MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

California’s Looming ‘Green New Car Wreck’ | Watts Up With That?

Posted by M. C. on October 3, 2020

And it isn’t just me saying this. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees. In a letter sent by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to Gavin Newsom on September 28, Wheeler wrote:

“[It] begs the question of how you expect to run an electric car fleet that will come with significant increases in electricity demand, when you can’t even keep the lights on today.

“The truth is that if the state were driving 100 percent electric vehicles today, the state would be dealing with even worse power shortages than the ones that have already caused a series of otherwise preventable environmental and public health consequences.”

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/10/02/californias-looming-green-new-car-wreck/

Anthony Watts

Governor Newsom announces major climate initiative, September 23, 2020. (Screenshot via California Gavin Newsom)

On September 23, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that will ban the sale of gasoline-powered cars in the Golden State by 2035. Ignoring the hard lessons of this past summer, when California’s solar- and wind-reliant electric grid underwent rolling blackouts, Newsom now adds a huge new burden to the grid in the form electric vehicle charging. If California officials follow through and enforce Newsom’s order, the result will be a green new car version of a train wreck.

Let’s run some numbers. According to Statista, there are more than 15 million vehicles registered in California. Per the U.S. Department of Energy, there are only 256,000 electric vehicles registered in the state—just 1.7 percent of all vehicles.

Using the Tesla Model3 mid-range model as a baseline for an electric car, you’ll need to use about 62 kilowatt-hours (KWh) of power to charge a standard range Model 3 battery to full capacity. It will take about eight hours to fully charge it at home using the standard Tesla NEMA 14-50 charger.

Now, let’s assume that by 2040, five years after the mandate takes effect, also assuming no major increase in the number of total vehicles, California manages to increase the number of electric vehicles to 25 percent of the total vehicles in the state. If each vehicle needs an average of 62 kilowatt-hours for a full charge, then the total charging power required daily would be 3,750,000 x 62 KWh, which equals 232,500,000 KWh, or 232.5 gigawatt-hours (GWh) daily.

Utility-scale California solar electric generation according to the energy.ca.gov puts utility-scale solar generation at about 30,000 GWh per year currently. Divide that by 365 days and we get 80 GWh/day, predicted to double, to 160 GWh /day. Even if we add homeowner rooftop solar, about half the utility-scale, at 40 GWh/day we come up to 200 GW/h per day, still 32 GWh short of the charging demand for a 25% electric car fleet in California. Even if rooftop solar doubles by 2040, we are at break-even, with 240GWh of production during the day.

Bottom-line, under the most optimistic best-case scenario, where solar operates at 100% of rated capacity (it seldom does), it would take every single bit of the 2040 utility-scale solar and rooftop capacity just to charge the cars during the day. That leaves nothing left for air conditioning, appliances, lighting, etc. It would all go to charging the cars, and that’s during the day when solar production peaks.

But there’s a much bigger problem. Even a grade-schooler can figure out that solar energy doesn’t work at night, when most electric vehicles will be charging at homes. So, where does Newsom think all this extra electric power is going to come from?

The wind? Wind power lags even further behind solar power. According to energy.gov, as of 2019, California had installed just 5.9 gigawatts of wind power generating capacity. This is because you need large amounts of land for wind farms, and not every place is suitable for high-return wind power.

In 2040, to keep the lights on with 25 percent of all vehicles in California being electric, while maintaining the state mandate requiring all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045, California would have to blanket the entire state with solar and wind farms. It’s an impossible scenario. And the problem of intermittent power and rolling blackouts would become much worse.

And it isn’t just me saying this. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees. In a letter sent by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to Gavin Newsom on September 28, Wheeler wrote:

“[It] begs the question of how you expect to run an electric car fleet that will come with significant increases in electricity demand, when you can’t even keep the lights on today.

“The truth is that if the state were driving 100 percent electric vehicles today, the state would be dealing with even worse power shortages than the ones that have already caused a series of otherwise preventable environmental and public health consequences.”


California’s green new car wreck looms large on the horizon. Worse, can you imagine electric car owners’ nightmares when California power companies shut off the power for safety reasons during fire season? Try evacuating in your electric car when it has a dead battery.

Gavin Newsom’s “no more gasoline cars sold by 2035” edict isn’t practical, sustainable, or sensible. But isn’t that what we’ve come to expect with any and all of these Green New Deal-lite schemes?

I acknowledge the help of Willis Eschenbach in checking the numbers for this article.

Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. He is also an owner of an electric vehicle in California.

Be seeing you

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

The Powerful and Obnoxious Odor of Mendacity – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on October 3, 2020

I read Jonathan’s Cook’s piece, “The Guardian’s deceit-riddled new statement betrays both Julian Assange and journalism.”  Cook rightly excoriates The Guardian  for lying about Assange and betraying him to the British and American governments, long-standing lies [my emphasis] that continue to today as Julian sits in a British kangaroo court where injustice is being served to extradite him to the USA.  Here is one point he makes;

Nauseatingly, however, the Guardian not only seeks to blame Assange for its own mistake but tells a glaring lie about the circumstances. Its statement says: ‘No concerns were expressed by Assange or WikiLeaks about security being compromised when the book was published in February 2011. WikiLeaks published the unredacted files in September 2011.’

Then I read another fine article at Asia Times, by MK Bhadrakumar…

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/edward-curtin/the-powerful-and-obnoxious-odor-of-mendacity/

By Edward Curtin

“Mendacity is a system we live in.”

– Paul Newman, playing Brick in Tennessee Williams’, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

A profusion of philosophical, psychological, and political ink has been spent on the subject of lying and liars.  The toll in loves lost and relationships destroyed from lying is incalculable. All the war dead are victims of government lies; what Marine Major General Smedley Butler called a “racket.” Lies are poison, slow or quick working, and they kill both body and soul.

We are living in a country of lies.  A country where propaganda is disseminated around the clock and lies are the air we breathe.  Is it any wonder that most people are confused as to what to believe and whom to trust?  But it goes much deeper.

I have recently read a number of perceptive, truthful articles that have gotten me thinking further about this subject, although I must add that I have been preoccupied with the issue since I was very young and my father took me to see Pinocchio in the movie theater and subsequently told me improvised Pinocchio stories before bedtime.  Whether he knew it or not – and I think he knew – he set me on a lifetime’s quest to try to distinguish truth from lies and embrace the former.  Then as a teenager, I appeared on a very popular television show, To Tell the Truth.  I was recruited to lie, to play the part of an impostor, which I did quite well. I lied for the money and probably would have made a good lying politician if fate hadn’t interceded. It was only later that my actions and the show’s title kept reverberating through my mind, echoing down my days to the present and my interest in truth, lies, and propaganda.  From my father came a love for the redeeming nature of stories.

***

“More and more often there is embarrassment all around,” wrote Walter Benjamin in The Storyteller, “when the wish to hear a story is expressed.  It is as if something that seemed inalienable to us, the securest among our possessions, were taken from us: the ability to exchange experiences.”

***

It was getting dark on the street as the young man emerged from his high school on New York’s Upper East Side after basketball practice.  He had lost track of time as he dreamed his basketball dreams and headed to the subway for the long ride home.  It was December, 1961. A man, dressed in a cashmere overcoat and carrying a silver bowl, was walking his dog on the street.  The boy asked him for the time.  The man told him, adding with a grin that his watch always ran fast.  The boy recognized the grin from what seemed like a dream.  He pet the man’s dog, and the man asked him about the imposing school next to them.  He asked the boy his name and the boy said “Eddie.”  While the dog did its business in the street, they chatted for a few minutes.  The man wished him luck with his basketball and said his name was Paul. As the boy hustled toward the subway, Paul Newman shouted after him, “See you later, Fast Eddie.”

The next week the boy went to see Paul Newman playing Fast Eddie Felson in The Hustler. He always remembered Paul’s words about mendacity and his words from The Hustler:

Fast Eddie: How should I play that one, Bert? Play it safe? That’s the way you always told me to play it: safe… play the percentage. Well, here we go: fast and loose. One ball, corner pocket. Yeah, percentage players die broke, too, don’t they, Bert?

Lies are a common way of playing it safe.  Except they kill the liar.

***

In an article by Mike Whitney, “Betrayal, Infuriating Betrayal,” in which he writes about the Democrats’ ongoing efforts – Russia-gate, etc. – to remove Trump from the presidency, efforts based on a string of lies they know to be lies [ my emphasis] and have been proven to be so, he wonders thus toward the end:

It’s surprising that this doesn’t piss-off more Democrats, after all, it’s the ultimate expression of contempt and condescension. When someone lies to your face relentlessly, repeatedly and shamelessly, they are expressing their loathing for you. Can’t they see that?

Of course, that’s a very good question.

I read Jonathan’s Cook’s piece, “The Guardian’s deceit-riddled new statement betrays both Julian Assange and journalism.”  Cook rightly excoriates The Guardian  for lying about Assange and betraying him to the British and American governments, long-standing lies [my emphasis] that continue to today as Julian sits in a British kangaroo court where injustice is being served to extradite him to the USA.  Here is one point he makes;

Nauseatingly, however, the Guardian not only seeks to blame Assange for its own mistake but tells a glaring lie about the circumstances. Its statement says: ‘No concerns were expressed by Assange or WikiLeaks about security being compromised when the book was published in February 2011. WikiLeaks published the unredacted files in September 2011.’

Then I read another fine article at Asia Times, by MK Bhadrakumar, “Permafrost descends on US-Russia ties,”  about a bipartisan Senate bill aimed at demonizing Russia.  The bill is led by Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware.  Bhadrakumar writes:

The fallout of all this is going to be profound for the Sino-Russian alliance. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov hit out last week: ‘It is time to stop applying Western metrics to our actions and stop trying to be liked by the West at any cost … the West is wittingly or unwittingly pushing us towards this analysis.

‘It is likely to be done unwittingly [my emphasis]. However, it is a big mistake to think that Russia will play by Western rules in any case, just like thinking this in terms of China.’

I was struck by Lavrov’s word “wittingly or unwittingly” – diplomatic speech – since he knows the Senator’s bill is filled with lies but suggests otherwise – “It is likely to be done unwittingly.”

Finally, I read an article by Philip Roddis, “Julian, Guardian, and the Law of Volitionality.”  As a lead-in to his announced topic, he tells a little tale about his step-mother that struck me.  It is worth quoting in full:

Indulge me a moment, will you? At fifteen I acquired a stepmother. We never got on. Her and dad’s insistence that she be called “mum” didn’t help. For the two years we spent in the same house – I left home weeks before turning seventeen – I never addressed her by name or title.

She had dad round her little finger. One ploy was to badger him into making a ruling against me. Once she’d done so, she’d beg him to relent. “Oh it’s alright, Frank. Let him … ” [do/have whatever it was she’d got him to forbid]. But no way was he going to u-turn at this point. A matter of pride, you see. I saw this little comedy for what it was but dad fell for it every time.

And here’s the thing. Maybe she did too. She got her way, but I don’t rule out her motives for that post victory appeal being hidden to – and by – her. My flawed but brilliant teacher said that everybody knows what they’re doing. Indeed, it was so fundamental a tenet he gave it a name: The Law of Volitionality. Yes, he took it to absurd and at times cruel lengths but for all that he was onto something. To manage cognitive dissonance – to maintain a sense of being fundamentally good – we play games with ourselves. Stepmother was likely fooling herself almost as much as dad with her tiresome shenanigans.

It’s not that she wasn’t being manipulative. Just that an essential ingredient of the manipulation, vital to maintaining self-esteem, was a decision – volitionally squirrelled away, out of sight from everyday awareness – to hoodwink herself. [my emphasis]

You can find such examples every day.  Articles about lies tossed about by all sides of the political spectrum are commonplace.

I think it fair to say that everyone has lied at some point, but only the most manipulative are proud of it.  “The essence of the lie implies in fact that the liar actually is in complete possession of the truth which he is hiding,” wrote Jean-Paul Sartre.  This cynical consciousness that knows the truth but denies it to others is a perfect description of  politicians, propagandists, intelligence services, and their media mouthpieces. They know they are lying and are proud of it, but of course they will never admit it.

Most people are not that manipulative.  Sartre says there is another type of liar who suffers from bad faith.  While they lie to others, they also try to lie to themselves and hide the truth from themselves.  People often say that this person and that one really believe their own lies, that they are deluded, but this is not possible.  For “the one to whom the lie is told and the one who lies are one and the same person, which means that I must know in my capacity as a deceiver the truth which is hidden from me in my capacity as the one deceived.”

I have recently been thinking that many people who are adamantly insistent on the efficacy of mask-wearing against SARS-CoV-2, the virus associated with COVID-19, and  those who are always quoting the official statistics, are of this sort.  They either know there is good evidence against mask-wearing and the official statistical game, but try to convince themselves this isn’t so, or they avoid reading about the possibility to save face and live with themselves  – both acts of bad faith.  Such people are like Philip Roddis’s step-mother.  But in this case, the bad faith is about a Big Lie, just as the fake fight between Trump and Biden has induced many people to take bad faith sides in a scene from Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass:

“Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle”
So Tweedledee and Tweedledum
Had their scrum
All about the rattle.
When it was done
Only the dumb
Gave a shit about their battle

***

Anthrax 9/11: The US C… Webb, George Buy New $1.99 (as of 05:26 EDT – Details) Last year, I was at a large library book sale and came upon an odd box of typed manuscripts of stories that lacked the author’s name.  They were free and so I took a few.  There was one very short story, entitled “Fear,” that struck me for its haunting connection to the issue of lies. “Death is the sanction of everything the storyteller can tell,” wrote Benjamin, which seems so true with this anonymous story. Here it is:

Listen, that’s what I want to say to them.  Listen, this is one of those stories hard to believe.  When I first heard it, I doubted it completely.  Of course I was telling it and that might have been a factor.  It’s hard, once you hear your own voice, to believe it’s you.  After a while, however, I became convinced it had to be true.  I couldn’t make up anything so odd, so sick if you prefer.  At first the voice sounded strange, but once I realized it was really mine, I understood I was revealing this pathetic tale under great duress and it was understandable that my voice sounded foreign.

You should take that into account.  I am a very sick man.  I realize that now.  In the beginning, I thought I was surely dying, until, that is, I saw that I was already dead.  Dying was beside the point.  I was dead.  Naturally this came as a great surprise to me.  Now you might reasonably ask, how did this absurd situation come about, and how can a dead man write words?  Let me tell you.

It began when I was born while the world was engaged in one of its periodic slaughters. No, periodic is not true.  Those slaughters are constant.

So you wonder what my astrological sign is?  The mushroom cloud of course.  A cancer born under the sign of the mushroom.

Anyway, I have been living for decades now and you’d think I would have seen the obvious.  I didn’t, or that’s what I told myself.  Not for the life of me.  I kept going on as if I were alive when I was dead.  It’s obvious now: the dead never know they’re dead until… But I didn’t know it, and you can imagine, I hope, how this caused me many problems.

Don’t laugh.

That was the year I disappeared.

She asked me: “But are you content?”

– No, I wouldn’t say that.

– So you’re not?  It’s hard to tell?  Tell me.

– No, not really.

– Not really what?

– Not really content.

– What would give you contentment?

– I’m not sure.

– You mean to say you have no idea?

– No, not that.  I guess if I thought about it …

– Do that, that’s what I’m asking you.  You must have thought about it before.

– Sure I have but… Bottle of Lies: The In… Eban, Katherine Best Price: $18.69 Buy New $16.94 (as of 02:25 EDT – Details)

– Why the but?  You’re so hesitant about everything.  You don’t know, you doubt, maybe, but, perhaps.  Why are you so unsure?

I had no satisfactory answer.  I could only stumble over my words.  I was afraid they would trip me up, especially if I spoke without premeditation. I was used to hesitating so I could control things.  That’s not exactly true.  When I realized I was dead, I also realized it was because I had always been a liar, to myself and others.

It was then I disappeared.

Since coming here, I have been resolved to change.  Yes, the outside world was making me sick with all its lies and deceptions.  Mendacity, mendacity, mendacity – I heard someone in a play scream that out once. I never forgot it, and I felt I was going mad because of it.  But I too was a liar, so I resolved to change.

No more bullshit.  That was my number one resolution.  It sounded crude but was true. Next to it, I listed euphemisms for bullshit: exaggeration, manners, civility, tolerance, modesty , mental reservations, kindness, and of course lies.  Bullshit was lies and self-deception.  Simple as that. I couldn’t admit that I was dead; that was bullshit, and I was dead because I was a bullshit artist and just wanted to be an artist and write stories that were true.  I have always lied so much because, like everyone else, I was afraid of the truth. Saying it, hearing it, or seeing it.  I much preferred ideas of what should be true rather than what was true, or what I really thought was true.  I was afraid if I gave up lying I would feel lonelier than I did before.  Where did it get me anyway?  Where does it get anyone?  I have always hated myself for it.  This all seemed so weird to me; how everyone nodded at truth, just as they nodded to each other, and then went on lying their ways through life.  And if you asked them if they were lying, they would invariably deny it.  Oh, it’s so twisted.  I am sick. I don’t know where I’m going with this story.  It seems to have a life of its own, unlike me.

I didn’t really disappear.  They took me here.  I am so afraid.

That was it.  Short and eerie.   It reminded me of Kafka, who wrote in his diary: “The strange, mysterious, perhaps dangerous, perhaps redeeming comfort that there is in writing.”

***

“And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”

That’s what the CIA has inscribed on the wall of its headquarters: The George Bush Center for Intelligence.

More appropriately, as a description of not only the CIA but American society as a whole, are Ken Kesey’s words from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest: “You seem to forget, Miss Flinn, that this is an institution for the insane.”

That’s not a lie.

Yes, “Mendacity is the system we live in.”

And the odor here is really loathsome.

The Best of Edward Curtin Edward Curtin [send him mail] is a writer whose work has appeared widely. His website is edwardcurtin.com. He is the author of the new book Seekinging Truth in the Country of Lies Seekinging Truth in the Country of Lies.

Be seeing you

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

The NRA Would Be Wise to Leave New York ASAP | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 3, 2020

Although there are legitimate critiques about the efficacy of said sanctuary movements, gun owners are at least getting into the right mindset of using local action to effect change as opposed to waiting for the Executive Branch or the Supreme Court to save them. Moreover, some have rocked the boat even further by suggesting state lines be redrawn.

https://mises.org/wire/nra-would-be-wise-leave-new-york-asap?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=cc3d46d665-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_10_02_06_25_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-cc3d46d665-228343965

José Niño

The State of New York has wasted no time reminding Americans about its pathological disregard for personal freedom.

Its covid-19 lockdown policies were among the most heavy-handed responses implemented by a state government in the country. Controversies surrounding the state government’s decision to place recovering covid patients in retirement homes, arguably a major factor behind the state’s deadly retirement home outbreak, were major black eyes for Governor Andrew Cuomo’s administration. The Empire State’s overreach hasn’t been confined to covid-19, though.

New York policymakers are taking crisis opportunism to another level by attempting to dissolve the National Rifle Association. Led by New York State attorney general Letitia James, the State of New York moved forward with a lawsuit last month in an attempt to gut the organization during a time when the NRA is mired in financial scandals. The New York suit alleges that the NRA has been involved in extensive cases of misallocation of funds and corruption, therefore requiring the state to dissolve America’s oldest and most powerful gun lobby.

How Bureaucrats Target Their Ideological Enemies

While state governments have the power to investigate organizations for potentially defrauding donors, the case the State of New York is pursuing against the NRA reeks of political grandstanding. The NRA is an easy target for the Left, which is ecstatic about any opportunity to demonize gun owners and institutions that encourage lawful use of firearms. In the case of New York attorney general James, her record of antigun crusading speaks for itself. While in her previous position as a public advocate for New York City, James attempted to force banks to break their ties with firearms manufacturers after the Pulse nightclub shooting in 2016. James is a politician with an ax to grind, and the current covid-19 lockdown hysteria gives her an opportunity to poke a “deplorable” group in the eye.

The NRA is no steadfast paladin of gun freedom, at least when compared tohard-line rivals or the manygrassroots organizations that don’t rely on big donor money to stay afloat. Be that as it may, its recent confrontation with New York’s state government should concern any organization advocating for even stronger firearm-related freedoms.

Previously, I wrote about the increasingly politicized nature of the political speech and activities that nonprofit organizations participate in. Historically, politicians have used the levers of tax power to harass political organizations that rub them the wrong way. It wasn’t too long ago that the Obama administration’s IRS made went after Tea Party organizations and excessively scrutinized their internal operations. While the IRS issued an apology for its behavior during the Obama years, the threat of government sticking its nose in the affairs of political organizations is still present at all levels. For now, activist state governments will be more than happy to make people’s lives miserable.

Gun owners face threats from all corners—from state and nonstate actors. To mitigate these threats, it would be wise for Second Amendment organizations to go where free speech and political organization are treated best. As riots across have vividly demonstrated, we cannot assume all jurisdictions will uphold their side of the proverbial “social contract” and protect basic liberties. Mises Institute president Jeff Deist candidly observed, “Selective prosecution and selective nonprosecution are terrifying features of the crappy US justice system. Any of us could have our lives ruined tomorrow by a political DA.”

Politicians are picking up on the divergent political paths states are taking. South Dakota governor Kristi Noem made a name for herself by refusing to enact a statewide lockdown. Similarly, Arkansas attorney general Leslie Rutledge came to the NRA’s defense by penning a piece for NBC News condemning her New York counterpart and demonstrating how her state offers more favorable conditions for gun owners and advocacy for the concept. After all, Arkansas is a constitutional carry state and is not going to go out of its way to persecute political organizations for wrongthink by using the excuses of campaign finance violations or trumped-up charges of misuse of funds.

The NRA’s current dilemma is emblematic of our political era—mass polarization and a widening gulf between the values of states dominated by major urban centers and those with more rural constituencies. Let’s face it: New York hasn’t been a gun-friendly jurisdiction in recent decades. From New York City’s assault weapons ban during the early 1990s to the passage of the SAFE Act in 2013, which established universal background checks and broadened the definition of so-called assault weapons, the State of New York has demonstrated a clear antipathy toward gun ownership. It is no surprise that it’s ranked dead last according to Guns and Ammo magazine’s annual rankings for gun friendliness.

The Benefits of Decentralization

America’s federalism still provides a fallback option for Americans living in states that are hostile to economic and cultural interests. If states become overzealous in their policymaking, people can vote with their feet by moving to states that are friendlier to personal and economic freedoms. We are already witnessing this trend in action, as 6 million Americans have already left states like California in the past decade for more business-friendly and affordable places such as Arizona, Colorado, and Texas. So, the movement of people is not just a hypothetical scenario in today’s climate of polarization.

President Donald Trump sagaciously suggested the NRA move its headquarters to Texas, a state known for its gun culture and policies that are receptive toward lawful gun ownership. From 2020 and beyond, many gun owners will have to grapple with the grim reality that certain jurisdictions will not be amicable toward wedge issues that span the spectrum from abortion to gun ownership. A number of gun owners have already gotten the memo and have begun to explore unorthodox ways of getting around the existential threat of gun control in their respective localities. Some have launched the notorious Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions movement. Although there are legitimate critiques about the efficacy of said sanctuary movements, gun owners are at least getting into the right mindset of using local action to effect change as opposed to waiting for the Executive Branch or the Supreme Court to save them. Moreover, some have rocked the boat even further by suggesting state lines be redrawn. For example, West Virginiainvited rural counties of Virginia to join the state, while disgruntled residents of Oregon and Northern California are attempting to break away from their respective states to become part of a Greater Idaho that better represents their values.

More states should make it a point to differentiate themselves from progressive bastions. Americans can see for themselves that there are other jurisdictions in the country that treat certain freedoms better than others. The potential loss of a significant portion of their tax base could be enough for blue states to start to reconsider their divisive policies. The question is, Are they ready to see the error of their ways?

We will have to see. Author:

Contact José Niño

José Niño is a Venezuelan American freelance writer. Sign up for his mailing list here. Get his e-book The 10 Myths of Gun Control here. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter, or email him here.

Be seeing you

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

The Absurdity of Covid “Cases” | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

Take a perfectly healthy person with no particular symptoms and swab the inside of their nose. If the culture shows the presence of staphylococcus aureus, do we insist they have a staph infection? When someone drives to work without incident or accident, do we create statistics about their exposure to traffic?

Mild or asymptomatic covid cases are effectively meaningless. The world is full of bacteria and viruses, and sometimes they make us a bit sick for a few days. There are millions of them in the world all around us, on our skin, in our nose and respiratory tract, in our organs. We are meant to live with them, which is why we all have immune systems designed to help us coexist and adapt to ever-changing organisms

https://mises.org/wire/absurdity-covid-cases?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=4e96eb02eb-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-4e96eb02eb-228343965

Jeff Deist

Today’s headlines announced Donald and Melania Trump “tested positive” for covid-19. Another claims nineteen thousand Amazon workers “got” covid-19 on the job. Both of these pseudostories are sure to ignite another absurd media frenzy. 

As always, the story keeps changing: Remember ventilators, flatten the curve, the next two weeks are crucial, etc.? Remember Nancy Pelosi in Chinatown back in February, urging everyone to visit? Remember Fauci dismissing masks as useless? Why should we believe anything the political/media complex tells us now?

So what do these headlines really mean? What exactly is a covid “case”? 

Since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, most US media outlets have been exceedingly credulous and complicit in their reporting. Journalists almost uniformly promote what we can call the “prolockdown” narrative, which is to wildly exaggerate the risks from covid-19 to serve a political agenda. They may be motivated to hurt Trump politically, to promote a more socialist “new normal,” or simply to drive more clicks and views. Bad news sells. But the bias is clear and undeniable. 

This explains why media outlets use the terms “case” and “infection” so loosely, to the point of actively misinforming the public. All of the endless talk about testing, testing, testing served to obscure two important facts. First, the tests themselves are almost laughably unreliable in producing both false positives and negatives. And what is the point? Are we going to test people again and again, every time they go out to the grocery or bump into a neighbor? Second, detecting virus particles or droplets in a human’s respiratory tract tells us very little. It certainly does not tell us they are sick, or transmitting sickness to anyone. 

Take a perfectly healthy person with no particular symptoms and swab the inside of their nose. If the culture shows the presence of staphylococcus aureus, do we insist they have a staph infection? When someone drives to work without incident or accident, do we create statistics about their exposure to traffic?

—A virus is not a disease. Only a very small percentage of those exposed to the virus itself—SARS-CoV-2—show any kind of acute respiratory symptoms, or what we can call “coronavirus disease.” 

The only meaningful statistics show the incidence of serious illness, hospitalizations, and deaths. The single most important statistic among these is the infection fatality rate (IFR). Data collected through July shows that the IFR for those under age forty-five is actually lower than that of the common flu. The covid-19 IFR rises for those over fifty, but it is hardly a death sentence. And the data does not segregate those with preexisting health issues caused by obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. If we could see data only for reasonably healthy people under fifty, the numbers would be even more reassuring. 

Mild or asymptomatic covid cases are effectively meaningless. The world is full of bacteria and viruses, and sometimes they make us a bit sick for a few days. There are millions of them in the world all around us, on our skin, in our nose and respiratory tract, in our organs. We are meant to live with them, which is why we all have immune systems designed to help us coexist and adapt to ever-changing organisms. We develop antibodies naturally, or we attempt to stimulate them through vaccines, but ultimately our own immune systems have to deal with covid-19. The virus will always be out there waiting, on the other side of any lockdown or mask—so we might as well get on with it. 

From day one the focus should have been on boosting immunity through exercise, fresh air, sunlight, proper dietary supplementation, and the promotion of general well-being. Instead our politicians, bureaucrats, and media insisted on business lockdowns, school closures, distancing, isolation, masks, and the mirage of a fast, effective vaccine. As with almost everything in life, state intervention made the situation worse. We can only hope many governors are removed from office, either by impeachment or at the next election. Several, including Andrew Cuomo in New York and Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, should face criminal charges for their lawless edicts. There is no due process exception for “public health.”

Lockdowns were never justified, either in terms of the covid-19 risk or the staggering economic tradeoffs, which will be felt for decades. They certainly are not justified now, given seven months of additional data showing that the transmission and lethality of covid-19 are not particularly worse than previous SARS, swine flu, or Ebola pandemics. We still don’t know how many of the reported two hundred thousand US covid-19 deaths were actually caused by the SARS-CoV-2 respiratory disease, or simply reflect people who died of other causes after exposure to covid-19. We do know that the harms caused by the lockdowns far outweigh the harms posed by the covid-19 virus.

We have had nearly eight months of life and liberty stolen from us by politicians and their hysteria-promoting accomplices in media. How much more will we accept? Author:

Contact Jeff Deist

Jeff Deist is president of the Mises Institute. He previously worked as chief of staff to Congressman Ron Paul, and as an attorney for private equity clients. Contact: email; Twitter.

Be seeing you

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

Is Chris Wallace a White Supremacist? – Taki’s Magazine

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

The entire point of the Proud Boys is for men to be masculine and defend the innocent, something like the Guardian Angels. It has nothing whatsoever to do with “white supremacy.” But, again, liberals call anyone they don’t like and can’t refute “white supremacists.”

You know why the media and Democrats hate the Proud Boys? Because they are America’s last line of defense against the left’s fascistic antifa storm troopers. Often, they are the only ones protecting us when the police are outnumbered or have been ordered to stand down by Democratic mayors and police chiefs.

https://www.takimag.com/article/is-chris-wallace-a-white-supremacist/print

Ann Coulter

After four months of looting, arson, window breaking, vandalism, intimidation, physical assaults, stabbings and shootings by Black Lives Matter and antifa, the first thing on the media’s mind is … getting Trump to condemn “white supremacists”!

It would be as if, on the morning after Pearl Harbor, the League of Nations demanded that FDR condemn American aggression in the Pacific.

Why on earth was Trump being badgered by both debate moderator Chris Wallace and Democratic nominee Joe Biden to denounce “white supremacy”? And why wasn’t Biden ever asked to condemn the nonstop violence by antifa that actually has been consuming the country for more than 100 nights now?

Wallace to Trump: “Are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups?”

Trump (perfectly accurately): “Sure. I’m willing to do that. But I would say almost everything I’m seeing is coming from the left wing, not the right wing.”

The media’s position on the murderous BLM and antifa riots has gone from What riots? They’re peaceful protests! to The rioters are white supremacist Trump supporters!

Who thinks white supremacists are a major force in America? There haven’t been any two people in 50 years who’ve gotten together and said, “Aren’t whites way better? Shouldn’t we rule over other people?”

“White supremacy” is a bogus concept invented on college campuses. There are white men who do horrible things, just as there are Asian men and black men who do horrible things. But they don’t represent any kind of organized movement.

You know what’s an organized movement? Antifa — Rose City Antifa, Antifa Seven Hills, Antifa Sacramento, Atlanta “Antifascists” and so on. They’re organized well enough that hundreds, sometimes thousands, of antifa members always know exactly when and where to show up, and what weapons to bring. Then they turn around and celebrate the destruction they’ve wrought (unpunished by Democratic mayors and liberal district attorneys).

But in Chris Wallace’s demon-haunted imagination, out beyond the coastal cities, there’s a scary world of pickup trucks being driven by men with long-barreled guns trying to re-enact “Roots.” (And they shop at Walmart!) “”White supremacy” is a bogus concept invented on college campuses.”

When Trump tried to bring up Pearl Harbor — i.e., the actual violence, as opposed to liberal imaginary violence — Wallace cited Kenosha.

REMINDER: After two nights of looting and arson by “peaceful protesters” in Kenosha in response to the police shooting of a knife-wielding black man resisting arrest, a group of men calling themselves “Armed Citizens to Protect Our Lives and Property” did just that. One of the men, Kyle Rittenhouse, shot three antifa as they were attacking him, killing two, in a clear case of self-defense.

That’s Wallace’s big example of right-wing violence: an armed citizen defending himself. The left wants antifa to rule our cities, with no pushback from uppity Americans.

Trump’s more addled debate partner, Joe Biden, threw in the Proud Boys — without correction by Wallace, whose entire career at Fox has been an audition tape for NBC.

Burning down police precincts, knocking statues off their pedestals, smashing windows, looting and vandalizing stores, stopping cars and demanding the drivers pledge allegiance to BLM, banging drums outside of politicians houses late into the night — was it the Proud Boys doing any of that?

Why are we talking about the Proud Boys at all? How about asking the Sierra Club to renounce violence?

Forget about the last 100 days of mind-boggling left-wing violence, let’s open it up to all of history! What is the Proud Boys’ big crime? Is there a single instance of the Proud Boy staging an unprovoked attack on anyone — ever?

The absolute worst thing you could say about the Proud Boys is: Too macho! They fight back. Fine, join the Democratic Party if testosterone isn’t your thing.

The nation’s leading anti-American and anti-Christian hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, calls them “white supremacists,” meaning, “anyone we don’t like and can’t refute.” You know who else this hate outfit hates? Dennis Prager. The Alliance for Catholic Tradition. Christian Ministries. The National Prayer Network.

The claim is especially delusional in the case of the Proud Boys, who have black members, Asian members and Latino members. The Los Angeles branch of the Proud Boys is about half Mexican. One of the founders is married to a black woman, with whom he has a biracial child.

The entire point of the Proud Boys is for men to be masculine and defend the innocent, something like the Guardian Angels. It has nothing whatsoever to do with “white supremacy.” But, again, liberals call anyone they don’t like and can’t refute “white supremacists.”

You know why the media and Democrats hate the Proud Boys? Because they are America’s last line of defense against the left’s fascistic antifa storm troopers. Often, they are the only ones protecting us when the police are outnumbered or have been ordered to stand down by Democratic mayors and police chiefs.

I believe that’s what Trump was trying to convey with his typically garbled: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by, but I’ll tell you what … somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem.” (If I’m wrong, then two men with Secret Service protection are throwing the rest of us to the wolves and I’m sitting this election out.)

The Proud Boys should sue Biden and Wallace for defamation.

The universities and media have successfully turned “white supremacist” into the worst thing any human can be — worse than “murderer,” “drug dealer” or “child molester.” To falsely accuse an organization of being “white supremacist” ought to be considered defamation per se. If you want to destroy something, is there a better way to do it than labeling it “white supremacist”?

In Portland, there have been mind-bogglingly destructive antifa riots every night for more than 100 days now. Last weekend, the Proud Boys staged a rally in Portland — and the lunatic governor of Oregon finally declared a “state of emergency.” (It was a lovely gathering with no arson or looting.)

This is the position of the media and the Democratic Party: Antifa must be allowed to run riot without interference from anyone. We’ve liberated antifa from district attorneys and mayors and now we’ll liberate them from individual Americans. Therefore, anyone who defends the innocent from psychotic left-wing violence will be cursed as a “white supremacist.”

Be seeing you

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

Melinda Gates Slams Social Media for Spreading ‘Disinfo’ – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/joseph-mercola/melinda-gates-slams-social-media-for-spreading-disinfo/

By Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

In a September 2020 interview with Axios on HBO, Melinda Gates said “It may be time for a reckoning” with social media’s role in spreading disinformation. According to Axios:1

“Bill and Melinda Gates … [have] seen firsthand the impact of disinformation, as they’ve become targets of conspiracy theories amplified and spread via social media … [Melinda] Gates … said society may need to start holding social media companies to account for their role in helping such disinformation spread.”

It’s ironic, to say the least, considering the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds and influences mainstream media companies, which in turn write whatever the Gates desire, be it truthful or not, without disclosing their conflict of interest.

Through its grants to the Leo Burnett Company, an ad agency owned by Publicis, the Gates Foundation is also financially linked to NewsGuard and HealthGuard, as both of these “fact-checking” sites are funded by Publicis. As such, Gates already has the power to pull strings and censor content they don’t like.

Gates Foundation Funds Scientific Disinformation

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Scott Atlas Just Hit Back at Fauci – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

One thing we can be sure of: under Joe Biden it’ll be all Fauci, all the time, with no dissident voices, and the handful of non-sociopaths we have as governors will have to summon plenty of courage to hold the line.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/thomas-woods/scott-atlas-just-hit-back-at-fauci/

By Tom Woods

From the Tom Woods Letter:

Well, this Dr. Scott Atlas is a fighter.

The lockdowners can’t stand him. So they point out that he isn’t an epidemiologist.

No, but (1) he’s simply relaying what the epidemiologists are saying, and any intelligent person can do that; and (2) he is trying to encourage Americans to think about the long-term effects on everyone of the fanaticism over COVID — and is that a concern we were seeing expressed under Fauci? Is there any indication that Fauci recognizes collateral damage from shutdowns at all?

Atlas mentions names — drawn from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford — that have never been uttered under the Fauci regime and would never have been heard by the American public otherwise. Trump: America First: … Bossie, David N. Best Price: $22.21 Buy New $15.65 (as of 05:38 EDT – Details)

And just the other day, with Laura Ingraham, he hit back at Redfield (of the CDC) and Fauci, pointing out that they’ve been all over the place.

In particular, he made fun of Fauci for suggesting that we really ought to be wearing goggles (remember that?).

He insists that it’s “destructive” to lock down healthy people, that we know who the vulnerable people are, and that “public health officials” have neglected the public-health effects of lockdowns themselves: these problems have “not been given the appropriate consideration by the public health officials who somehow think they have unique expertise,” he says.

Well, it’s about time we have a non-hysteric in public life.

And it’s about time St. Fauci got brought down a few notches. The religious reverence toward the guy is downright creepy, as well as unhelpful.

Oh, and I love that Atlas retweeted this (Kulldorff is from Harvard Medical School), after Dr. Fauci said it was “extraordinarily inappropriate” for Atlas to have contradicted Dr. Redfield at a press conference:

One thing we can be sure of: under Joe Biden it’ll be all Fauci, all the time, with no dissident voices, and the handful of non-sociopaths we have as governors will have to summon plenty of courage to hold the line.

Now, so far on the Tom Woods Show this week I’ve talked to Gret Glyer, whose DonorSee philanthropy app has helped so many people around the world, about how shutdowns are decimating the developing world, and then yesterday I wrote to you about the Rockwell/Woods debate analysis episode.

But I skipped over another important one, with a CEO whom I recently discovered is publicly anti-lockdown (which is unusual, believe it or not).

His rags to riches to rags to riches story may resonate with you, to be sure, but you’ll also be interested in the kind of business he runs — it’s a platform normal people can use to run little online stores. The kind of thing that would have seemed out of science fiction just 30 years ago.

The difference: for these stores you don’t have to take out a $1 million mortgage, stock your shelves with $1 million of merchandise you sit up at night worrying about whether it will sell, etc. This isn’t 1957.

Enjoy:

Ep. 1744 Doing Business in an Age of Shutdowns, with CEO Donald Wilson

The Best of Tom Woods

Tom Woods [send him mail; visit his website] is the New York Times bestselling author of 12 books and host of the Tom Woods Show, which libertarians listen to every weekday. Get a free copy of Your Facebook Friends Are Wrong About the Lockdown: A Non-Hysteric’s Guide to COVID-19.

Be seeing you

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

The Nanny State From Hell | Keeping It Unreal

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

During the 1980s, the Grace Commission investigated how our taxpayer dollars are allocated by the myriad of federal agencies. They found that fully one third of all government spending went to abuse, fraud, or simple waste. Ronald Reagan, tax-cutter extraordinaire that he was, ignored the recommendations of the Grace Commission.

https://donaldjeffries.wordpress.com/2020/10/01/the-nanny-state-from-hell/

donaldjeffries

have spent the last few months navigating through the endless layers of unproductive fat in our gargantuan government bureaucracy. I advocate for more than one close family member, and until you’ve dealt with it first hand, you have no idea of just how awful our system is.

You are invariably routed from one overpaid, often shockingly uneducated government employee to another. Few are civil, most are rude, and none are helpful. If you complain too much, they simply hang up on you. Good luck waiting an excruciatingly long time again, just to call back and take your place at the end of the line. To talk to an identically disinterested and incompetent worker. Whose salaries and benefits almost certainly compare favorably to the private working class that is forced to fund them.

I can state from personal experience that Legal Aid for the poor is a joke. They won’t take your case. EEOC? I don’t know- maybe it works for Black people. It certainly is useless for White people who’ve been discriminated against. The biggest farce of all is the Americans with Disabilities Act. That was the definition of an empty piece of legislation. There is no agency that oversees ADA. Seriously. You must simply wade through the countless agencies that supposedly deal with this issue. The fact is; all of them will tell you that “it’s not my job,” to quote the late comedian Freddie Prinze.

I almost had a loved one thrown out on the street from a nursing home, until I made enough noise to get her funneled into a decent place. But most people aren’t as loud as I am. Too many lonely adults have no one who cares about them, let alone will advocate for them. The social “safety net” which has supposedly been cemented in place since the days of the New Deal, is full of holes. In fact, it rarely catches anyone.

Employed in a “Right to Work” state? That means they have a right to fire you for no reason at all. And you will have no recourse to fight it (I certainly can attest to that personally). You’d think that, out of all those unconstitutional alphabet agencies taxpayers fund, that there should be one to investigate every alleged case of unjust termination. There isn’t. Same with workplace bullying; as I noted in Bullyocracy, employers are nearly as unlikely to punish harassment as our pathetic public schools are.

Speaking of those public schools, my book exposes their horrific track record on the issue of bullying. Even if they were wonderful in all other aspects (which, of course, they are decidedly not), the fact they continue to foster a climate that causes even elementary school students to kill themselves, is reason alone to overhaul that system. But it doesn’t seem like ‘Murricans are “mad as hell” about any of this. They might grumble quietly in the corner, but they’re still paying for Transgender Story Hour.

The Department of Energy? Exactly what do they do? What alternative forms of energy are being promoted, or affordable to the general public? Inventors of potentially life-changing devices are either killed (Stanley Meyer), or denied a patent for their product (Joseph Newman). Who knows how many lesser known revolutionary minds have had their inventions suppressed? Nikola Tesla devised a way to provide free energy for all almost a century ago. His records have never surfaced (confiscated by none other than Donald Trump’s uncle), and no one has continued his research.

In the wake of the 9/11 lie, the monstrosity known as the Homeland Security Department was established. Exactly how did our society function before then? What does Homeland Security staff do on a daily basis? Look out of their windows and verify that the “homeland” is safe? A few years back, the number 3 man in the entire agency fell for a police online sting involving a fake 13 year old girl. So we’re paying for the best and brightest.

I have never been able to determine just what the function of the department of Health and Human Services is. They don’t seem to provide any help in terms of anyone’s health, and “human services” is a broad term that could mean almost anything. I haven’t found any meaningful “service” they provide to the public. This used to be Health, Education, and Welfare. Welfare is an antiquated term, although conservatives still rant against it. Bill Clinton abolished it, and turned it into a scheme where fewer people get less help for a shorter period of time. But no taxes were saved by doing this.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was created by Jimmy Carter. It was the most damaging thing he did in office. What do employees at this “emergency” agency do during….non-emergencies? Which should logically be the vast majority of the time. Their presence did nothing to facilitate assistance during Katrina and other crises, and they have been invisible during the entire “pandemic” thing. Doesn’t this allegedly deadly virus quality as an emergency? What are they doing?

Our military industrial complex has only grown stronger and more impenetrable to public scrutiny, despite President Eisenhower’s farewell warning against them sixty years ago. Our slew of intelligence agencies still have top secret budgets. So we don’t even have the right to complain about how much of our money is being wasted there. Other than assassinations and subverting foreign elections, is there a legitimate purpose for any of these intelligence agencies?

During the 1980s, the Grace Commission investigated how our taxpayer dollars are allocated by the myriad of federal agencies. They found that fully one third of all government spending went to abuse, fraud, or simple waste. Ronald Reagan, tax-cutter extraordinaire that he was, ignored the recommendations of the Grace Commission. Think about that; a 33% tax cut and spending cut without slashing a single program. Given the drift of this crumbling country since then, there is no question that the percentage of waste, fraud, and abuse is much greater now.

Pensions for retired government workers, which are often amazingly lucrative, are the responsibility of a dumbed down, lower paid private work force which has seen their own pensions largely disappear. There’s a deep irony there somewhere. The double and even triple dippers, retired police and fire chiefs- the list is very long of retirees who are, and will be living very nicely on the public dole.

Social Security has become the only “pension” most workers will ever get. That’s if they get it. Our illustrious leaders’ normal response to the impossible math of Social Security is simply to keep raising the retirement age. How about offer a lump sum payout option? How about paying the loved ones of all those hapless souls who paid into the system for decades, but never married or had children, and died too quickly to collect much of any of their money back? And why not implement means testing? Or tax all income for Social Security? Right now, only the first $122,000 (the last figure I saw) are taxed for Social Security. Could there be a more regressive form of taxation? Do you hear any “liberals” talking about that?

So we essentially pay for a cradle to grave nanny state, but get almost nothing in return for our money. No months long paid maternity and paternity leave, like most of Europe and Canada. France sends people to help new parents with laundry and housework. I think they even deliver diapers. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney noted last year, as she drove across France, that she never encountered a single pothole. Our infrastructure is absolutely Third World standard. I live in one of the richest counties in the country, and our roads, bridges, airports, and power grids would be considered disgraceful even if we paid nothing for them. But we pay a lot for them, just as we pay a lot for all the other “services” we never get.

Our Medical Industrial Complex, while not nominally government run, fits perfectly into the disastrously run bureaucracy. I don’t believe any of the universal healthcare systems in Europe, Canada, or elsewhere, could possibly be worse than ours. I worked for it, and have seen far too many people I loved suffer from their interaction with it. Our system consists largely of waiting. And waiting. Filling out far too many forms for a “private” enterprise. Then dealing with a typically brusque and uncaring doctor who allots as much time for your “care” as the average public defender does to a poor defendant. Alternative treatments are discouraged, too expensive for the average person, or outright banned. And, incredibly, Americans pay more in taxes for our bloated and ineffective healthcare system than citizens do in socialist countries with single payer systems.

Can things be this complicated in “socialist” countries? Can their bureaucracies be less responsive, or more incompetent? Do they have career government workers, taking three hour lunch breaks, and “liberal leave” whenever a strong wind blows? Who don’t appear to have any discernable function? If you’ve visited the Smithsonian museums, or the National Zoo, in recent years, you will see exactly how your tax dollars are being spent there. Fewer and fewer exhibits, which have increasingly dubious historical value and revolve around political correctness. There is a dearth of animals at the National Zoo. But you will walk a lot. And there are no hippos. No hippos. That’s a national travesty.

So exactly what are we paying for? Our local police forces? The ones who serve primarily to harass law-abiding citizens who’ve committed a nonsensical traffic violation? The ones who operate under a corrupt policing for profit system, which includes draconian asset forfeiture laws? The ones who are never there when you need them, or stop a crime before it’s been committed? But are hiding behind the bushes when you don’t come to a complete stop at 3 in the morning?

Firefighters? Well, okay, but how often will any of us need their services? How often do you see fires being fought? During the nationwide protests over the past few months, firefighters frequently refused to address burning buildings due to concerns about their “safety.” This was the same rationale used by police officials to explain why those tasked to enforce the law weren’t anywhere to be seen amidst the looting and destruction of property. But they all still got paid. By us.

The public library system? Even with reduced hours and services, and a stubborn reluctance to stock controversial titles, at least our library system does offer something of substance to those who pay for it. But that really isn’t much in return for what we pay. The bureaucracy is so confusing and inaccessible to the public that Matthew Lesko has built a successful career selling books that reveal the secrets of how to get grants and more otherwise secretive perks our government offers. Shouldn’t the benefits bestowed by government be clearly and easily known to the public?

Finally, there are elected representatives. I don’t think we have to belabor the point that they are a sorry lot. We fought a war for independence built around the whole “no taxation without representation” theme. Does any American citizen really feel that their interests are being represented by these career politicians, whom we cluelessly re-elect at a 90+ percent clip? We are paying them to look after the interests of their powerful donors, corporate America, the fraudulent banking system, and the elite who push constant wars upon the world. So while we are undeniably taxed, we don’t have any kind of authentic political representation.

So how can we define this rigged system of ours? Socialism without services? Capitalism without competition? Conservatives who rant against “socialism” ignore corporate socialism, corporate welfare, and the endless entitlement of the super wealthy. The Founders devised a system of checks and balances, with states’ rights in the forefront and a purposefully decentralized federal government. Needless to say, the present system would be unrecognizable to the Founding Fathers.

I have said many times that we could have a much improved and decent society with a small central government, as envisioned by Thomas Jefferson and other enlightened early American leaders. Think Ron Paul. But we could also do pretty well with a system that provided services to the people commensurate with the exorbitant taxes paid. Think Norway or Switzerland, countries that have been rated best in terms of quality of life. The United States is not making the top of any of those lists.

Bottom line- Americans pay more for less than any other country in the world. We basically have the “socialist” government conservatives decry. But it’s a kind of trickle down socialism, where little of anything trickles down to the common people whose taxes pay for it.

It’s a worst of both worlds situation for the vast majority of Americans. It’s shameful, and inexcusable, and we all ought to be demanding something much, much better.

About donaldjeffries

Author of the critically acclaimed best sellers “Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover Ups in American Politics,””Survival of the Richest: How the Corruption of the Marketplace and the Disparity of Wealth Created the Greatest Conspiracy of All,” and the newly released “Crimes and Cover Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963.” Author of the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel “The Unreals,” which has been described as a cross between The Wizard of Oz and The Twilight Zone, and compared to A Confederacy of Dunces and classic Russian literature. A second edition of “The Unreals” was published in February 2015 by Pocol Press. Long time JFK assassination researcher. Seeker of truth, proponent of justice and fairness. Enemy of corruption. Sender of as many “tiny ripples of hope” as possible.

Be seeing you

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

Let’s Stop Ignoring the History of Conquests and Atrocities Committed by Non-Europeans | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 2, 2020

Few are unaware of the devastating trauma unleashed by the Mongol invasions.

Essentially, empire building is typical of several cultures. Furthermore, since empires usually result in negative and positive effects, it would be prudent to judge them based on their long-term impacts. The truth is that Western empires are special, because notwithstanding their flaws, only in the West did freedom become a cherished value.

https://mises.org/wire/lets-stop-ignoring-history-conquests-and-atrocities-committed-non-europeans?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=c57a9ba7ef-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_02&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-c57a9ba7ef-228343965

Lipton Matthews

Of extreme interest to many in academia is the impact of Western imperialism on former colonies. Exploring the implications of Western hegemony has become a cottage industry. There is a litany of studies examining colonial legacies in the developing world. For instance, distinguished scholars James Robinson and Daron Acemoglu trace underdevelopment in some countries to the institutional legacies of colonialism. History shapes the future, so we should never suggest that examining the effects of Western colonialism is an unworthy goal. But the fascination with the exploits of Westerners is quite strange. Listening to some commentators, one would assume that only white people launched empires. For instance, Nikole Hannah Jones in a letter she penned as a college student perfectly demonstrates a mindset prevalent even among educated adults: “The white race is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager, and thief of the modern world….Europeans have colonized and destroyed the indigenous population of every continent on this planet. They have committed genocide against cultures that have never offended them in their greed and insatiable desire to control…every nonwhite culture.”

Denigrating Western civilization for previous atrocities is the norm in intellectual circles. In a blistering critique of the West, Daniel MacMillen Voscoboynik concludes, “The full impact of colonialism would be revealed in its long-term impacts. It radically transformed landscapes, state relations, philosophies, and cultures, leaving as one of its inheritance[s] an intensive and plunderous economic model. In pursuit of resources, countries ran roughshod over limits, and destroyed many of the ecosystems necessary for preventing climate change.” The need for objective discourse mandates that these claims be scrutinized. Jones and Voscoboynik are not wrong to repudiate horrendous acts. Yet their biases are revealing. The false narrative propagated by these thinkers is that conquest is unique to Europeans. Clearly, it has become fashionable to portray imperial pursuits as peculiar to white people, though this outlook is historically inaccurate.

Let us unpack the lopsided assertion that “Europeans have committed genocide against cultures that have never offended them in their greed and insatiable desire to control…every nonwhite culture.” History tells us that people irrespective of race or culture have subjugated weaker groups for no other reason than to attain political power. Few are unaware of the devastating trauma unleashed by the Mongol invasions. Ira M. Lapidus in his indispensable text, The History of Islamic Societies poignantly describes the damages inflicted on Iranians by their Mongolian overlords:

The first impact of the Mongol invasions in Iran was disastrous and amounted to a holocaust. The populations of many cities and towns were systemically exterminated. Whole regions were depopulated by invading armies and by the influx of Turkish and Mongol nomads who drove the peasants from the land. The conquerors plundered their subjects, made them serfs and taxed them ruinously. The result was a catastrophic falling population, income, and state revenue. For over a century fine pottery and metalwares ceased to be produced. A period of urban autonomy and cultural vitality was brought to an end.

Iran was negatively affected by foreign rule, but except for a select group of scholars interested in empire building, these tales are rarely rehashed in the popular press. Some writers will not allow us to forget the unfortunate consequences of colonialism in Africa. Yet they never discuss African imperialism. Contrary to popular beliefs, Africans have not been passive actors in world affairs. In the past, they also established empires intending to achieve political hegemony. Writing about the expansionist state in Africa, Kwame Arhin illustrates the prowess of the legendary Asante Empire: “Asante was collectively the greatest beneficiary from military conquests and political expansion. Its conquered territories were the greatest in extent and its empire had the longest run.” Another interesting point is that non-European conquerors were hardly known for their generosity. E. Ola Abiola (1984) offers a stinging rebuke of Fulani rule in the northern states of Nigeria after the jihad of 1804–08: “The conditions of these unfortunate people were in no way better than they were under Hausa rule. In fact, they seem to be far worse.”

To be nuanced, however, we must admit that not all aspects of Fulani rule were negative. Johnson Olaosebikan Aremu presents a more favorable picture:

The Jihad could be said to have brought unity to Hausaland. It would be recalled that through inter-state wars, Hausa states had for centuries tried without success to impose an imperial authority which could guarantee political order, stability and unity among the Habe states. Fortunately, the Jihad, by enthroning Islam provided the much-needed suprastate ideology for integration among the Hausa states. The Jihad brought a new peace to the north.

Moreover, dominant in the rhetoric of people like Jones and Voscoboynik is the assumption that European colonialists built rapacious institutions to serve their interests. This position is not false, but how does this make Europeans different from non-European colonizers? Critics fail to acknowledge that the purpose of organizing an empire is to enrich the conquerors, not natives. Imperialism may actuate some positive effects, but imperial ambitions are not undergirded by a desire to ameliorate the conditions of conquered peoples. To think otherwise is patently naïve. Even the Aztecs established extractive schemes to derive wealth from their subjects. Anthropologist Frances Berdan explains the goal of conquest in the Aztec Empire: “A primary goal of conquest was the exploitation of resources (natural and human) from conquered peoples. Subjugated city-states were required to offer their overlords obeisance and supply them with palace service, corvée labor, and support in future military ventures.”

Essentially, empire building is typical of several cultures. Furthermore, since empires usually result in negative and positive effects, it would be prudent to judge them based on their long-term impacts. The truth is that Western empires are special, because notwithstanding their flaws, only in the West did freedom become a cherished value. As eminent sociologist Orlando Patterson notes: “Freedom has been the core value of Western culture throughout its history….It is the West that must be scrutinized and explained for its peculiar commitment to this value.” Due to the primacy of freedom in Western society, institutions for protecting individual rights such as parliaments and the jury system were instituted in colonies.

Considering that respect for the individual is of paramount value in Western society, empires managed by the West often endowed natives with rights, despite the failings of Western imperialism. For example, Europeans abolished slavery in many of their African colonies after conquests. Additionally, in his publication “The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy,” Robert D. Woodberry submits that Western missionaries were “a crucial catalyst initiating the development and spread of religious liberty, mass education, mass printing, newspapers, and voluntary organizations in Latin America, Asia, and Africa.” He further outlines the pivotal role of these missionaries in promoting mass education: “Another mechanism through which Conversionary Protestants dispersed power was through spreading mass education…CPs advocated mass literacy so that everyone could read the Bible and interpret it competently. Their attempt to convert people through education threatened other elites and spurred these elites to also invest in mass education.”

Similarly, there is strong consensus in some quarters that colonialism in the Post-Enlightenment era was advantageous for long-term political development. According to the findings of one study, “Colonial duration is positively associated with levels of democracy among countries colonized after 1850….Western penetration after 1850 during an enlightened (yet imperialist) age created an openness to Western ideas and ideals that facilitated the transition to democracy and modernization.”

Throughout history, humans have developed oppressive empires. Yet the moral revolution aiding the abandonment of imperialism and its associated evils first emerged in the West. Critics of Western imperialism should not be dismissed as flippant. However, they must admit that only Western empires succeeded in promoting universal freedom. What they ought to be wondering is not why Westerners built empires, but that they even entertained the thought that dignity could be extended to conquered peoples. Author:

Contact Lipton Matthews

Lipton Matthews is a researcher, business analyst, and contributor to Mises.org, The Federalist, and the Jamaica Gleaner. He may be contacted at lo_matthews@yahoo.com or twitter @matthewslipton

Be seeing you

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

Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.

Posted by M. C. on October 1, 2020

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »