MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Theodore Roosevelt’

The Most Dangerous Democratic Delusion

Posted by M. C. on November 6, 2024

Keeping perspective

President Woodrow Wilson declared in 1919: “In the last analysis, my fellow countrymen, as we in America would be the first to claim, a people are responsible for the acts of their government.” Wilson had campaigned for reelection three years earlier bragging that he had kept the country out of World War I; then, shortly after he started his second term, he submitted to Congress a declaration of war against Germany. Were the people responsible for President Wilson’s 1916 peace promises or his 1917 declaration of war?

by James Bovard

Democracy is a system of government under which the people are automatically liable for whatever the government does to them. Many of the most deadly errors of contemporary political thinking stem from the notion that in a democracy the government is the people, so there is scant reason to worry about protecting citizens from the government.Freedom consists of more than a mere choice of political masters.
[Click to Tweet]

Throughout western history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have sought to browbeat the citizens into obedience by telling them that they are only obeying themselves — regardless of how much the citizens disagree with the government’s edicts. Thomas Hobbes explained in 1652:

Because every subject is by this institution the author of all the actions, and judgments of the sovereign instituted; it follows, that whatsoever he doth, it can be no injury to any of his subjects; nor ought he to be by any of them accused of injustice. But by this Institution of a commonwealth, every particular man is author of all the sovereign doth; and consequently he that complaineth of injury from his sovereign, complained of that whereof he himself is author.

Hobbes sought civil peace by imposing an almost unlimited duty of submission via the sham that people are responsible for whatever government does to them: thus, government can never do the people wrong: thus, people never have a right to resist the government. Unfortunately, Hobbes’s canard has become standard equipment in the rhetorical armory of many rulers of democratic states.

A long history of abuses

In 1798, President John Adams pushed through Congress the Alien and Sedition Acts, which empowered Adams to suppress free speech and imprison without trial any critic of the federal government. When the citizens of Westmoreland County, Virginia, petitioned Adams in 1798 complaining of the acts, President Adams responded by denouncing the citizens: “The declaration that Our People are hostile to a government made by themselves, for themselves, and conducted by themselves, is an insult.” Adams’s response to the people of Westmoreland County — few of whom had voted for Adams — was the classic trick of a would-be democratic tyrant. Virginia had been unwilling to ratify the Constitution until a Bill of Rights had been added to safeguard free speech, among other rights.

Yet even though Adams openly suppressed free speech, he still claimed a right to not only the citizen’s abject obedience but also a right to be above criticism for suppressing their freedom. Kentucky and Virginia enacted resolutions declaring the sedition act null and void; the Kentucky resolution observed that the doctrine “that the general government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it [is] nothing short of despotism; since the discretion of those who administer the government, and not the Constitution, would be the measure of their powers.”

President Theodore Roosevelt, speaking in Asheville, North Carolina, on September 9, 1902, proclaimed: “The government is us; we are the government, you and I.” Yet, at the time, Roosevelt was using the American military to brutally crush a rebellion in the Philippines, which had been conquered by the United States and declared an American territory a few years before. Roosevelt explained that the “constitution does not follow the flag” — the American army therefore had no duty to respect the rights of the Filipino people.

President Woodrow Wilson declared in 1919: “In the last analysis, my fellow countrymen, as we in America would be the first to claim, a people are responsible for the acts of their government.” Wilson had campaigned for reelection three years earlier bragging that he had kept the country out of World War I; then, shortly after he started his second term, he submitted to Congress a declaration of war against Germany. Were the people responsible for President Wilson’s 1916 peace promises or his 1917 declaration of war? How can they be responsible for both? Wilson campaigned for the presidency in 1912 as a progressive. Shortly after he took office, mass firings of black federal employees occurred. The chief federal revenue collector in Georgia announced: “There are no Government positions for Negroes in the South. A Negro’s place is in the cornfield.” How were voters who opposed Jim Crow laws responsible for Wilson’s unexpected racist purge? And how could people have been responsible for Wilson’s pervasive suppression of civil liberties — as well as his pious promises to respect the Constitution? As Harvard professor Irving Babbitt observed in 1924, “Wilson, in the pursuit of his scheme for world service, was led to make light of the constitutional checks on his authority and to reach out almost automatically for unlimited power.”

President Franklin Roosevelt declared in 1938, “Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country.” When Roosevelt first ran for the presidency in 1932, he promised to balance the federal budget — and then later touted his endless deficit spending as a panacea for all the nation’s economic woes. When Roosevelt ran for reelection in 1936, he never mentioned his plan (revealed in early 1937) to pack the nation’s highest court with new appointees to rubber-stamp his decrees. Yet, because he won in 1936, he effectively implied that the citizens were somehow bound to accept all of his power grabs as if they themselves had willed them. Likewise, were citizens responsible for FDR’s 1940 reelection campaign boasts about keeping America out of World War Two — or were they to blame of his secret machinations to drag the United States into that war the following year?

President Lyndon Johnson declared on October 28, 1964: “Government is not an enemy of the people. Government is the people themselves.” Yet it wasn’t “the people” of Arkansas or Oklahoma who had lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident to create a pretext to commence bombing a foreign nation.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

How the FBI Used Twitter to Lie to You – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on December 28, 2022

But the most remarkable thing about the agency is that Theodore Roosevelt created the FBI via executive order after Congress refused his request to create a national police agency. Now that agency, born in defiance of congressmen who saw no constitutional place for a national police force, is staffed by people who think it’s their right to use any means they can find or develop, to override the constitutional procedure for choosing our president.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/12/how_the_fbi_used_twitter_to_lie_to_you.ht

By Trish Randall

The FBI we know is a creation of Hollywood. From the beginning, J. Edgar Hoover sought to insert the bureau into movies and TV shows, to portray the agency as grounded in American values, and special agents as righteous competence personified. Even on the far-out “X-Files,” with its hinting at nefarious government activities, Agent Mulder’s one flaw was idealism bordering on naivete. For over a century, Hollywood has upheld the belief that a federal law enforcement/internal quasi-spy agency is necessary for the safety of a free society and its citizens.

This image of the FBI fails to highlight an important fact. The FBI is allowed to lie to you. They can lie to acquire information or encourage a confession. Unlike entertainment, agents don’t need a story to fill a certain screen time, or number of theater seats. They just need to convince a very small audience just dumb enough to reveal something incriminating to their new friends.

The Bureau had Hunter Biden’s laptop by December 2019, before Joe Biden was the Democrat candidate. Although Biden was such a ghost candidate that all his campaign events combined wouldn’t have filled a stadium washroom, trained, experienced FBI employees were desperate for the opposing candidate to lose, just as they’d opposed Candidate Trump in 2016.

The targets for the FBI’s 2020 fabrication were Twitter staffers with titles like “Trust and Safety,” “Site Integrity,” “Product Trust,” or “Legal Policy and Trust.” They mostly worked to prevent 280-character tweets causing distress to potential readers with marginalized identities. There were many ex-FBI staff at Twitter, including attorney James Baker. Twitter staffers were primed to expect nefarious Russian efforts to influence the 2020 presidential election, including fake information, a laptop that didn’t belong to Hunter Biden or was hacked, salacious contents that were false and would be leaked. Being asked to help the FBI and given temporary Top Secret Clearance were ego-feeding perks. Twitter executive Yoel Roth apparently enjoyed running out of boring names for meetings with the FBI.

Twitter staff was groomed to squash a story from Russian agents, with no evidence of Russians targeting the 2020 election. After spending $100,000 on ads in 2016 with no effect, the Russians had apparently given up.

Some people working at Twitter couldn’t see how Twitter rules against hacked materials or misinformation were applicable to the Hunter laptop story published by the NY Post in October 2020. Yet they blocked the laptop story, including the link to the original story from being shared on Twitter — or even via private messages (or DMs) between Twitter users.

The operation hid the truth just long enough that the laptop documenting crimes by the family of the next president stayed mostly unknown until after the election. By March 2022, people who had voted for the man elected in Nov. 2020 were saying they would have voted differently if they’d heard about the laptop sooner.

It would seem awfully risky to use this flimsy story to convince a social media company to keep a secret that could be revealed by other means. Why not hold an official FBI press conference to claim that Russians loaded a laptop with fabricated evidence of Biden family crimes — perhaps adding some patently ridiculous material? The Russians would announce, “That wasn’t our work.” The FBI would reply, “Of course the Russians would say that.” The controversy would probably still be going back and forth.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

The United Nations and the Origins of “The Great Reset” | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on November 19, 2020

Eugenics

After the foundation of UNESCO in 1945, the English evolutionary biologist, eugenicist, and declared globalist Julian Huxley (the brother of Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World) became its first director.

At the launch of the organization,  Huxley called for a “scientific world humanism, global in extent” (p. 8) and asked to manipulate human evolution to a “desirable” end. Referring to dialectical materialism as “the first radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy” (p. 11), the director of UNESCO laments that the Marxist approach to changing society was bound to fail because of its lack of an indispensable “biological component.”

Keynes was not alone. The list of advocates of breeding the human race for its own betterment is quite large and impressive. These “illiberal reformers” include, among many other well-known names, the writers H.G. Wells and G.B. Shaw, US president Theodore Roosevelt, and British prime minister Winston Churchill as well as the economist Irving Fisher and the family-planning pioneers Margaret Sanger and Bill Gates Sr., the father of Bill Gates, Microsoft cofounder and head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

https://mises.org/wire/united-nations-and-origins-great-reset?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=6513cf7200-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-6513cf7200-228343965

Antony P. Mueller

About twenty-four hundred years ago, the Greek philosopher Plato came up with the idea constructing the state and society according to an elaborate plan. Plato wanted “wise men” (philosophers) at the helm of the government, but he made it also clear that his kind of state would need a transformation of the humans. In modern times, the promoters of the omnipotent state want to substitute Plato’s philosopher with the expert and create the new man through eugenics, which is now called transhumanism. The United Nations and its various suborganizations play a pivotal role in this project which has reached its present stage in the project of the Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset.

The Struggle for a World Government

The Great Reset did not come from nowhere. The first modern attempts to create a global institution with a governmental function was launched by the government of Woodrow Wilson who acted as US president from 1913 to 1921. Under the inspiration of Colonel Mandell House, the president’s prime advisor and best friend, Wilson wanted to establish a world forum for the period after World War I. Yet the plan of American participation in the League of Nations failed and the drive toward internationalism and establishing a new world order receded during the Roaring Twenties.

A new move toward managing a society like an organization, however, came during the Great DepressionFranklin Delano Roosevelt did not let the crisis go by without driving the agenda forward with his “New Deal.” FDR was especially interested in the special executive privileges that came with the Second World War. Resistance was almost nil when he moved forward to lay the groundwork for a new League of Nations, which was now to be named the United Nations.

Under the leadership of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt, twenty-six nations agreed in January 1942 to the initiative of establishing a United Nations Organization (UNO), which came into existence on October 24, 1945. Since its inception, the United Nations and its branches, such as the World Bank Group and the World Health Organization (WHO), have prepared the countries of the world to comply with the goals that were announced at its foundation.

Yet the unctuous pronouncements of promoting “international peace and security,” “developing friendly relations among nations,” and working for “social progress, better living standards, and human rights” hides the agenda of establishing a world government with executive powers whose task would not be promoting liberty and free markets but greater interventionism and control through cultural and scientific organizations. This became clear with the creation of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1945.  

Eugenics

After the foundation of UNESCO in 1945, the English evolutionary biologist, eugenicist, and declared globalist Julian Huxley (the brother of Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World) became its first director.

At the launch of the organization,  Huxley called for a “scientific world humanism, global in extent” (p. 8) and asked to manipulate human evolution to a “desirable” end. Referring to dialectical materialism as “the first radical attempt at an evolutionary philosophy” (p. 11), the director of UNESCO laments that the Marxist approach to changing society was bound to fail because of its lack of an indispensable “biological component.”

With these ideas, Julian Huxley was in respectable company. Since the late nineteenth century, the call for the genetic betterment of the human race through eugenics has been gaining many prominent followers. John Maynard Keynes, for example, held the promotion of eugenics and population control as one the most important social questions and a crucial area of research.

Keynes was not alone. The list of advocates of breeding the human race for its own betterment is quite large and impressive. These “illiberal reformers” include, among many other well-known names, the writers H.G. Wells and G.B. Shaw, US president Theodore Roosevelt, and British prime minister Winston Churchill as well as the economist Irving Fisher and the family-planning pioneers Margaret Sanger and Bill Gates Sr., the father of Bill Gates, Microsoft cofounder and head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

In his discourse at the foundation of the UNESCO, Julian Huxley was quite specific about the goals and methods of this institution. To achieve the desired “evolutionary progress” of mankind, the first step must be to stress “the ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.”

Furthermore, the institution must consider the tradeoff between the “importance of quality as against quantity” (p. 14), which means it must take into account that there is, “an optimum range of size for every human organization as for every type of organism” (p. 15). The educational, scientific, and cultural organization of the UN should give special attention to “unity-in-variety of the world’s art and culture as well as the promotion of one single pool of scientific knowledge” (p 17).

Huxley makes it clear that human diversity is not for all. Variety for “weaklings, fools, and moral deficients…cannot but be bad,” and because a “considerable percentage of the population is not capable of profiting from higher education” and also a “considerable percentage of young men” suffer from “physical weakness or mental instability” and “these grounds are often genetic in origin” (p. 20), these groups must be excluded from the efforts of advancing human progress.

In his discourse, Huxley diagnosed that at the time of his writing the “indirect effect of civilization” is rather “dysgenic instead of eugenic” and that “in any case, it seems likely that the deadweight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability, and disease-proneness, which already exist in the human species, will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved” (p. 21). After all, it is “essential that eugenics should be brought entirely within the borders of science, for as already indicated, in the not very remote future the problem of improving the average quality of human beings is likely to become urgent; and this can only be accomplished by applying the findings of a truly scientific eugenics” (pp. 37–38).

Use of the Climate Threat

The next decisive step toward the global economic transformation was taken with the first report of the Club of Rome. In 1968, the Club of Rome was initiated at the Rockefeller estate Bellagio in Italy. Its first report was published in 1972 under the title “The Limits to Growth.” 

The president emeritus of the Club of Rome, Alexander King, and the secretary of the club, General Bertrand Schneider, inform in their Report of the Council of the Club of Rome that when the members of the club were in search of identifying a new enemy, they listed pollution, global warming, water shortages, and famines as the most opportune items to be blamed on humanity with the implication that humanity itself must be reduced to keep these threats in check.

Since the 1990s, several comprehensive initiatives toward a global system of control have been undertaken by the United Nations with Agenda 2021 and Agenda 2030. The 2030 Agenda was adopted by all United Nations member states in 2015. It launched its blueprint for global change with the call to achieve seventeen sustainable development goals (SDGs). The key concept is “sustainable development” that includes population control as a crucial instrument.

Saving the earth has become the slogan of green policy warriors. Since the 1970s, the horror scenario of global warming has been a useful tool in their hands to gain political influence and finally rule over public discourse. In the meanwhile, these anticapitalist groups have obtained a dominant influence in the media, the educational and judicial systems, and have become major players in the political arena.

In many countries, particularly in Europe, the so-called green parties have become a pivotal factor in the political system. Many of the representatives are quite open in their demands to make society and the economy compatible with high ecological standards that require a profound reset of the present system. 

In 1945, Huxley (p. 21) noted that it is too early to propose outright a eugenic depopulation program but advised that it will be important for the organization “to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”

Huxley’s caution is no longer necessary. In the meantime, the branches of the United Nations have gained such a level of power that even originally minor UN suborganizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) have been enabled to command individual governments around the world to obey their orders. The WHO and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)—whose conditionality for loans has changed from fiscal restraint to the degree to which a country follows the rules set by the WHO—have become the supreme tandem to work toward establishing the new world order.

As Julian Huxley pointed out in his discourse in 1945, it is the task of the United Nations to do away with economic freedom, because “laisser-faire and capitalist economic systems” have “created a great deal of ugliness” (p. 38). The time has come to work toward the emergence “of a single world culture” (p. 61). This must be done with the explicit help of the mass media and the educational systems.

Conclusion

With the foundation of the United Nations and its suborganizations, the drive to advance the programs of eugenics and transhumanism took a big step forward. Together with the activities of the Club of Rome, they have stage to initiate the great reset that is going on currently. With the pronouncement of a pandemic, the goal of comprehensive government control of the economy and society has taken another leap toward transforming the economy and society. Freedom faces a new enemy. The tyranny comes under the disguise of expert rule and benevolent dictatorship. The new rulers do not justify their right to dominance because of divine providence but now claim the right to rule the people in the name of universal health and safety based on presumed scientific evidence. Author:

Antony P. Mueller

Dr. Antony P. Mueller is a German professor of economics who currently teaches in Brazil. Write an email. See his website and blog.

Be seeing you

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

Teddy Roosevelt captain says he knowingly risked career with virus warning

Posted by M. C. on September 21, 2020

Agent Orange, Burn Pits, vaccine/medical experimentation…soldiers are expendable, image is not.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/09/19/captain-says-he-knowingly-risked-career-with-virus-warning/

The Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO — The dismissed captain of a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier knew he was jeopardizing his military career when he broke protocol and sent a now-famous email warning of possible sailor deaths due to a coronavirus breakout on board.

 

But Brett Crozier says in a witness statement obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle that he did so in an urgent effort to help avoid a “larger catastrophe.”

Crozier’s witness statement, recorded in May during the Navy’s investigation into the handling of the outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, provides a look at his thinking when he sent the March email that upended the military world and brought condemnation from the top Navy admiral overseeing the carrier. President Donald Trump also criticized Crozier.

Vice Adm. William Merz, commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet, told investigators that Crozier either did not understand military efforts underway to evacuate the crowded ship or wanted to undermine those efforts. Merz hypothesized that Crozier screwed up and panicked, or wanted to play hero.

“Either way, he surrendered, and brings into question his resiliency and toughness in command,” Merz said.

 

Crozier, a native of Santa Rosa, California, was stripped of his position but received a rousing hero’s sendoff from his crew, who credited him with saving their lives.

The aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt departs Apra Harbor, Guam, July 4, following an extended visit in the midst of the COVID-19 global pandemic. (MCSN Kaylianna Genier/Navy)
The aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt departs Apra Harbor, Guam, July 4, following an extended visit in the midst of the COVID-19 global pandemic. (MCSN Kaylianna Genier/Navy)
 

A frustrated Crozier sent the letter March 30, saying that more needed to be done to remove 5,000 sailors from the carrier docked in Guam. More than 1,200 sailors eventually tested positive for the virus, including Crozier, who spent a month in Guam in isolation. Several were hospitalized and one died from COVID-19 complications.

Crozier said he sent the email through unclassified channels because of quickly worsening conditions that demanded urgent action. Navy officers said that led to the memo being leaked and jeopardized sensitive talks with Guam officials to house sailors in hotel rooms.

They said he was removed for poor handling of the breakout and for going outside the chain of command.

 

“My intent in sending the email … was to bring a sense of urgency to a rapidly deteriorating and potentially deadly situation onboard the (Theodore Roosevelt) and avoid a larger catastrophe and loss of life,” Crozier said in the witness statement.

“From my perspective, even just one more week of routine planning would have resulted in another week of exponential growth in positive cases and greater risk to more Sailors. We wanted to stop the administrative bureaucracy … so I sent up a red flare,” he said.

The conditions on board the Roosevelt became public when the San Francisco Chronicle reported on the email. Crozier was dismissed from command April 3.

Be seeing you

 

 

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

Conquering the Earth — The Expansion of the US Empire

Posted by M. C. on August 27, 2019

During his presidency, he did such a good job at his invasions that, in 1906, he was the first US President to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Considering the enormous head of steam that the US government is building up toward these countries, it would be surprising in the extreme if the world did not find itself in a state of world war…

https://internationalman.com/articles/conquering-the-earth/

by Jeff Thomas

The Akkadian Empire is often regarded as the world’s first empire, reaching its peak between the 24th and 22nd centuries BC, some 4,400 years ago.

It was in the Middle East, home of quite a few empires over the millennia. It began with King Sargon, who, having succeeded at conquering his neighbours in Babylonia, decided to expand further into Syria and Canaan.

King Sargon established a fad that has remained until the present day. In any era since his time, there have been those nations that, having had initial successes at conquest, couldn’t resist the temptation to “have it all.”

Each, in turn, had occasion to learn why this is not the most sensible objective for a nation to pursue.

The Roman Empire collapsed, in part, because it attempted to gobble up as much of the known world as possible and found that, once another civilisation had been conquered and looted, a military and other resources were then necessary to maintain control. Rome learned too late that, whilst conquest is often profitable, maintaining a conquered land is a liability.

Over the millennia, history has seen many empires come and go. By the time of the Spanish Empire (peaking in 1521–1643), kings had a rough idea of how very big the world was and recognized that controlling it all was quite a task.

This did not, however, stop ambitious leaders. Every century has seen its Genghis Khan or Napoleon, whose desire for conquest was insatiable. Repeatedly, such leaders came to a bad end, specifically because they tried to bite off more than they could chew.

Britain owned the nineteenth century, with colonies worldwide, but today, we British eat humble pie, as we were eclipsed due to excessive warfare and government spending.

Then the US owned the twentieth century, not only colonizing parts of the world, but seeking to police the rest of it.

This began in 1899. Future President Theodore Roosevelt stated publicly that “Peace may come only through war.” …

And to maintain a geographic balance, the US government dispenses weekly notices to the media of the growing need for aggression in Venezuela and North Korea.

Why? Well, just like King Sargon, the US military interests are ever-conscious that there are still a few countries out there that are not US-dominated. As can be seen in the map above, the US has a military presence in all the countries that are coloured pink.

The US has some 800 military bases and has military personnel deployed in 177 countries – a total of 1.3 million troops. In addition to these bases, there are numerous “lily pads,” or mini-military bases. Such bases generally house weaponry and supplies, at the ready for larger troop deployments.

Further, the US has a host of “militarily active advisors” and “peacekeeping forces” deployed across the globe.

No surprise then, that the US tends to work towards the day when 100% of the world has US military boots on the ground.

For example, that grey collection of islands on the map, just above Norway, are the Svalbard and Jan Mayen islands. Although they’re presently inhabited by Russians and Norwegians, are in the Arctic Circle and have virtually no value, when US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis visited Svalbard in 2018, he saw it as a good site for a US base, saying, “Certainly America’s got to up its game in the arctic. There’s no doubt about that.”…

Considering the enormous head of steam that the US government is building up toward these countries, it would be surprising in the extreme if the world did not find itself in a state of world war in the not-too-distant future.

The US Empire, like its predecessors throughout history, is about to bite off more than it can chew and the world will pay the price.

Editor’s Note: The US government is overextending itself by interfering in every corner of the globe. It’s all financed by massive amounts of money printing. However, the next financial crisis could end the whole charade soon.

The truth is, we’re on the cusp of a global economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. That’s exactly why Doug Casey and his team just released this urgent video. Click here to watch it now.

Be seeing you

war-is-peace

 

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

Minimum Wage – The Gift That Keeps On Giving.

Posted by M. C. on November 22, 2014

Early 20th century Progressives and eugenicists were concerned about the quality of life. Mostly theirs. The so-called “inferior” and “low wage” races at that time were the Irish, Eastern Europeans, Italians, blacks and Chinese. Their willingness to work for less and for longer hours combined with high birth rates raised fear in WASP circles. Progressive pioneer Theodore Roosevelt coined a term for allowing this to continue – “Race Suicide”. Read the rest of this entry »

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