is currently only a shell, serving as a vehicle for barbarians to loot the corpse of a once great empire.

Some people think that the American Empire will simply be replaced by the next globally dominant superpower. And of course there are concerns that China is next in line to dominate the globe, as I discuss in another video on how China used Covid to play Western civilization.

But more likely is the death of all nation states, as we transition out of the industrial age, and into the information age.

I’m going to explain what I mean, but first a quick note– one short video will never do these concepts justice. So if you’re interested in this subject please subscribe and hit the notification bell. That way you will receive a slow drip of content like this that will help you transition smoothly into this new age, at this really exciting time to be alive.

Back to the point–  let me explain why the industrial age was characterized by large nation states.

See, the nation state is more than just a country or a government– those have existed for thousands of years. The nation state aims to bind massive numbers of people in a territory together with myths of common cause, culture, and patriotism. This allows a single government to extract much more revenue and build much bigger armies. And this large scale government rose with the industrial era, because countries required large scale armies to defend the industrial production in a given area.

The scale provided by nation states allowed industry to invest and grow in areas that were relatively safe from plunder and destruction by barbarians or rival countries. Since a factory can’t so easily pick up and move, it needs a stable environment and protection in order to make the large capital investment worth the risk. Therefore, powerful nation states attracted more industry, and thus became richer in the process. Less stable regions, with smaller governments unable to protect their capital did not become as wealthy.

But that situation is rapidly changing as wealth becomes less about material production, and more about information technology, and human capital. These things are extremely mobile, and not very susceptible to plunder. They therefore do NOT require a massive nation states to justify investments.

And for this reason, we are witnessing, in real time, the fall of the nation state. But again, when you are so close to such a major global shift, it’s hard to pinpoint exactly what is happening.

The end of the industrial age won’t be obvious, and only in the future will historians look back and try to pinpoint a day or year that the world transitioned into the age of information.

One great candidate for the fall of the nation state would be November 9, 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall. This heralded the demise of the Soviet Union– a massive nation state which tried to bind citizens of various countries and culture together under patriotism for the socialist cause.

1989 is also a great year to mark the end of the industrial era because it is the year that the World Wide Web was invented, marking the beginning of all the massive changes that would come to the world through the internet, and mass communication.

Also 1989 was the year I was born, so I like to think of myself as yet another herald for the glorious death of the nation state.

We have been in the industrial era since the end of the feudal age. If we want to pick a nice clean date, we might pinpoint 1492 as the major shift, with Columbus’ exploration being an early sign of nation states competing for industrial capital.

As the Renaissance bloomed the power of the Catholic Church faded, and a new myth was required to bind the people to their governments.

The nation-state replaced feudal chivalry with nationalist citizenship. Knights, inspired by chivalry, loyal to their Lords were replaced by soldiers, inspired by patriotism, loyal to mother nation.

But now those myths hold less and less power. People, companies, and capital are more mobile than ever, and frequently shop around for the best jurisdictions in which to live, work, and run a business.

Smaller countries and city-states are actually better positioned than nation states to take advantage of this– without the need for massive military and government spending, they can offer government services as a product, based on the actual cost.

There are already a number of signs of the transition to government as a service provider, such as Caribbean nations selling citizenship through investment, Estonia selling e-citizenship, places like the country Georgia, Panama, Portugal and so many others offering competitive tax rates to attract residents and business.

Of course it may seem like these small nations will be threatened by massive governments with huge armies that could take over, sort of like what has happened with China and Hong Kong. And this is still a threat. The dying nation state will not go out without a fight. They will fight to preserve their power in a changing world. They’ll exploit crises like pandemics and terrorism to make it seem like we still need the nation state.

But these efforts will inevitably fail, because nation states can no longer grow rich through conquest and plunder.

It’s easy to move vast wealth when it is all in information technology, and the human mind, capable of working from anywhere in the world, connected via the internet. The need for large governments and armies to protect the capital is fading, because the ability of large governments and armies to take the capital is fading.

And competition among a hopefully growing number of countries will make it so that no government can charge more than a market rate for their services.

No more paying 50% of your income to receive some basic subpar services– the price will be based on product, with plenty of jurisdictions offering a la carte government services.

New models of governance will mean government is no longer characterized by involuntary monopolization on land and force.

Instead we will see, Free Private Cities where you sign a contract with the government, virtual governments which behave similar to insurance companies, distributed governments which do not require their citizens to all be located in the same geographic area, and so much more innovation in how societies will be governed.

That said plenty of people will be left behind by these great new forms of government, because they simply will refuse to believe that Rome has collapsed. Shells of nation-states will remain, offering the worst conditions for the price. But even these may be forced to adapt if only to compete with the new much better forms of governance.

This doesn’t mean you can simply ignore the dying nation-states– they may be more dangerous than ever at this stage. They have the capacity for violence, without much restraint.

This does pose a bit of a balancing act for the sovereign individual.

We have to at the same time make sure we do not become targets of the dying nation state’s wrath, without letting its rules hold us back from participating in the dawning of a new age.

There are still enough legal avenues to participate in the new era of humanity that we don’t have to poke the nation-state and risk our own lives and freedom.

Pay as little taxes as legally possibly, find the best jurisdiction, and diversify so you can safely weather the storm.We’re living in extremely interesting times, with the promise of individual freedom never before afforded to individuals.

Again this is a huge subject so definitely subscribe, hit the bell so you’re notified, and join my email list in case YouTube deletes me in it’s attempts to keep the nation state on life support for a little longer.

Also you might consider reading the book, The Sovereign Individual: Mastering the Transition to the Information Age, (Amazon affiliate link) on which most of this video was based. It’s really fascinating one because it’s about 20 years old and has already accurately predicted a lot, and two because it goes into a deep dive on all this information to help us understand and better navigate this changing world.

You can help protect us from BIG TECH DE-PLATFORMING by joining our email list.

This is the single biggest way to ensure we can’t be silenced for speaking out against censorship, and the elite/ cabal’s plans for a “Great Reset”– their New World Order meant to render you impoverished and powerless.

Plus, when you subscribe, you immediately receive TWO FREE TACTICAL REPORTS:

1. Four Ways The Elite Control You

2. How to Infiltrate the Elite and Take Their Power for Yourself

Be seeing you

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

Was Covid-19 created in a laboratory? Did it originate in Wuhan? Will this man get to finish his bat sandwich?

Posted by M. C. on June 6, 2021

Be seeing you

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

Now Is Your Last Chance To Opt-Out Of Amazon Sidewalk | ZeroHedge

Posted by M. C. on June 6, 2021

No Echo, no Alexa, no nothin’, no problem

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/now-your-last-chance-opt-out-amazon-sidewalk

Tyler Durden's Photoby Tyler Durden

Amazon Sidewalk, the company’s new shared mesh network that helps devices like Amazon Echo devices, Ring Security Cams, outdoor lights, motion sensors, and Tile trackers work better around the house and beyond, will be switched on next week. Tens of millions of Americans own Amazon devices, and the experimental network will turn users into guinea pigs next week, according to ArsTechnica.

On June 8, users who don’t opt-out will be automatically enrolled in “Sidewalk.” The mesh network, created by Echoes, cameras, and other smart devices under the Amazon brand, will use a small amount of bandwidth and broadcast to nearby neighbors and or city streets. 

“Amazon Sidewalk creates a low-bandwidth network with the help of Sidewalk Bridge devices, including select Echo and Ring devices. These Bridge devices share a small portion of your internet bandwidth which is pooled together to provide these services to you and your neighbors. And when more neighbors participate, the network becomes even stronger,” Amazon’s website said. 

While Amazon does provide a white paper detailing the technical foundations of the shared mesh network, it’s likely many users won’t be too excited. Some might find it helpful as others don’t want their networks exposed to possible security flaws. 

 ArsTechnica wrote a cautionary note: 

There are enough theoretical risks to give users pause. Wireless technologies like Wi-Fi and Bluetooth have a history of being insecure. Remember WEP, the encryption scheme that protected Wi-Fi traffic from being monitored by nearby parties? It was widely used for four years before researchers exposed flaws that made decrypting data relatively easy for attackers. WPA, the technology that replaced WEP, is much more robust, but it also has a checkered history… 

Consider the wealth of intimate details Amazon devices are privy to. They see who knocks on our doors, and in some homes they peer into our living rooms. They hear the conversations we’re having with friends and family. They control locks and other security systems in our home. Extending the reach of all this encrypted data to the sidewalk and living rooms of neighbors requires a level of confidence that’s not warranted for a technology that’s never seen widespread testing.

There is no doubt, the benefits of Sidewalk for some, but users will be guinea pigs. To protect the network security of your home network and even your family, you may want to opt-out of the program before next week.

“Amazon Sidewalk opt-out” is the first on this web search query. 

Google Search Trends shows rising search trends for people trying to figure out how to disable Sidewalk.

Turning off Sidewalk is easy: 

  1. Opening the Alexa app
  2. Opening More and selecting Settings
  3. Selecting Account Settings
  4. Selecting Amazon Sidewalk
  5. Turning Amazon Sidewalk Off

Be seeing you

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

‘Fauci Under The Bus?’ – RPI 5 June Update

Posted by M. C. on June 5, 2021

𝐂𝐎𝐕𝐈𝐃 𝐋𝐚𝐛 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐲 𝐅𝐚𝐮𝐜𝐢’𝐬 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐬:
1) Fauci and his associates immediately were concerned about the possibility COVID leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
2) The tone shifted, as Fauci and his associates became concerned about their ties to the lab leak (via NIH and NIAID funding).
3) Fauci and his associates used resources to research their accountability with respect to the lab leak.
4) Fauci and his associates publicly denounced the “lab leak theory” – despite their own understanding of its possibility. This set the mainstream media’s narrative, and allowed platforms to censor skeptics.
5) Peter Daszak, president of a lab directly tied to the Wuhan research, organized scientists to condemn the lab leak theory. It was aPR campaign to avoid accountability. He personally thanked Fauci for helping with PR.

We also know that while Fauci was demanding that we all wear at least two face masks or we would all die from Covid, he privately told his friends that face masks were useless against the virus:

https://mailchi.mp/ronpaulinstitute/fauci-115450?e=4e0de347c8

Fauci Cornered Dear Friends:

A little over a week when I last wrote to you I honestly was not sure whether my Fauci-as-Icarus metaphor would bear itself out. The attention-seeking bureaucrat, lionized and cannonized by what has become essentially a religious cult centered around a new virus that emerged, ostensibly, late in 2019 or early 2020, was tottering on the ropes, hammered with body-blows by the likes of Sen. Rand Paul over “mask theater” and, perhaps fatally, over support for “gain-of-function” research on viruses. Fauci famously, while clenching his teeth, vehemently denied funding “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan lab in China. But he was lying. And Sen. Paul knew he was lying. And Sen Paul showed us how he was lying: he used a cut-out organization, EcoHealth Alliance, to funnel money to the lab for research on how to “juice up the virus,” as Sen. Paul puts it.

Since my last message the release of Fauci’s emails, triggered by a FOIA request, as confirmed all that Sen. Paul brought up in the hearing and more. Brian Lohman on Facebook shared via Unwoke Narrative one of the most concise synopses of just how damning the Fauci emails actually are. As he writes, what they confirm are: 𝐂𝐎𝐕𝐈𝐃 𝐋𝐚𝐛 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐲 𝐅𝐚𝐮𝐜𝐢’𝐬 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐬:
1) Fauci and his associates immediately were concerned about the possibility COVID leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
2) The tone shifted, as Fauci and his associates became concerned about their ties to the lab leak (via NIH and NIAID funding).
3) Fauci and his associates used resources to research their accountability with respect to the lab leak.
4) Fauci and his associates publicly denounced the “lab leak theory” – despite their own understanding of its possibility. This set the mainstream media’s narrative, and allowed platforms to censor skeptics.
5) Peter Daszak, president of a lab directly tied to the Wuhan research, organized scientists to condemn the lab leak theory. It was aPR campaign to avoid accountability. He personally thanked Fauci for helping with PR. We also know that while Fauci was demanding that we all wear at least two face masks or we would all die from Covid, he privately told his friends that face masks were useless against the virus:


As satisfying as it is to see Fauci perhaps getting his comeuppance – and he deserves to be remembered in ignominy henceforth ’til the end of time – there is also this alarming feeling that the narrative is shifting to protect the guilty. Fauci has enjoyed wealth and fame as the public face of the Covid response (and the author of nearly unimaginable human and economic destruction since last February or so), but as Don Corleone told Tom Hagen in The Godfather, “Tattaglia’s a pimp. … it was Barzini all along.” 

Is Fauci just a front man for a larger agenda? Are we supposed to cheer so hard when he finally lands to the ground, his wax wings melted all around him, that we do not bother looking for all the Barzinis who really launched this plot?

The takedown of Fauci increasingly causes me concern, as appreciative as I am for the work of Sen. Paul and so many others. What is replacing it is the “war with China” narrative that the military-industrial-complex/CIA has been pushing since the implosion of the bogus “war on terror” and associated nonsense like the emergence of a new and extremely threatening (and bogus) “Khorasan group” which “forced” Obama to go into Syria in 2014, only to arm and train murderous jihadists to overthrow the secular Assad government.

The US war machine has China in its targets over its “totalitarianism” meanwhile endorsing all of the actual totalitarian policies of the Chinese government: mass surveillance, vaccine passports, social credit scores (in bed with Big Tech and social media companies). What they really hate is that China is out-competing the US globally in doing business overseas. Beijing inks deals overseas, Washington imposes sanctions and drops bombs. Which makes more sense?

The US war-profits machine hates that China is out-competing the US overseas without needing a trillion dollar military-budget. That draws attention to their scam: they are not protecting us. They are enriching themselves while picking our pockets and destroying the future for our children and grandchildren.

Fauci is going down. That’s a good thing. But if we pause too long for a victory dance we will miss the dark demons who have long abandoned their Faucian host for the promise of greener pastures elsewhere. The war parasite is again feeding.
  RPI Conference Update:
I hope to make an announcement this week regarding the possibility of our holding once again this summer what has become our regular Ron Paul Institute Washington Conference. Last year we were thwarted by the Covid hysteria but the skies are clearing it seems and we are working around the last few hurdles. Watch this space!!!
Sincerely yours,

Daniel McAdams
Executive Director
Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Be seeing you

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

Democratic Showdown: Kamala vs. Manchin – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 5, 2021

As for Manchin, he is sitting in the catbird seat in the Democratic Party. He holds the whip hand over both Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Biden. For if the West Virginian refuses to bend or break on the filibuster, then not only will the voting rights bill fail in the Senate, so, too, could gun control, D.C. statehood, climate change, and immigration legislation.

If Joe Manchin holds his ground this June, he will prevail, the filibuster will survive, the For the People Act will die a deserved death, and Joe will become legend in West Virginia.

And if Manchin stands his ground, the big loser is Kamala Harris.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/06/patrick-j-buchanan/democratic-showdown-kamala-vs-manchin/

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Speaking in Tulsa on the 100th anniversary of the racial atrocity there, Joe Biden belatedly turned to the issue of voting rights, to explain why he is having such difficulty winning passage of the party’s priority legislation.

“I hear all the folks on TV saying, ‘Why doesn’t Biden get this done?’”

“Well, because Biden only has a majority of, effectively, four votes in the House and a tie in the Senate, with two members of the Senate who vote more with my Republican friends.”

Biden was referring to Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

“But we’re not giving up,” Biden hastily added.

“Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed For the People Act to protect our democracy. The Senate will take it up later this month, and I’m going to fight like heck with every tool at my disposal for its passage.

“To signify the importance of our efforts, today I’m asking Vice President Harris to help … lead them. … With her leadership and your support, we’re going to overcome again, I promise you. But it’s going to take a hell of a lot of work.”

Thus did Biden designate Kamala Harris as his field commander in winning Senate passage of a voting rights bill that would cancel out many GOP victories in state legislatures in enacting voting reforms.

Sunday, Harris, who is also Biden’s point person on the border crisis, will be in Guatemala to learn what causes Latin American peoples of color to leave the land they were born in and travel 1,000 miles for a chance to live, work and raise their families in a nation established by and for white supremacists.

But when she returns, Harris will face a showdown — with Joe Manchin.

For Manchin, who has the decisive Democratic vote in the Senate, not only opposes elements of the Democrats’ voting rights bill. He has declared that ending the Senate filibuster would “be to destroy our government,” and he will never cast a vote to kill it.

In April, Manchin was emphatic in The Washington Post, “There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster.”

Yet, as long as that filibuster exists, 60 Senate votes are needed to pass major legislation. And if the filibuster is not eliminated, Democratic voting rights proposals don’t have a snowball’s chance of being enacted.

Hence, if Manchin is telling the truth and holds his ground, Harris is headed for a fruitless and failed assignment this June that will reveal her to be a leader without clout in the Senate whence she came.

Thus, in publicly handing Harris the portfolio on both the Democrats’ voting rights bill and border crisis, Biden may have set up his vice president for a great fall and a major humiliation. Yet, Harris is said to have asked Biden for the assignment.

As for Manchin, he is sitting in the catbird seat in the Democratic Party. He holds the whip hand over both Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Biden. For if the West Virginian refuses to bend or break on the filibuster, then not only will the voting rights bill fail in the Senate, so, too, could gun control, D.C. statehood, climate change, and immigration legislation.

All could suffer the same fate as the Jan. 6 Commission.

The Washington Post reports Senate staffers are saying that there is “panic” in the Democratic caucus that Manchin will stand his ground and refuse to kill the filibuster, no matter the pressure the party puts on him.

Recognition by the White House of the leverage Manchin and Sinema wield was evident in press secretary Jen Psaki’s effort to soften Biden’s crack about “the two members of the Senate who vote more with my Republican friends.”

Psaki brushed aside any suggestion that Biden was being caustic about the two senators saying, “I don’t think he was intending to convey anything other than a little bit of commentary on TV punditry.”

But the issues and stakes involved are becoming evident to everyone.

A coalition of progressive groups, on Thursday, called on Schumer to hold a Senate vote to kill the filibuster. More than 100 groups sent a letter to the majority leader arguing that the Republican senators who blocked a bill to create a commission to probe the Jan. 6 Capitol attack showed, “it is clearer than ever that the filibuster needs to be eliminated.”

The groups added: “We call on you and the Senate Democratic caucus to eliminate the filibuster as a weapon that Sen. McConnell can use to block efforts to defend and strengthen our democracy and make our government work for the American people.”

If Joe Manchin holds his ground this June, he will prevail, the filibuster will survive, the For the People Act will die a deserved death, and Joe will become legend in West Virginia.

And if Manchin stands his ground, the big loser is Kamala Harris.

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 »