Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Social Justice’ What is the Problem With, For “Social Justice” Purposes, Taking Half of the $203 Billion Wealth of Jeff Bezos and Giving It To the Poor?

Posted by M. C. on November 21, 2020

Here’s a Don Boudreaux letter to a college student writing a paper on what he calls “the social justice of wealth redistribution”:

Mr. Eden:

Thanks for your e-mail.

You ask: “Why shouldn’t government tax away half of Jeff Bezos’ wealth and give it to America’s poor people.” In your assessment, “this would be fair without hurting Bezos.”

My disagreements with your assessment are many, but I have time now to list only three.

First and primarily, it’s immoral to take stuff belonging to other people. Because Bezos acquired his wealth lawfully, to take it is wrong. Note also that he acquired his wealth in a manner that bestows enormous benefits on hundreds of millions of his fellow human beings, and that he has already paid billions of dollars of taxes on his earnings.

Second, Bezos’s wealth is now reported at $203 billion. With 34 million Americans currently below the poverty line, confiscating half of Bezos’s fortune and distributing it equally to these poor Americans would give each a one-time windfall of $2,985. A nice sum. But it’s not enough to transform their lives. More fundamentally, people’s lives aren’t transformed for the better by being given windfalls. Transformation comes from within, personally, and from better policies that allow the creation of more and better opportunities.

Third, Bezos’s net worth is what it is because the vast bulk of it is invested in Amazon and other productive enterprises. If he suddenly must turn over half of his wealth to the government, he would not draw it from his consumption (which is what you mean when you say that this policy would not hurt Bezos). He would draw it out of his investments. And resources currently used in valuable productive uses would become much less valuable when turned into goods and services for current consumption. And so to give each poor American $2,985 paid for by Jeff Bezos would require that far more than half of his fortune be seized.

You might nevertheless be good with this outcome, for it would still leave Bezos very wealthy. It would still not put a dent in his lifestyle. But the American economy would suffer greatly. Not only would the economy lose, in one fell swoop, well over a hundred billion dollars of assets – which means the loss of whatever outputs those assets produce – but lose also untold trillions of dollars of assets over time that would have been, but will not be, created. Like it or not, people do not invest heavily when government seizes large chunks of the fruits of their successes.

Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030

The above originally appeared at Cafe Hayek

Be seeing you

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

The Orwellian indoctrination of kindergarteners with Critical Race Theory is outrageous and must be stopped — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on September 22, 2020

CRT is a philosophy of hyper-racialization that looks to radically transform our “inherently racist” society, including children. Under CRT, Martin Luther King’s dream is abolished, as racial identification is mandatory, and white children are taught self-loathing and black children to embrace victimhood. Like a religion, it is unfalsifiable, elevates subjective experience above objective reality, and crumbles under intellectual scrutiny.

Michael McCaffrey
Michael McCaffrey

Michael McCaffrey is a writer and cultural critic who lives in Los Angeles. His work can be read at RT, Counterpunch and at his website He is also the host of the popular cinema podcast Looking California and Feeling Minnesota. Follow him on Twitter @MPMActingCo

Woke teachers and school administrators are waging a culture war for the minds of kids as young as five, by inculcating them with toxic social justice teachings.

This summer, I got an unpleasant initiation into the culture war when, in the wake of the George Floyd killing, my five-year-old child’s elementary-middle public charter school here in Los Angeles went from being an academic institution interested in preparing students for the workplace and college to an ideological hotbed devoted to promoting Critical Race Theory (CRT) over all other subjects. 

CRT is a philosophy of hyper-racialization that looks to radically transform our “inherently racist” society, including children. Under CRT, Martin Luther King’s dream is abolished, as racial identification is mandatory, and white children are taught self-loathing and black children to embrace victimhood. Like a religion, it is unfalsifiable, elevates subjective experience above objective reality, and crumbles under intellectual scrutiny.

A shameless example of CRT indoctrination in action is that the very first lesson taught to my child’s kindergarten class this autumn was “how to be an activist.” 

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines activist as “a person who uses or supports strong actions (such as public protests) in support of or opposition to one side of a controversial issue.” My child’s school decided to perniciously redefine “activist” as “someone who notices that a system is unfair to another person, group of people, or animals, and then creates a new system that ensures fairness for every person, group of people, or animal.”  

Redefining “activist” is as Orwellian as it gets. Words have meaning and meaning matters. Calling an ass an eagle doesn’t make it sprout wings and fly. But the mendacity doesn’t stop there. The school also teaches the four traits of an “activist,” which they claim to be “Observe. Ask questions. Have empathy. Show compassion.” But these positive traits are more defining of a good neighbor or a good friend, rather than an “activist.”

Contorting the meaning of “activist” to suit an ideological need, and claiming that all “activists” have “empathy” and “show compassion” is the kindergarten equivalent of teaching “war is peace,”“freedom is slavery,” and “ignorance is strength.” 

Do the “activists” of the Westboro Baptist Church, Antifa, or KKK “have empathy” and “show compassion”? And what about Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong, and Osama Bin Laden? None of these were profiles in empathy and compassion either, but they, too, started out as what one might call “activists.” 

George Orwell wrote, “If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” It seems obvious that CRT has corrupted the language used by my child’s school, and that this corrupted language is intended, in turn, to corrupt the thoughts and minds of young students. 

This intentionally deceptive “activist” lesson runs throughout the school year and is accompanied by the “activist song,” that’s sung everyday to the tune of ‘Row, Row, Row Your Boat’. The lyrics are… “I am an activist, I look and I observe, I ask questions and find out, what has been unheard  / Having empathy, helps me understand, I can make a change, working hand in hand.”

This isn’t education – this is blatant indoctrination. The school isn’t teaching children how to think, but rather what to think.

The school claims its mission is to develop “critical thinking” but does misinforming children about the definition of “activist” spur critical thinking? I’ve asked the leadership of the school this question, as well as for their specific definition of “equity” and “anti-racism” – terms they frequently espouse. Does “equity” mean “equality of opportunity” or “equality of outcome”? Does “anti-racism” mean “opposing discrimination in all its forms” or “discriminating to benefit minorities”? These questions have been entirely ignored.

I also asked if my child would face discrimination at the school, and the principal and CEO steadfastly refuse to answer that question too, which, unfortunately, seems like an answer unto itself, and one that may carry legal liability.

That this taxpayer-funded charter school – which, according to reports, just received between $2 million and $5 million in pandemic-related Paycheck Protection Program loans from the federal government – refuses to say it won’t discriminate against a five-year-old, is quite an indictment. It reveals the ethical rot at the center of CRT, and the catastrophic error the American education system is making by embracing it. 

At best, CRT is an intellectually flaccid and insidiously vacuous ideology that focuses on “unlearning” alleged “implicit bias” at the expense of learning the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic. At worst, it is a malevolent, mendacious, and cancerous cult that demands discrimination against some children under the guise of “equity.”

Parents should be in charge of their children’s moral and ethical education, and if parents want CRT taught to their kids, let them teach it at home. Just as I wouldn’t impose my Catholic faith on other people’s children, I don’t want their CRT cult imposed on mine.

Many parents privately tell me they’re horrified that CRT is being taught in kindergarten, but are reluctant to speak out for fear of being labeled ‘racist’. This is part of the ‘social justice’ game, in which people are shamed into silence and compliance by scurrilous labels. But parents must screw their courage to the sticking place and fight back now, because the war for children’s minds is being waged, and teachers’ unions, school boards, and woke faculty members and administrators are moving fast and pushing hard to make CRT the default foundation for all education in America.

Indoctrinating children with CRT is akin to systemic child abuse, as it steals innocence, twists minds, and crushes spirits. Parents must move heaven and earth to protect their children, and they can start by coming together and rooting out CRT from their schools by any and all legal means necessary. 

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Be seeing you



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

Calling Chomsky Out: The Riots Are a Full-Fledged Attack by the Hard Left To Topple American Society – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on September 12, 2020

The charge of systemic institutionalized racism against black people is completely false (see here, here and here). The only form of institutional racism that exists in the United States is discrimination against whites and Asians in education and employment.

Please make no mistake. The specious charge of anti-black racism is a mere cover for unleashing violence dressed up as a “social justice movement” whose real purpose is to destabilize our society and bring about the Hard Left’s extra-electoral coup d’état.


Professor Noam Chomsky, formerly of MIT, has the distinction of being the most frequently quoted academic and is arguably the best known public intellectual in the world. He recently gave an interview in which he spoke, among other things, about the BLM sponsored riots that are taking place across the United States. This is what he had to say on this subject:

“The Black Lives Matter protests which is a huge, incredible development: the biggest social movement in American history. A huge number of people involved spontaneously, solidarity black and white together, constructive goals, develop good programs, really great things happening… At the fringes they are people who are breaking windows, intimidating somebody at the restaurant… Things like this shouldn’t be happening, but that’s not what’s going on. What’s going on is a massive, non-violent, constructive social movement.”

As the tennis great John McEnroe used to say to wayward referees, “You cannot be serious. You just cannot be serious, sir.”

Professor Chomsky has made a career of calling out lying and hypocrisy. Today we must call out his own.

Below are some news pieces Professor Chomsky may want to read at his leisure.

From a Fox News report of June 29:

“Nationwide, Floyd related protests and riots lasted 3 weeks in 140 U.S. cities, including Washington, D.C., New York; Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles. By June 4 at least 40 cities in 23 states had imposed curfews. High-end boutiques in Beverly Hills and New York like Gucci and Chanel were looted, luxury stores in Santa Monica and big box retailers like Target and Macy’s across the US have suffered tens of millions in losses.”

And this:

The costliest civil disorder in U.S. history: That’s what insurance experts and city officials say the riots and demonstrations following the death of George Floyd are shaping up to be. From police overtime to losses from fire – as well as theft and other destruction – costs of the unrest are adding up. And for the first time since statistics were collected in 1950, the insurance industry has labeled this a “riot and civil disorder” catastrophe in multiple states. In Minneapolis, where some 400 businesses were damaged, owners and insurance experts estimate costs of the damage to exceed $500 million, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

A quote from another news item: “From police injuries to financial losses from looters, the aftermath from weeks of cross-country protests is bringing some cities to their knees.”

And here is an assessment of those peaceful and constructive protests by an insurance industry journal:

“The civil disturbance that started in Minneapolis after the killing by police of George Floyd spread to 20 other states — an unprecedented property insurance catastrophe that will likely impact policy renewals and could even persuade some insurers to exclude coverage for damage caused by riots, executives for Verisk’s Property Claim Services said. In the U.S., there has been no precedent for a riot catastrophe like this,” Tom Johansmeyer, head of PCS.”

And should we not mention Portland which has been burning for over one hundred days running and New York City which has been essentially hollowed out?

Some people on the “fringes breaking windows?” Is that really what’s happening, Professor?

The above reports are from weeks ago. The damage has only grown much worse since. There can be little doubt that when all is said and done the cumulative costs and losses will run into hundreds of billions of dollars. And that’s if we are lucky enough not to disintegrate in the process.

This catastrophic destruction is not the work of some far-off fringe. After all, how could a small minority on the periphery wreak such immense havoc? No, this kind of violence is the thrust and focus of this criminal enterprise which is being disingenuously portrayed by the Left as a “social justice” movement.

Do you want to know who is on the fringes of this campaign? They are those gullible enough to show up at the protests believing that there will be peaceful marching. These people are what Lenin used to call “useful idiots.”

The real heart of this “peaceful movement” are the violent vandals who have done an excellent job indeed. They have wrecked half the country.

“Constructive” and “non-violent?” Did you really say that Professor Chomsky?

What exactly is “non-violent” about all this terrible violence?

And what is “constructive” about a crusade launched under false pretenses? A sham claim is made – that the US is a racist country – and violence is let loose. This movement is not constructive – it is destructive. The whole travesty is based on a bogus allegation and conducted under a fake guise.

Since he is someone who has always portrayed himself as a scholar of complete intellectual honesty and integrity, we call upon Professor Chomsky to retract his statements about the situation on the ground which run in complete contravention of reality.

It is difficult to believe that anyone in his right mind would describe these devastating riots “non-violent” and “constructive.” But this is what leftists do, for they are masters of reality inversion. To listen to the leftist-speak is to enter a Twilight Zone. To them white is black and black is white. To them a violent insurrection is a gentle demonstration. To leftists a man is a woman and a woman is a man, and if you do not agree to their insanities you get cancelled and fired. And then you get threatened and you have to run for your life. This is the Left’s modus operandi, which is not surprising since psychologically and ideologically they hail from the same root as tyrants and totalitarians. We have shown this in the graphic called the Ideological Pedigree Table of Values and Views. Please do take a look if you have time.

Here is what is happening before our eyes: With America mired in a multi-prong crisis – which, sadly, is largely of our own making – the Hard Left has sensed that our society has been weakened to the point where it can be toppled. Taking advantage of the present weakness, the radicals are now trying to achieve their goal. From the very beginning, they have done all they could to encourage the vandals on the streets who have risen to the task by unleashing brutality that has caused heavy damage on many fronts and levels and shook America to its core. The army of wreckers have beaten and injured countless people, destroyed thousands of businesses and brought ruin to a number of cities. Rowing gangs of looters have terrorized and demoralized large swathes of the American population. The violence and chicanery have shaken this country deeply, pushing it to the brink. These domestic terrorists have been all along cheered on and protected by their enablers and shills in the media, in academia, in the courts and in the Democrat Party. What we are witnessing right now is nothing other than a full-fledged, coordinated assault against America by the elements of the Hard Left. The objective of this attack is the overthrow of our society.

These are no civil rights protests to bring justice and equality to an oppressed minority. The charge of systemic institutionalized racism against black people is completely false (see here, here and here). The only form of institutional racism that exists in the United States is discrimination against whites and Asians in education and employment. Just recently the US Justice Department found a leading IVY League university guilty of gross discrimination against white and Asian applicants whereby such applicants had a ninety percent lower chance of being admitted than black candidates with comparable scores. From a US Department of Justice press release:

“The Department of Justice today notified Yale University of its findings that Yale illegally discriminates against Asian American and white applicants in its undergraduate admissions process in violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The findings are the result of a two-year investigation in response to a complaint by Asian American groups concerning Yale’s conduct.”

If this is not racism what is, asks Patrick Buchanan in his column The Progressive Racism Of The Ivy League. This kind of anti-white, anti-Asian racism is the common practice in academia as well as in other spheres of our societal life such as government employment and contracts. The truth is that black Americans are the beneficiaries of reverse discrimination and numerous other forms of preferential treatment.

Please make no mistake. The specious charge of anti-black racism is a mere cover for unleashing violence dressed up as a “social justice movement” whose real purpose is to destabilize our society and bring about the Hard Left’s extra-electoral coup d’état.


Be seeing you

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

Shakedown: BLM Demands Cut of Louisville Business Profits for Protection

Posted by M. C. on August 3, 2020

Seems oddly familiar.

We are here to win your hearts and minds…or else we will burn your village down.

by Robert Kraychik

Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters issued “social justice” and “black liberation” demands regarding “diversity” to a restaurant owner in Louisville, KY, including a directive for “donations” to organizations run by non-whites.

Listed demands from a BLM affiliate in Louisville include racial quotas for staff and ownership of business suppliers, donations to organizations run by non-whites, and adjustment to dress codes. The posters used the acronym “BIPOC” (“black or indigenous persons of color”) as a euphemism for non-white persons:

23% of Staff is BIPOC in Front of House

23% of inventory is from BIPOC retailer(s)

Regular donations to BIPOC organization

Dress code policy does not discriminate against BIPOC patrons of employees.

Additional demands issued via the letter included the option to give 1.5 percent of revenues to a local “black nonprofit or organization” in lieu of purchasing a minimum of 23 percent of the business’s inventory from “black retailers,” mandated “diversity and inclusion training” for all employees, and displaying of left-wing messaging to support “reparations.”…

Be seeing you






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

Social Justice Has a Religion, and This Is Its Dictionary – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 22, 2020


Some identify religion as a human necessity. Seemingly as a testament to that, even those who have proudly done away with what they see as the banal and barbaric myths of the past, make a god of the state and a religion of the political process. Others may see Tony Robbins as a high priest overseeing an invigorating religious ceremony. Still others, may see Oprah as a prophet, or a periodic, lavish dinner as an epicurean communion of ritualistic value.

It is apparent that man longs for a story about the order of the universe that religion offers.

Christianity did not become the de rigueur spiritual, philosophical, and political system of vast portions of the world without having something to offer its adherents. Writers like Carl Jung or Joseph Campbell have written volumes on the universal need of humans for certain structures in life. Religion satisfies many of those structural needs.

As the extreme left in America veers further from established religion, it inevitably engages in a very human behavior and builds itself yet another religion.

The problem is, unlike religions that have had centuries or millennia of the brightest minds in the world testing and retesting the ideas of the religion in fervent debate, the religion of the social justice warrior is a several decades old mish mosh of screwy ideas.

Far from a work of prescription, it is with the utmost sadness that I present to the reader a descriptive work of this befuddling body of thought. Sadness, because these ideas somehow exist as a body of thought in an age where the most brilliant, tested, consistent and cohesive ideas are just a few keystrokes away. It is not lack of access that stops more solid ideas from being adopted. Nor is it lack of resources or education, for the more education a person receives, the more likely they are to subscribe to this body of ideas. To identify a few:

Original Sin — The modern feminist movement imposes original sin on the man in the relationship, popularly referred to over the past decade as “privilege.”

Unlike original sin, privilege is not digital or binary, but analog and appearing in gradients. If the man is white, then his original sin is even greater. Privilege of all sorts exist. The less privileged one is, the better that person is.

All privileged people must confess their sins and come to the collective with a spirit of humbleness. The more privilege one has, the more this is needed. The less privilege one has, the less this is expected.

God — The flavor-of-the-month trend deemed popular by the collective is able to act as god. The role of god shifts from group to group and time period to time period. The status of god verges on the omnipotent and omniscient, but is so temporary that some may be imbued with this role for mere days.

Council of Nicaea — The Council of Nicaea is an ongoing meeting, often taking place on social media. Where two or three gather in the name of social justice, there is a Council of Nicaea serving as implementer of dire and important dogma, the temporariness of which does not detract from the direness of the implementation, but makes it all the more passionate, high stakes, and extreme.

Prophetic Voices — Only those who are seen as being identified with an issue are permitted to speak on an issue. The idea that a straight white man could have a valuable opinion on racism, abortion, homosexuality, or hardship is anathema. Total self-censorship is recommended when speaking to those of less privilege, with only the most self-deprecatory statements considered permissible.

Sinners — Only those who can be shamed into accepting their own privilege are deemed sinners. Though the unrepentant will be pursued with a missionary zeal, refusal to publicly accept one’s role as a sinner largely excludes a person from the worst defilement the religion has to offer. A sinner must willingly accept his role as sinner. Any public apology makes one a sinner in the eyes of the social justice movement. The act verges on masochistic.

Once a sinner, always a sinner. In this regard, the public apology is a form of baptism that does not cleanse the soul, but opens it up to repeated defilement. The act of baptism is repeated over and over publicly as a show of humbleness and attrition (sorrow) but not contrition (remorse and penitence).

There is no method of reaching contrition in this religion, and no attainment of forgiveness.

Satan Read the rest of this entry »

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

German Foreign Policy Is a CIA Front – Global ResearchGlobal Research

Posted by M. C. on May 26, 2020

And the purpose of EUCOM? “The mission of EUCOM is to protect and defend the US..” It’s purpose is not to defend the interests of Germany but the interests of the USA.

Shocking! Not that the CIA is doing this but that the Germans are happy being US lackeys.

By Aidan O’Brien

On March 30 Germany declared the important Lebanese political group, Hezbollah, to be a “terrorist” organization and banned it from German soil. By doing so it gratuitously increased the tension in the eastern Mediterranean and exposed Berlin’s lack of credibility on the world stage.

Is it really in Germany’s interest to destabilize a region that has already been crippled by multiple wars? On the surface Germany doesn’t appear to have a stake in the politics of Lebanon. Indeed, from whatever angle the situation is viewed from, Germany qua Germany doesn’t have a meaningful stake in Lebanon. Yet Berlin is assaulting the sovereignty of this small Mediterranean nation that means no harm.

Hezbollah is an organization that forms 10% of the current Lebanese parliament and is a significant part of Lebanon’s governing coalition. Because of its commitment to international justice, Hezbollah is, in fact, Lebanon’s most recognizable political group. And that’s the point. Hezbollah’s successful efforts to defend the sovereignty of Lebanon in the past decades, and the sovereignty of Syria in recent years, is a problem for that power which aims to destroy the sovereignty of both Lebanon and Syria. However, that power isn’t Germany, so what then explains Berlin’s hostility towards Beirut?

Germany is doing someone’s bidding. Germany’s problem is that it’s foreign policy is stuck in the late 20th century. At present, Germany’s political structure is stuck in post World War Two Europe. Ever since the Nazis were defeated in 1945, Germany has been a cutout. To begin with, it was either a Soviet or an American cutout. But when the Soviets had the decency to exit Germany in “1989”, the Americans remained. As a consequence, in the 21st century German independence is still an aspiration rather than a reality.

According to Deutsche Welle (DW), in 2019 there were “roughly 38,600” American soldiers based in Germany. “This is…more military personnel than the US keeps in any other country except Japan.” In other words, whether it likes it or not, Germany is a key part of American geopolitics. As DW explains:

“Germany’s strategic importance for the US is reflected by the location of US European Command (EUCOM) headquarters in the southwestern city of Stuttgart, from which it serves as the coordinating structure for all American military forces across 51 primarily European countries.”

And the purpose of EUCOM? “The mission of EUCOM is to protect and defend the US..” It’s purpose is not to defend the interests of Germany but the interests of the USA.

EUCOM though is only the overt dimension of US power in Germany. As intimidating and oppressive as EUCOM is, it is less sinister than the covert dimension of US power in Berlin and beyond. To bend German politicians and opinion towards warmongering in west Asia requires a level of deceitfulness that is too subtle for the straightforward American war machine. This need for sly covert action is the raison d’être of America’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). And Germany is as much under the control of the CIA as it is under the control of EUCOM. The evidence is the illogical German decision to make Hezbollah illegal.

The evidence is the fact that Germany’s “foreign” secret service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (the BND), which reportedly has 300 bases inside and outside Germany, was a CIA creation. This means that infamous spymasters, like Allen Dulles (CIA/Nazi sympathizer) and Reinhard Gehlen (Nazi/CIA), developed a covert system within Germany in the late 1940s and 1950s – a system that continues to function surreptitiously today.

Recent evidence of this insidious CIA activity in Germany includes the US bugging of Germany’s prime minister, Angela Merkel (revealed in 2013); the US/German creation of a Swiss front company (Crypto AG) to spy on world governments (revealed in 2020); and the manipulation of German media, as revealed in the book Presstitutes Embedded in the Pay of the CIA (2019), by Udo Ulfkoette. All of which confirms the claims made by CIA whistleblower Philip Agee in the 1970s. For example, in a 1976 interview with the German magazine Informations Dienst he stated:

“Since World War II, the aim of US foreign policy has been to guarantee the coherence of the western world under the leadership of the USA. CIA activities are directed toward achieving this goal….Left opposition movements had to be discredited and destroyed….After World War II, West Germany was a crucial area. In order to secure US interests there, the CIA supported not only the CDU (Christian Democratic Union) but also the SPD (Social Democratic Union) and the trade unions. The CIA wanted the influence of the two major political parties to be strong enough to shut out and hold down any left opposition…..Most CIA stations pay journalists to publish the CIA’s propaganda as if it were the journalist’s own work….”

And how does Hezbollah fit into this CIA / German matrix? Its an official US enemy. And so, ipso facto, its an official German “enemy”. As a key part of the “axis of resistance” (Lebanon, Syria and Iran) that’s fighting US imperialism in west Asia, Hezbollah has been in the crosshairs of Washington DC for sometime. Hence the March 2019 Aljazeera headline: “[US] Tells Lebanon to Choose Hezbollah or Independence”. A headline which can also be read: “US Tells Germany to Criminalize Hezbollah”.

The big geopolitical picture is, of course, the grand chessboard that stretches across the Eurasian landmass. On the western edge of this “world island” the US is anchored in Germany. And on the eastern side the US is anchored in Japan. The aim of US imperialism is to control or contain everything in between – primarily Russia and China. And in this US “game” of control and containment, the oil fields and pipelines in west Asia (the eastern Mediterranean) are fundamental.

Germany’s decision to criminalize Hezbollah is a part this great US “game”. As a key American base on the Eurasian landmass, the “mighty“ Germany is nothing but a pawn in the hands the US. This “German decision”, therefore, is in reality an American decision – a decision managed by America’s covert warriors: the CIA. The problem for the USA and Germany, however, is that the “game” is now so obvious that whatever decision is made lacks power and meaning.

Be seeing you


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

Selected Gems By Thomas Sowell

Posted by M. C. on May 4, 2020


It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.


Racism is not dead, but it is on life support — kept alive by politicians, race hustlers and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as ‘racists’


What do you call it when someone steals someone else’s money secretly? Theft. What do you call it when someone takes someone else’s money openly by force? Robbery. What do you call it when a politician takes someone else’s money in taxes and gives it to someone who is more likely to vote for him? Social Justice.


It is bad enough that so many people believe things without any evidence. What is worse is that some people have no conception of evidence and regard facts as just someone else’s opinion.


I have never understood why it is “greed” to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.


If you believe in equal rights, then what do “women’s rights,” “gay rights,” etc., mean? Either they are redundant or they are violations of the principle of equal rights for all.


In the long run, the greatest weapon of mass destruction is stupidity.


Politics is the art of making your selfish desires seem like the national interest.


What the welfare system and other kinds of governmental programs are doing is paying people to fail. In so far as they fail, they receive the money; in so far as they succeed, even to a
moderate extent, the money is taken away.


A recently reprinted memoir by Frederick Douglass has footnotes explaining what words like ‘arraigned,’ ‘curried’ and ‘exculpate’ meant, and explaining who Job was. In other words, this man who was born a slave and never went to school educated himself to the point where his words now have to be explained to today’s expensively under-educated generation.


‘Fair’ is one of the most dangerous concepts in politics. Since no two people are likely to agree on what is ‘fair,’ this means that there must be some third party with power – the government – to impose its will. The road to despotism is paved with ‘fairness’.

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

The New Far-Left Curriculum Transforming Our Public Schools – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on December 17, 2019

By Robert Steven Ingebo

“Deep Equity,” developed by the Corwin company, is quickly becoming the new standard curriculum being taught in our public schools.  If you’ve never heard of it, you soon will.  It’s in San Tan Valley in Arizona; Chicago, Illinois; Louisville, Kentucky; the entire Cleveland Ohio public school district; charter schools in California; and many more American cities as well as Canada.

This is how their website describes it:

The Deep Equity framework, based on the work of Gary Howard, helps schools and districts establish the climate, protocols, common language, and common goal of implementing culturally responsive teaching practices.

The Deep Equity approach is based on the belief that scholastic inequities are symptomatic of institutional biases and norms that must be directly challenged through systemic, ongoing, and authentic work.

Deep Equity is a comprehensive and systemic professional development process aimed at producing the deep personal, professional, and organizational transformations that are necessary to create equitable places of learning for all of our nation’s children.

This capacity-building program helps educators dismantle disparities through sustained, collaborative efforts and courageous leadership.

Notice the politically “woke” phrases used.

Disparities.  Translation: The monolithic gap in education between disadvantaged people and those who are privileged.

Culturally responsive teaching practices. Translation: If you’re not white, you will get much more leniency in matters of academic performance.

Institutional biases.  Translation: Institutions that operate in a manner that oppresses certain social groups while favoring others.  For example: institutional racism victimizes blacks, Hispanics, and Asians while favoring whites.

Organizational transformations.  One of Obama’s favorites.  Remember the “fundamentally transform the U.S.” speech?  In other words, substitute the current white privilege–based curriculum with a new Marxist one.

From this, it is clear that Deep Equity teaches that America is a deeply racist nation with a “hierarchy of various oppressions” (intersectionality).  It demonizes whites, halts all debate, and tells teachers to reject and resist parents who disagree.  Social justice demands that everyone believe that white people are simply too ignorant and privileged to understand that they are the oppressors within our society. Read the rest of this entry »

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

Social Justice Is Nothing like Real Justice | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on November 30, 2019

So, when a high-income person pays a higher rate of income tax to support a government program designed to increase inequality, we are not transferring wealth from individuals shown to have “exploited” others. Nor is there evidence that every recipient who benefits from these programs has been victimized by some sort of economic exploitation. Instead, it is merely assumed that those who pay more tax are guilty of exploiting others, while those who receive the wealth were exploited.

Social justice is a political and social ideology that advocates for the equal redistribution of wealth, equal access to economic opportunities, and the reduction of unfair privileges within a society. The central argument used by social justice advocates is that the government has the moral obligation to equalize access to wealth, opportunities, and privileges.

In abstract, to many people, this ideology seems morally right. In practice though, social justice has done more harm to those it intended to help and has hindered society’s advancement as a whole. But to fully comprehend the reason why social justice is a problem; it is helpful to understand its origins.

The Origins of Social Justice

To understand social justice, we first need to define what justice is. Justice is a concept under which wrongs committed against one party by another party are “set right,” either through restitution or punishment. Justice is generally administered by an institution — law courts, for example —  in which a third-party impartially adjudicates a dispute. The purpose of adjudicating this dispute is to determine how a victim might be repaid for a loss or private property or bodily harm. Justice, properly understood, therefore assumes there must be an identifiable victim, and that some third party will ensure the proper steps are taken to repair the harm.

Social justice as a concept arose in the early nineteenth century during the Industrial Revolution and subsequent civil revolutions throughout Europe, which aimed to create more egalitarian societies and remedy capitalistic exploitation of human labor. Indeed, the concept of social justice is rooted in the Marxist theory of man-made exploitation. Advocates of social justice argue that social inequalities are based upon the fact that those who have access to resources, do so because they have deprived the have-nots of these same opportunities. Consequently, social justice advocates argue that the government has the moral obligation to rectify that injustice. Unlike true justice, however, reparations in the name of social justice do not involve a specific victim or a specific perpetrator. Instead, the guilty party is said to be an entire class of people, many of whom have never been shown to have exploited any specific person at all.

In America, social justice has become the new go-to “solution” to alleviate economic inequalities between people and social classes. The current trend of social justice in the United States underlies the misleading premise that the top 1 percent controls all the wealth while the bottom 99 percent produces that wealth. Moreover, this fallacious premise builds upon the myth that most millionaires and billionaires have inherited the wealth that they have today from their predecessors. But, according to a 2017 survey from Fidelity Investments, 88 percent of millionaires in America are self-made. Most did not grow up in exclusive country club neighborhoods. Needless to say, most millionaires started out within the 99 percent then worked their way up by climbing the social ladder. Yet social justice proponents argue that the wealthy — merely by being wealthy — have deprived those from lower social classes of wealth and capital. To fix that “injustice,” policies such as a progressive income tax have been imposed at the national level and in most states.

Note also that the moral system undergirding social justice requires immorality on the part of the state. Since the state produces no wealth of its own, it can only “create” wealth for the less-wealthy by taking wealth and property from the more-wealthy. Thus, social justice is founded on the idea of the state using violence to take from one group and give to another.  Since no specific victim and no specific crime has been identified, this is no case of reparation as exists under real justice. It is simply a transfer of wealth from one group to another based on some sort of general “exploitation.”

So, when a high-income person pays a higher rate of income tax to support a government program designed to increase inequality, we are not transferring wealth from individuals shown to have “exploited” others. Nor is there evidence that every recipient who benefits from these programs has been victimized by some sort of economic exploitation. Instead, it is merely assumed that those who pay more tax are guilty of exploiting others, while those who receive the wealth were exploited. These, of course, are not good assumptions, and are not based on any sort of judicial proceeding or examination of evidence, as would be the case of administering what is properly known as justice.

Be seeing you


You can’t tell SJWs from ISIS without a program.


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

SJWs As Bourgeois Bolshies | The American Conservative

Posted by M. C. on October 23, 2019

By Rod Dreher

I’m reading one of the best books I’ve ever seen, historian Yuri Slezkine’s The House of Government: A Saga of the Russian Revolution. It’s a massive — over 1,000 pages — history of the Bolshevik movement, focusing on the people who lived in a vast apartment building constructed across the Moskva River from the Kremlin, for party elites. In the 1930s, during the purges, it was the most dangerous address in the country. The secret police came for people there all the time.

The book has given me a breakthrough in understanding why so many people who grew up under communism are unnerved by what’s going on in the West today, even if they can’t all articulate it beyond expressing intense but inchoate anxiety about political correctness. Reading Slezkine, a UC-Berkeley historian, clarifies things immensely. Let me explain as concisely as I can. All of this is going into the book I’m working on, by the way.

In my book, I identify two main factors that make the “soft totalitarianism” we’re drifting into different from the hard totalitarianism of the communist years. One is the vastly greater capabilities of surveillance technology, and its penetration into daily life in this current stage of capitalism. The other is the pseudo-religion of Social Justice, the holy trinity of which is Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. The mathematician James Lindsay last year wrote an insightful essay analyzing Social Justice ideology as a kind of postmodern religion (“faith system,” he writes). Reading Slezkine on Bolshevism illuminates this with new depth.

To be clear, Social Justice religion is not the same thing as Bolshevism, which conquered a nation and turned it into a charnel house. But the psychological dynamics are so similar that I can understand now why Soviet-bloc emigres feel in their bones that something wicked is coming, and coming fast.

I’m going to give a brief overview of the ideas in this part of Slezkine’s book. Slezkine describes the Bolsheviks as “millenarian sectarians preparing for the apocalypse.” He gives a short history of apocalyptic sects, which he said began in the Axial Age, the period between the 8th and the 3rd centuries BC that saw parallel developments in civilizations — Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern, Greco-Roman — that caused a fundamental shift in human consciousness. The Axial Age introduced some concepts that are still with us today, including the idea that history is linear. Religion and philosophical systems of the Axial Age developed a sense of separation from the Real (that is, what is material), and the Ideal (what is transcendent). They also introduced the idea that time would culminate in a final battle between Good and Evil that would result in the End of History and the everlasting reign of Justice. The rich will be conquered, and the poor will triumph.

Slezkine writes at some length about these themes in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), but points out that they also existed in parallel in other religions of the era. The two Abrahamic religions that emerged from Axial Age Judaism — Christianity and Islam — modified these same concepts for themselves. The Book of Revelation in the Christian Bible is the standard Western account of the Apocalypse, but not the only one.

In the 16th century, the radical Protestant theologian Thomas Müntzer, leader of an apocalyptic Reformation sect, led an armed revolt against the Catholic Church, Martin Luther, and feudal authority. He and his followers believed the Last Days were upon the world, and that revolutionary violence was necessary to prepare for them.

These movements, says Slezkine, often depend on the virtuous mutually surveilling each other to keep everyone in line. Calvin’s Geneva was like this, and had laws prescribing the death penalty for relatively minor violations of its purity code. In the 17th century, the English Puritan movement under Thomas Oliver [the mistake was mine — RD] Cromwell (the “Puritan Moses”) was in this same vein.

The Enlightenment birthed apocalyptic millenarianism without God…

Here’s another interesting difference, and an important one: SJWs may want to destroy the oppressive practices, but unlike the Bolsheviks, they don’t want to destroy the institutions of society. Rather, they want to conquer them and administer them. The religion of Social Justice has already conquered the university, as James Lindsay points out, and is moving quickly into other institutions: media (the NYT is its Pravda), law, tech, entertainment, and corporate America. The Social Justice faith system can be easily adapted by the institutions of bourgeois capitalism — a fact that conceals its radicalism.

The people who have lived in societies suffused with this kind of ideology — emigres from Soviet-bloc countries — can see through the veil. With this new book I’m working on, I’m going to do my best to help readers see through their eyes. Meanwhile, if you are really interested in the Russian Revolution, I strongly urge you to read The House Of Government — all 1,128 pages of it. Yuri Slezkine is a masterful storyteller. It reads like a novel.

Be seeing you



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