MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘totalitarian’

The Extreme and Deadly Risks We Face Are Many, and of Our Own Making – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 5, 2021

So long as the common man bows to power because he assumes that it may be of some good use, he has acquiesced his soul for an unsustainable and baseless self-interested goal. 

“Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.”~ Arthur Schopenhauer (2007). “Parerga and Paralipomena: A Collection of Philosophical Essays”, p.60, Cosimo, Inc.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/05/gary-d-barnett/the-extreme-and-deadly-risks-we-face-are-many-and-of-our-own-making/

“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

~ Hannah Arendt (1951) “The Origins of Totalitarianism”

It is never enough to place all blame on the ruling class, regardless of the evil present, unless one is innocent, enlightened, and powerless to protect and stand up for self and truth. So long as the common man bows to power because he assumes that it may be of some good use, he has acquiesced his soul for an unsustainable and baseless self-interested goal. This attitude is not one of morality and proper purpose, but one of egocentrism, indifference, and greed. It is easy to lay blame at the feet of politicians, until one realizes that tyrants could never survive and prosper without the consent of the governed. Accepting this legitimate reality can be the impetus for achieving a free existence.

All that is going on today; the lockdowns, mask wearing, cold and heartless distancing from family, friends, and society, self-imprisonment, deadly injections, surveillance, censorship, economic destruction, and massive restrictions of life-sustaining activities, have all been willingly accepted. Does this mean that the people themselves are at fault for the horrible circumstances that currently threaten them? It certainly does, but not in the sense that the masses planned and wished for such a travesty, but in the manner that all of this carnage was voluntarily allowed to happen, even in the face of extreme hardship and suffering. It was brought about by fear, and fear can be a very convincing tool in the quiver of tyrants when they seek to trick the herd into accepting oppressive and authoritative rule in order to gain what is falsely termed as ‘safety.’ This is the result of mass propaganda meant to weaken the resolve of the many by fooling them into submission, while the power brokers simply stay in the shadows awaiting the voluntary surrender of their subjects.

Given this state of affairs, and understanding the implications of these truths should strengthen the determination and courage of the general population because it is obvious that without the consent of the people, none of this could continue to threaten our very existence. The American people in other words, hold all the real power to escape this tyranny, and simply have to unite to throw off the ‘claimed’ rulers. The idea of defeating this manmade travesty is really that simple, but the desire to implement this winning strategy is still lacking among the public at large. The importance of fighting back, and reclaiming freedom is imperative if any liberty is to be salvaged. Educating as many as is possible about the power they hold is necessary in order to start a fire in the bellies of all those that have the most to lose. Those are you and me, and everyone you know. All Americans are at great risk.

We are in the midst of an aggressive attack on humanity itself. Each of us at some point must accept the fact that without mass resistance, we will all be slaves. This stark realization is inevitable, and all that is required in order to stop this global reset is disobedience and non-compliance by large numbers.

Without that resistance, the possible, or more likely probable, terror that we will experience will be widespread and all encompassing. The next planned and telegraphed major attack against the people, the next “9/11’ type event if you will, in all probability, “will be a massive cyber attack meant to implode the entire financial system, and allow for a government censoring and takeover of the internet. This plot was designed in the near past, and has been openly simulated and the full strategy released just a few months ago.” In addition, this event will be used to bring about a national digital system, so that monetary policy can be controlled at a national and then global level. Of course, this will mean a vast increase in surveillance and censorship, so that the mainstream narrative can be continually pushed without any offsetting truth or scrutiny.

As I wrote recently: “A total digital system is desired by Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum (WEF), along with the central banking cartel and its government and corporate partners, and the way forward with this scheme can only take place when the current economic system is destroyed. In other words, a new financial system has already been designed, and is ready to be implemented after an economic collapse. Technocratic control is sought, and we are already far into the plot to implement a takeover of the entire financial system. The new and dictatorial internet “Patriot Act” is already drafted, and will be introduced almost immediately following this staged cyber attack that is sure to come.”

And this is only one part of this plot to globalize and reset our current system. The immunity passport agenda will continue in earnest, and several tactics could be used to instill much more fear in this society, including targeted releases of bio-weapon technology, more lethal effects of injections, and intentional killing in order to continue to gain compliance. The deadly ‘vaccine’ agenda will also continue, and while many are properly rejecting this poison today, how many will line up when deaths begin to stack up due to the already large number of citizens that have taken this gene-altering, and deadly concoction that can be intentionally designed to destroy the natural human immune system?

In the interim, more anti-gun legislation, higher taxation, and massive inflation will consume this society, causing more unemployment, more bankruptcies, business closings, and poverty. All this will be used to decimate this already crippled economy and the weakened population will become even more dependent on government. All in all, much more hell is coming, so unity among all of us is imperative if survival and freedom are desired.

America is no longer a home to free individuals, and has become the poster child for almost absolute tyranny. The individual needs to once again reign supreme, and stand in total defiance against this nation state that seeks only to capture and control the bodies and minds of the people in order to gain dominance over all.

“Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.”

~ Arthur Schopenhauer (2007). “Parerga and Paralipomena: A Collection of Philosophical Essays”, p.60, Cosimo, Inc.

Source links:

 The engineered ‘Covid-19 Crisis” is a fraud

What Is Coming

A planned cyber attack to affect a global financial meltdown is coming

The WEF’s simulation of the planned cyber pandemic

Judges new internet censorship

New World Next Week

Gary D. Barnett [send him mail] is a retired investment professional that has been writing about freedom and liberty matters, politics, and history for two decades. He is against all war and aggression, and against the state. He recently finished a collaboration with former U.S. Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney, and was a contributor to her new book, “When China Sneezes” From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Political-Economic Crisis.” Currently, he lives in Montana with his wife and son. Visit his website.

Be seeing you

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

Why ‘Public Health’ Is the Health of the State – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on April 14, 2021

The reasons for this can be understood by reading the following passages from Randolph Bourne’s famous essay where I have substituted the words “pandemic” or “public health” (in brackets) for the word “war”:

“The republican state has almost no trappings to appeal to the common man’s emotions . . . .  The moment a [pandemic] is declared, however, the mass of the people . . . with the exception of a few malcontents, proceed to allow themselves to be regimented, coerced, deranged in all the environments of their lives . . . .  The citizen throws off his contempt and indifference to government, identifies himself with its purposes . . . and the state once more walks . . .”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/04/thomas-dilorenzo/why-public-health-is-the-health-of-the-state/

By Thomas DiLorenzo

One of the most remarkable articles written about the growth of government during the twentieth-century is “War is the Health of the State” by Randolph Bourne.  Published in 1918, Bourne’s essay explained how it is human nature to mostly ignore the state because the state during peacetime has “almost no trappings to appeal to the common man’s emotions.”  War, however, is the all-purpose tool of the state to stir up the public’s emotions in a way that motivates it to hand over to the state virtually unlimited powers, abandoning all constitutional constraints – and to subsequently relinquish most of their supposedly cherished freedoms.

But the state has other tricks up its sleaves in its never-ending quest for totalitarian control of society.  And do not delude yourself:  All states aspire to become totalitarian by nature – it’s only a matter of time.

Wars are very expensive; they generate antiwar movements, fierce political opposition, and sometimes assassinations.  And they can go very, very badly.  As both Napoleon and Hitler learned when they foolishly invaded Russia.

Other kinds of less risky (to the state) “emergencies” will often suffice as totalitarianism’s propaganda/brainwashing strategies.  As the world has learned in the past year, a “public health emergency” (or the perception of a fabricated and phony one) can do the job just fine without the messiness and expenses of war.  The reasons for this can be understood by reading the following passages from Randolph Bourne’s famous essay where I have substituted the words “pandemic” or “public health” (in brackets) for the word “war”:

“The republican state has almost no trappings to appeal to the common man’s emotions . . . .  The moment a [pandemic] is declared, however, the mass of the people . . . with the exception of a few malcontents, proceed to allow themselves to be regimented, coerced, deranged in all the environments of their lives . . . .  The citizen throws off his contempt and indifference to government, identifies himself with its purposes . . . and the state once more walks . . .”

Every single word of this is a perfectly accurate description of how Americans have behaved ever since the “public health” bureaucrats declared a pandemic.  It was shocking how immediate millions of people so immediately agreed to be regimented, coerced, and deranged in all aspects of their lives.  Of course, the fact that all of the dictates by the local government mini-Mussolinies were enforced by armed police also helped to “convince”  Boobus Americanus that he must genuflect to the state.

Bourne continues:

“[Public health] is the health of the state.  It automatically sets in motion throughout society those irresistible forces for uniformity, for passionate cooperation with the government coercing into obedience the [numerical] minority groups and individuals which lack the larger herd sense.  The machinery of government sets and enforces the drastic penalties; the minorities are either intimidated into silence . . . .  Minorities are rendered sullen . . .”

Those Americans who “lack the herd sense” regarding the Hitlerian dictates of Anthony Fauci and his ilk have been fired from their jobs, canceled from Facebook, Twitter, etc., and generally demonized as enemies of human civilization.  “Minorities” have been literally silenced by the “Tech giants” with no “persuasion” at all involved.  Well-known drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine that could have saved untold numbers of lives were effectively banned, and the common sense approach of boosting one’s immunity with vitamins D and C and zinc (and a half hour of vitamin D-generating sunshine a day) were either ignored or denounced as snake oil by the state, the television networks, the laughingly-called “media” in general, and many others who have prostituted themselves to the pharmaceutical industry.

Once the “public health” bureaucracy declared a pandemic, millions of Americans instantly turned into mental infants, eager for the D.C. bureaucracy to become their real mommies and daddies and protect them from the big bad coronavirus wolf.  As Bourne explained:

“There is . . . in the feeling toward the state a large element of pure filial mysticism.  The sense of insecurity, the desire for protection, sends ones desire back to father and mother . . . .  It is not for nothing that one’s state is still thought of as Father or Motherland.  The [pandemic] has shown that nowhere under the shock of danger have these primitive childlike attitudes failed to assert themselves . . .”

Anthony Fauci, who went to medical school sixty years ago; never actually practiced medicine himself; who has been a tenured federal bureaucrat for more than half a century; and who parades around in public wearing two masks despite having been vaccinated, became every American’s all-knowing, protective “father.”  His Stepford wife-ish, half-body scarf-wearing sidekick, Dr. Deborah Birx, became everyone’s stand-in for “mother.”  Every state and local government in America did exactly what these two bureaucratic weasels demanded that they do.  “Listen to Dr. Fauci,” Joe Biden has repeatedly demanded.  Anyone asking for a second opinion was either ignored or smeared as an enemy of society.  There are myriad stories of doctors who did offer second opinions who were fired or punished in other ways.  (For giving a speech in which she argued that the CDC death count numbers were not reliable since they conflated death with COVID and death from COVID, a physician friend of yours truly was banned from referring her patients to the hospital she had been associated with.  Today, the CDC admits that only 6 percent of the half million or so “COVID” deaths in the U.S. can be legitimately called death from COVID).

As with war, the state attempts to crush all dissent when it comes to its “public health” emergencies.  As Bourne further wrote:

“[D]issent is like sand in the bearings.  Any difference with ‘unity’ turns the whole vast impulse toward crushing it . . . .  the herd becomes divided into the hunters and the hunted, and the [pandemic] becomes not only a technical game but a sport as well.”

Ah, “unity,” the new mating call of the Party of Biden.  Dissent from Unity’s Official Truth, and you will in fact be hunted down, possibly lose your job, or have your life destroyed.

Now, for any readers who still believe the government lie that “we are the government” and, therefore, the government would never manipulate us in these ways, I recommend another online essay, this one by economic historian Robert Higgs entitled “The Song that is irresistible.”  In that essay Higgs states the truism that:

“States, by their very nature, are perpetually at war – not always against foreign foes, of course, but always against their own subjects.  The state’s most fundamental purpose, the activity without which it cannot exist, is robbery . . .  which it pretties up ideologically by giving it a different name (taxation) and by striving to sanctify its intrinsic crime as permissible and socially necessary” (emphasis added).

Or as yours truly has written on numerous occasions:  The purpose of government is for those who run it to plunder those who do not.

The state also “sanctifies” mass murder, by the way, thinly disguised by calling it “war” and by enlisting legions of intellectual prostitutes to dream up myriad excuses and rationales for its mass murdering sprees.  Mainstream “Lincoln scholarship” would be the most egregious example of this kind of intellectual whoremongering (and warmongering).

Be seeing you

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

EPA’s totalitarian assault on America – Ice Age Now

Posted by M. C. on April 5, 2021

His second goal is to increase “cooperation” between the EPA and its “subordinate” state environmental agencies. EPA will dictate; states will fall in line.

For decades, the EPA relied on unreviewable studies to impose draconian restrictions on businesses and industries, and thus on the U.S. economy. Trump wanted to bring true transparency to the process. Opponents claimed the Trump secret science” rule would block the use of critical public health studies kept secret supposedly to protect the identities of trial participants – which of course was not the case.

The EPA claims modifying a vehicle previously certified for street driving for use as a competition-only racecar is unlawful even for vehicles that are trailered and never driven on public roads again. This policy seeks to end a 50-year-old American tradition. It has no precedent; even California exempts racing vehicles from regulation.””Not only does the EPA claim it is illegal to convert a vehicle for racing by modifying its emission system; it claims manufacturing, selling or installing race parts for such vehicles is likewise unlawful. It’s even said enforcement actions against high performance parts – including superchargers, tuners and exhaust systems – will now be a top priority

https://www.iceagenow.info/epas-totalitarian-assault-on-america/

by Robert

Using ‘transparency’ and ‘dialogue’ to target auto racing, then all fossil fuel use, all controlled by a dictatorship of faceless and nameless totalitarians
– Duncan Flanakin

______________

“One of the Trump EPA’s final actions revised and overturned “secret science” rules that let the agency hide or modify questionable data and still claim it was being “transparent,” writes Paul Driessen. “One of the Biden EPA’s first actions restored this secretive, manipulative science. One of its next actions aims to use ozone regulations and secret science to eliminate racecar driving in America – and then eradicate fossil fuel use, and control the entire US economy.”

“Biden-Harris EPA Administrator Michael Regan clearly has “bold aspirations and a long to-do list,” says the Washington Post, as he works to increase “cooperation” between the EPA and its “subordinate” state environmental agencies. As Duggan Flanakin explains, this means EPA intends to dictate, and states will be expected to fall into line.”

______________

EPA’s totalitarian assault on America

Using ‘transparency’ and ‘dialogue’ to target auto racing, then all fossil fuel use
All controlled by a dictatorship of faceless and nameless totalitarians

Duggan Flanakin

Biden-Harris Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan is clearly on a mission. He has “bold aspirations, and a long to-do list,” says The Washington Post. But to succeed, the Post acknowledges, he must “help the EPA get its groove back.” As Reagan put it, “We’ve got a lot of work to do, starting with rebuilding staff morale and getting all our staff back to feeling as if they matter, their voices matter.”

Regan says his job is “to restore the scientific integrity and the utilization of data, of facts, as we move forward, and make some very important decisions.” His second goal is to increase “cooperation” between the EPA and its “subordinate” state environmental agencies. EPA will dictate; states will fall in line.

A big step toward that goal was extending a Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA, the Environmental Council of the States, and the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials. According to Regan, “EPA is committed to building on the values of transparency, respect, and an open dialogue that are the cornerstone of a successful partnership with the states.” As EPA defines the terms.

The EPA’s use of “secret science” 

An Obama-appointed federal judge just restored the EPA’s use of “secret science” in formulating regulations that businesses and industries must follow just because the EPA says so – with “scientific evidence” that cannot be cross-examined. U.S. District Judge Brian Morris (in Great Falls, Montana) took just hours before vacating the Trump EPA rule that would have ended this Star Chamber style rule.

For decades, the EPA relied on unreviewable studies to impose draconian restrictions on businesses and industries, and thus on the U.S. economy. Trump wanted to bring true transparency to the process. Opponents claimed the Trump secret science” rule would block the use of critical public health studies kept secret supposedly to protect the identities of trial participants – which of course was not the case.

As Trump EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler explained, the “secret science” rule in no way blocked previous “secret” studies; rather, it created tiers in which preference is given to studies with public data. Peer reviewers looking at a study’s raw data did not need to know any of the subject’s names, so no patient confidentiality was at risk. Moreover, in most cases, a review of basic methods, statistics and results is sufficient to determine if they actually support the study’s conclusion. Wheeler also noted:

“Too often Congress shirks its responsibility and defers important decisions to regulatory agencies. These regulators then invoke science to justify their actions, often without letting the public study the underlying data. Part of transparency is making sure the public knows what the agency bases its decisions on.”

Destroying auto racing in the USA

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

The Omnipotent Power to Assassinate – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on February 16, 2021

For some 150 years, the federal government lacked the power to assassinate people. For the last 75 years, however, the federal government has wielded and actually exercised the omnipotent power to assassinate, including against American citizens.

How did it acquire this omnipotent power? Certainly not by constitutional amendment. It acquired it by default — by converting the federal government after World War II from a limited-government republic to a national-security state.

https://www.fff.org/2021/02/12/the-omnipotent-power-to-assassinate-2/

by Jacob G. Hornberger

It goes without saying that the Constitution called into existence a government with few, limited powers. That was the purpose of enumerating the powers of the federal government. If the Constitution was bringing into existence a government of unlimited or omnipotent powers, then there would have been no point in enumerating a few limited powers. In that event, the Constitution would have called into existence a government with general, unlimited powers to do whatever was in the interests of the nation.

If the Constitution had proposed a government of omnipotent powers, there is no way the American people would have accepted it, in which case America would have continued operating under the Articles of Confederation. Our American ancestors didn’t want a government of omnipotent powers. They wanted a government of few, limited, enumerated powers.

Among the most omnipotent powers a government can wield is the power of government officials to assassinate people. Our American ancestors definitely did not want that type of government. That is why the power to assassinate is not among the enumerated powers of government in the Constitution.

Despite the enumerated-powers doctrine, our American ancestors were still leery. They knew that the federal government would inevitably attract people who would thirst for the power to assassinate people. So, to make certain that federal officials got the point, the American people enacted the Fifth Amendment after the Constitution was ratified. It expressly prohibited the federal government from taking any person’s life without due process of law.

Due process of law is a term that stretches all the way back to Magna Carta. At a minimum, it requires formal notice of charges and a trial before the government can take a person’s life. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, assassination involves taking a person’s life without notice or trial.

For some 150 years, the federal government lacked the power to assassinate people. For the last 75 years, however, the federal government has wielded and actually exercised the omnipotent power to assassinate, including against American citizens.

How did it acquire this omnipotent power? Certainly not by constitutional amendment. It acquired it by default — by converting the federal government after World War II from a limited-government republic to a national-security state.

A national-security state is a totalitarian form of governmental structure. North Korea is a national security state. So is Cuba. And China, Egypt, Russia, and Pakistan. And the United States, along with others.

A national-security state is based on a vast, all-powerful military-intelligence establishment, one that, as a practical matter, wields omnipotent powers. Thus, when the CIA, one of the principle components of America’s national-security state, was called into existence in 1947, it immediately assumed the power to assassinate. In fact, as early as 1952 the CIA published an assassination manual that demonstrates that the CIA was already specializing in the art of assassination (as well as cover-up) in the early years of the national-security state.

In 1954, the CIA instigated a coup in Guatemala on grounds of “national security.” The aim of the coup was to oust the country’s democratically elected president, Jacobo Arbenz, and replace him with a military general. As part of the coup, the CIA prepared a list of people to be assassinated. To this day, the CIA will not disclose the names of people on its kill list (on grounds of “national security,” of course) but it is a virtual certainty that President Arbenz was at the top of the list for establishing a foreign policy of peace and friendship with the communist world. To his good fortune, he was able to flee the country before they could assassinate him.

In 1970, the CIA was attempting to prevent Salvador Allende from becoming president of Chile. Like Arbenz, Allende’s foreign policy was based on establishing a peaceful and friendly relationship with the communist world. The CIA’s plan included inciting a coup led by the Chilean military. However, the overall commander of Chile’s armed forces, Gen. Rene Schneider, stood in the way. His position was that he had taken an oath to support and defend the constitution and, therefore, that he would not permit a coup to take place. The CIA conspired to have him violently kidnapped to remove him as an obstacle to the coup. During the kidnapping attempt, Schneider was shot dead.

Schneider’s family later filed suit for damages arising out of Schneider’s wrongful death. The federal judiciary refused to permit either U.S. officials or the CIA to be held accountable for Schneider’s death. Affirming the U.S. District Court’s summary dismissal of the case, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that U.S. officials who were involved in the crime could not be held liable since they were simply acting within the course and scope of their employment. Moreover, the U.S. government couldn’t be held liable because, the court stated, it is sovereignly immune.

Central to the Court’s holding was what it called the “political question doctrine.” It holds that under the Constitution, the judicial branch of the government is precluded from questioning any “political” or “foreign policy” decision taken by the executive branch.

Actually though, the Constitution says no such thing. It is in fact the responsibility of the judicial branch to enforce the Constitution against the other branches, including the national-security branch. That includes the Fifth Amendment, which expressly prohibits the federal government from taking people’s lives without due process of law.

So, why did the federal judiciary come up with this way to avoid taking on the CIA? Because it knew that once the federal government was converted to a national-security state, the federal government had fundamentally changed in nature by now having a branch that could exercise omnipotent powers, such as assassination, with impunity. The federal judiciary knew that there was no way that the judicial branch of government could, as a practical matter, stop the national-security branch with assassinating people. To maintain the veneer of judicial power, the judiciary came up with its ludicrous “political question doctrine” to explain why it wasn’t enforcing the Constitution

Once Pinochet took office after the coup in Chile, the Chilean judiciary did the same thing as the U.S. judiciary. It deferred to the power of the Pinochet military-intelligence government, declining to enforce the nation’s constitution against it. Like the U.S. judiciary, the Chilean judiciary recognized the reality of omnipotent power that comes with a national-security state. Many years later, the Chilean judiciary apologized to the Chilean people for abrogating its judicial responsibility.

The webpage for our upcoming conference “The National Security State and the Kennedy Assassination” is now live and taking registrations. Admission: free.EMAIL


This post was written by: Jacob G. Hornberger

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

Be seeing you

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

The Totalitarian Future Globalists Want For The Entire World Is Being Revealed

Posted by M. C. on August 31, 2020

The CFR was founded for “the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all powerful one world government.”

http://www.alt-market.com/index.php/articles/4314-the-totalitarian-future-globalists-want-for-the-entire-world-is-being-revealed

Brandon Smith

All over the Western world ever since 9/11 there have been incremental steps towards what many liberty advocates would call a “police state”; a system in which governments are no longer restricted by the boundaries of civil liberties and are given the power to do just about anything they want in the name of public safety. The use of “the law” as a tool for injecting tyranny into a culture is the first tactic of all totalitarians.

The idea is that by simply writing government criminality into the law books, that criminality somehow becomes justified by virtue of legal recognition. It’s all very circular. Whenever government abuse of the people is initiated, it’s always initiated in the name of what’s “best for society as a whole”. To save society, the individuals that make up a society must be sublimated or destroyed. This mentality is the complete opposite of what the Founding Fathers in America fought and died for, but as Thomas Jefferson once said:

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

In countries like Australia, which claim to value Western democratic principles of liberty and rule by the people, the perception is that civil rights are codified into the legal framework just as they are in the US. However, there are some glaring differences and issues; specifically, Australian citizens (like many European citizens) have absolutely no means to compel their government or the elites that influence their government to limit themselves. It is these nations, in which the populations have been mostly disarmed and pacified, that any agenda for tyranny will first be established. But we will get to that in a moment…

Make no mistake, there is a very OPEN and easily identifiable agenda on the part of globalists to establish a heavily centralized police state system in every country they are able. This is not “conspiracy theory”, this is conspiracy fact.

For many years now there have been numerous analysts, economists and geopolitical experts in the alternative media that have predicted and warned the public about the globalist strategy of “order out of chaos”. In other words, the ultra-wealthy power brokers that hold influence over most governments on Earth seek to “reshape” the existing social order through the creation of crisis and disaster. By engineering public desperation, they hope to lure us into accepting restrictions on our freedoms that we would have never considered otherwise.

The goal of a single global economy and government has been spoken of by elites time and time again, yet it is still to this day called “conspiracy theory” or “paranoid delusion”. I could quote these elites and their organizations all day long, but I’ll cite a few choice statements to make my point.

As former Deputy Secretary of State under Clinton and Council on Foreign Relations member Strobe Talbot wrote in an article for Time Magazine in 1992 titled ‘America Abroad: The Birth Of The Global Nation’:

In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”

As elitist and Fabian Socialist HG Wells outlines in his non-fiction treatise titled ‘The New World Order’:

“…When the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people … will hate the new world order … and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.”

And how about one of my favorite revealing quotes from Trilateral Commission member Richard N. Gardner, former deputy assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations under Kennedy and Johnson? He wrote in the April, 1974 issue of the Council on Foreign Relation’s (CFR) journal Foreign Affairs (pg. 558) in an article titled ‘The Hard Road To World Order’:

In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Members of globalist foundations and think-tanks like the CFR have inhabited nearly every US government office and presidential cabinet for the past several decades. This includes the two dozen or so CFR members in Donald Trump’s cabinet.  Draining the swamp? Not going to happen.

As Harpers Magazine candidly revealed in a 1958 expose titled ‘School For Statesmen’: Read the rest of this entry »

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

‘The God That Failed’: Why the U.S. Cannot Now Re-Impose Its Civilisational Worldview — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on June 30, 2020

Tucker Carlson, a leading American conservative commentator known for plain speaking, frames the movement a little differently: “This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious, and highly organized political movement … It is deep and profound and has vast political ambitions. It is insidious, it will grow. Its goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge western civilization itself … We’re too literal and good-hearted to understand what’s happening … We have no idea what we are up against … These are not protests. This is a totalitarian political movement”.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/06/29/god-that-failed-why-us-cannot-now-re-impose-its-civilisational-worldview/

Alastair Crooke

It was always a paradox: John Stuart Mill, in his seminal (1859), On Liberty, never doubted that a universal civilisation, grounded in liberal values, was the eventual destination of all of humankind. He looked forward to an ‘Exact Science of Human Nature’, which would formulate laws of psychology and society as precise and universal as those of the physical sciences. Yet, not only did that science never emerge, in today’s world, such social ‘laws’ are taken as strictly (western) cultural constructs, rather than as laws or science.

So, not only was the claim to universal civilisation not supported by evidence, but the very idea of humans sharing a common destination (‘End of Times’) is nothing more than an apocalyptic remnant of Latin Christianity, and of one minor current in Judaism. Mill’s was always a matter of secularized religion – faith – rather than empiricism. A shared human ‘destination’ does not exist in Orthodox Christianity, Taoism or Buddhism. It could never therefore qualify as universal.

Liberal core tenets of individual autonomy, freedom, industry, free trade and commerce essentially reflected the triumph of the Protestant worldview in Europe’s 30-years’ civil war. It was not fully even a Christian view, but more a Protestant one.

This narrow, sectarian pillar was able to be projected into a universal project – only so long as it was underpinned by power. In Mill’s day, the civilisational claim served Europe’s need for colonial validation. Mill tacitly acknowledges this when he validates the clearing of the indigenous American populations for not having tamed the wilderness, nor made the land productive.

However, with America’s Cold War triumph – that had by then become a cynical framework for U.S. ‘soft power’ – acquired a new potency. The merits of America’s culture, and way of life, seemed to acquire practical validation through the implosion of the USSR.

But today, with America’s soft power collapsed – not even the illusion of universalism can be sustained. Other states are coming forward, offering themselves as separate, equally compelling ‘civilisational’ states. It is clear that even were the classic liberal Establishment to win in the November U.S. elections, America no longer has claim to path-find a New World Order.

Yet, should this secularised Protestant current be over – beware! Because its subterranean, unconscious religiosity is the ‘ghost at the table’ today. It is returning in a new guise.

The ‘old illusion’ cannot continue, because its core values are being radicalised, stood on their head, and turned into the swords with which to impale classic American and European liberals (and U.S. Christian Conservatives). It is now the younger generation of American woke liberals who are asserting vociferously not merely that the old liberal paradigm is illusory, but that it was never more than ‘a cover’ hiding oppression – whether domestic, or colonial, racist or imperial; a moral stain that only redemption can cleanse.

It is an attack – which coming from within – forecloses on any U.S. moral, soft power, global leadership aspirations. For with the illusion exploded, and nothing in its place, a New World Order cannot coherently be formulated.

Not content with exposing the illusion, the woke generation are also tearing down, and shredding, the flags at the masthead: Freedom and prosperity achieved via the liberal market.

‘Freedom’ is being torn down from within. Dissidents from the woke ideology, are being ‘called out’, made to repent on the knee, or face reputational or economic ruin. It is ‘soft totalitarianism’. It recalls one of Dostoevsky’s characters – at a time when Russian progressives were discrediting traditional institutions – who, in a celebrated line, says: “I got entangled in my data … Starting from unlimited freedom, I conclude with unlimited despotism”.

Even ‘science’ has become a ‘God that failed’; instead of being the path to liberty, it has become a dark soulless path toward unfreedom. From algorithms that ‘cost’ the value of human lives, versus the ‘costing’ of lockdown; from secret ‘Black Box’ algos that limit distribution of news and thinking, to Bill Gates’ vaccination ID project, science now portends despotic social control, rather than a fluttering standard, hoist as the symbol of freedom.

But the most prominent of these flags, torn down, cannot be blamed on the woke generation. There has been no ‘prosperity for all’ – only distortions and warped structures. There are not even free markets. The Fed and the U.S. Treasury simply print new money, and hand it out to select recipients. There is no means now to attribute ‘worth’ to financial assets. Their value simply is that which Central Government is willing to pay for bonds, or grant in bail-outs.

Wow. ‘The God who failed’ (André Gide’s book title) – a crash of idols. One wonders now, what is the point to that huge financial eco-system known as Wall Street. Why not winnow it down to a couple of entities, say, Blackrock and KKR (hedge funds), and leave it to them to distribute the Fed’s freshly-printed ‘boodle’ amongst friends? Liberal markets no more – and many fewer jobs.

Many commentators have noted the wokes’ absence of vision for the future. Some describe them in highly caustic terms:

“Today, America’s tumbrils are clattering about, carrying toppled statues, ruined careers, unwoke brands. Over their sides peer those deemed racist by left-wing identitarians and sentenced to cancelation, even as the evidentiary standard for that crime falls through the floor … But who are these cultural revolutionaries? The conventional wisdom goes that this is the inner-cities erupting, economically disadvantaged victims of racism enraged over the murder of George Floyd. The reality is something more … bourgeoisie. As Kevin Williamson observed last week, “These are the idiot children of the American ruling class, toy radicals and Champagne Bolsheviks, playing Jacobin for a while, until they go back to graduate school”.

Is that so? I well recall listening in the Middle East to other angry young men who, too, wanted to ‘topple the statues’; to burn down everything. ‘You really believed that Washington would allow you … in’, they taunted and tortured their leaders: “No, we must burn it all down. Start from scratch”.

Did they have a blueprint for the future? No. They simply believed that Islam would organically inflate, and expand to fill the void. It would happen by itself – of its own accord: Faith.

Professor John Gray has noted “that in The God that failed, Gide says: ‘My faith in communism is like my faith in religion. It is a promise of salvation for mankind’’. “Here Gide acknowledged”, Gray continues, “that communism was an atheist version of monotheism. But so is liberalism, and when Gide and others gave up faith in communism to become liberals, they were not renouncing the concepts and values that both ideologies had inherited from western religion. They continued to believe that history was a directional process in which humankind was advancing towards universal freedom”.

So too with the wokes. The emphasis is on Redemption; on a Truth catharsis; on their own Virtue as sufficient agency to stand-in for the lack of plan for the future. All are clear signals: A secularised ‘illusion’ is metamorphosing back into ‘religion’. Not as Islam, of course, but as angry Man, burning at the deep and dark moral stain of the past. And acting now as purifying ‘fire’ to bring about the uplifting and shining future ahead.

Tucker Carlson, a leading American conservative commentator known for plain speaking, frames the movement a little differently: “This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious, and highly organized political movement … It is deep and profound and has vast political ambitions. It is insidious, it will grow. Its goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge western civilization itself … We’re too literal and good-hearted to understand what’s happening … We have no idea what we are up against … These are not protests. This is a totalitarian political movement”.

Again, nothing needs to be done by this new generation to bring into being a new world, apart from destroying the old one. This vision is a relic – albeit secularised – of western Christianity. Apocalypse and redemption, these wokes believe, have their own path; their own internal logic.

Mill’s ‘ghost’ is arrived at the table. And with its return, America’s exceptionalism has its re-birth. Redemption for humankind’s dark stains. A narrative in which the history of mankind is reduced to the history of racial struggle. Yet Americans, young or old, now lack the power to project it as a universal vision.

‘Virtue’, however deeply felt, on its own, is insufficient. Might President Trump try nevertheless to sustain the old illusion by hard power? The U.S. is deeply fractured and dysfunctional – but if desperate, this is possible.

The “toy radicals, and Champagne Bolsheviks” – in these terms of dripping disdain from Williamson – are very similar to those who rushed into the streets in 1917. But before dismissing them so peremptorily and lightly, recall what occurred.

Into that combustible mass of youth – so acultured by their progressive parents to see a Russian past that was imperfect and darkly stained – a Trotsky and Lenin were inserted. And Stalin ensued. No ‘toy radicals’. Soft became hard totalitarianism.

 

 

 

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

Right To Work and the Betrayal by Lockdowns – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 20, 2020

It’s madness to think that putting millions out of work can stop an epidemic, especially one that’s already well underway. Its madness and ignorance to think this can be done without causing a great many more deaths by other follow-on effects of the lockdowns.

In sum, all people, including Americans, have a right to work, a natural right. It follows from the basic rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And following from the right to work are rights of travel over means paid for by taxpayers, who largely work and also use those means for other ends.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/michael-s-rozeff/right-to-work-and-the-betrayal-by-lockdowns/

By

The right to work in this blog is not the phrase as used for union issues. It’s the natural right. For us human beings, work means “Such effort or activity by which one makes a living; employment.” Your right to work means that at your voluntary option you may make employment exchanges or bargains with other people with similar liberty; and at the same time people external to the bargaining parties, i.e., other than you and the people you are exchanging with, may not coerce either of you to prevent, change or modify the work arrangement.

Right to work doesn’t mean that anyone owes you any stuff like this: “…technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the individual.” Nor do you owe anyone an affirmative action or non-discrimination aspect of your bargain.

Obviously, labor laws in the U.S. prevent you from exercising your right to work fully and freely. “The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) administers and enforces more than 180 federal laws. These mandates and the regulations that implement them cover many workplace activities for about 150 million workers and 10 million workplaces.”

We do not live in a free country.

The lockdowns are even more totalitarian than the labor laws and regulations on the books. They prevent you from working even if you are obeying all the existing labor laws!

Did your legislatures pass lockdown laws? No. One available list shows that state governors in the U.S. mainly did this. Health authorities, counties and cities seem also to have instigated lockdowns.

In the name of a health measure, state governors infringed the natural right to work. It’s a natural right because that’s how you sustain yourself and live. That’s how you pursue happiness. If you are denied the means to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, you cannot have or secure those natural rights. The right to work follows as a natural right because it’s necessary to achieve the major ends of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and the making of voluntary work arrangements involves only the presumed justly-held property of the participants making the exchange.

By ordering lockdowns, these governors betrayed the Declaration of Independence “…That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted…” They betrayed us. They betrayed their states. They betrayed their country. They may have done so in panic or mistakenly or to look good or to save lives or for any number of reasons, but there is no doubt. Their lockdowns orders were and are betrayals.

The governors betrayed our principles. There is no point in having principles, such as individual rights to work, to life, to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness, if they are violated hastily and unlawfully and then replaced by their very opposites. It’s worthy of the term “betrayal”

Supposing that our governments are actually designed to possess “…just Powers from the Consent of the Governed…” as the Declaration says, can lockdowns that abrogate natural rights possibly be exercises of “just Powers”? How can government actions that do the very opposite of securing rights, which is the main purpose and end of our governments, be seen as anything other than exercises of UNJUST powers?

To implement one’s right to work generally involves travel on public roads. Does the government’s presence in the system of roads render right to work an empty idea, stymied because of a property rights barrier? Not one whit. Highway departments maintain roads, governments get them built, but the funding comes from taxes at all levels. Taxpayers own the roads, not your City Manager or County Supervisor. They are your agents. The right to work includes rights to travel on the roads, over bridges, through tunnels, etc. Having paid for them, they are your property, jointly owned to be sure, but meant to be available so that you exercise your rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They too are essential parts of the larger right to work. They are necessary means, and the use of them cannot coercively be prevented by governments without violating your right to work.

If courts understand and defend the police power as an essential if unstated part of government constitutions, then why should they not also understand and defend the right to work as an essential right of We the People? Why should we all not recognize it and strongly resist its abrogation?

These lockdown orders were extreme. It’s madness to think that putting millions out of work can stop an epidemic, especially one that’s already well underway. Its madness and ignorance to think this can be done without causing a great many more deaths by other follow-on effects of the lockdowns.

In sum, all people, including Americans, have a right to work, a natural right. It follows from the basic rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And following from the right to work are rights of travel over means paid for by taxpayers, who largely work and also use those means for other ends.

For whatever motivations, governors issued lockdown orders denying the exercise of the right to work, without which life cannot long be sustained. This is reason enough alone to condemn the lockdown measures strongly.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

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

America’s Totalitarian Ruling Class and Its Willing Slaves – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 18, 2020

Your author used to have a quotation on his office door from Ringo Starr, of all people, that said:  “Everything government touches turns to crap.”  No truer words were ever spoken.  The inevitable failures of government (Did the Centers for Disease Control succeed in controlling the coronavirus disease?) elicits a typical response from politicians:  ramp up their totalitarian dictates, as so many of today’s governors are doing at the moment, after the original dictates proved to be failures.

“The worst” do not do it all alone.  The have help from a large segment of the population that assists them in making them their own de facto slaves.

You see these people every day all over America: The man driving alone in his car wearing a face mask. The couple out walking on a windy day wearing face masks and scurrying off whenever they see another human being; those who answer opinion polls in the affirmative when asked if the lockdown should last “until a vaccine is available;”

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/thomas-dilorenzo/americas-totalitarian-ruling-class-and-its-willing-slaves/

By

If the corona cold virus calamity teaches us anything it is that, with few exceptions, America’s political class is overwhelmingly dominated by fascists and totalitarians.  I speak of course of all the governors, mayors, and city and county council members who have taken it upon themselves to declare that their words are law, and to use the heavily-armed police forces at their disposal to enforce their “laws.” The Morticia Adams-ish governor of Michigan has become the face of today’s fascist totalitarian political class.

Real laws are passed by Congress and state legislatures and are signed by chief executives.  NONE of the “stay-at-home” orders are laws; they are the mere words of politicians and bureaucrats.  Nor are they based on “science.” In the true spirit of Abraham Lincoln, who arbitrarily redefined “treason” from its Article 3, Section 3 definition of “levying war upon” the free and independent states (which he was guilty of) to criticizing himself and his policies, the political class has not amended but simply redefined the Constitution to mean whatever words come out of either sides of their mouths.  This reminds your author of an old movie, “The Island of Doctor Moreau,” in which Burt Lancaster portrays a mad scientist who experiments on animals that he makes part human.  To control the beasts he tells them that he is their father and  and “The Sayer of the Law.”  Whatever he says is “the law” by virtue of his having said it.  America has become one big island of Dr. Moreaus hiding behind their titles of “governor” or “mayor.”

The Bill of Rights does not say that we have inalienable rights to freedom of speech, assembly, and religion “unless people get sick,” after all.  But, alas, the Constitution has essentially been a dead letter for generations.  Americans have long lived under the “Hamiltonian constitution,” which is whatever the politicians of the day say it is.   Jeffersonian “strict constructionism” was abandoned, essentially, at the end of the “Civil War.”

This fact is why almost all who are attracted to politics as a career today are totalitarian-minded thugs. They get into politics precisely because they want to yield this monopolistic, totalitarian power against their fellow citizens, who they often despise and hate, publicly labeling them with such words as “deplorable” and much worse.  There are a few exceptions, of course, the most magnificent of which is former Congressman Ron Paul, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule.

I also speak of the entire U.S. Congress, the U.S. Department of Justice, and virtually the entire judicial system, every member of whom has remained as silent as a church mouse while the rule of law in America was swept away in a mere six weeks.  Think of this the next time a “conservative Republican” in Washington pretends to be devoted to the Constitution.

The American public lost control of the federal government when the rights of secession and nullification were abolished in 1865.  John C. Calhoun was right when he explained in his Disquisition on Government that a written constitution would never be enough to control and restrain legal plunder.  Some mechanism that could be utilized by the people of the free and independent states, organized in political communities, was necessary if the central government was to be the servant rather than the master of the people, he said.  Naturally, Calhoun is one of the most demonized political figures in American history by the American ruling class.

Then came the deification and glorification of the Lincoln dictatorship, which turned into the deification of the presidency in general and of all its “executive powers” (i.e., mostly unconstitutional, dictatorial powers to wage war, enslave citizens through conscription, and everything else).  Federalism was destroyed by the “Civil War,” after which the states became mere franchises or appendages of the central government in Washington.  The federal government was turned into one giant monopoly of the worst kind:  One from which there can be no escape once it acquired the powers of money printing and income taxation.

The temptation to be one of the chosen few to yield such totalitarian powers is what causes the worst elements of society to pursue careers in politics, as F.A. Hayek explained in The Road to Serfdom.  Long gone are the days when public-spirited citizens would serve in Congress for a few years, their behavior constrained by “the chains of the Constitution,” as Jefferson once said, and then return to their private lives.

Your author used to have a quotation on his office door from Ringo Starr, of all people, that said:  “Everything government touches turns to crap.”  No truer words were ever spoken.  The inevitable failures of government (Did the Centers for Disease Control succeed in controlling the coronavirus disease?) elicits a typical response from politicians:  ramp up their totalitarian dictates, as so many of today’s governors are doing at the moment, after the original dictates proved to be failures.  As Hayek wrote (p. 135):  They “would soon have to choose between disregard of ordinary morals and failure.  It is for this reason that the unscrupulous and uninhibited are likely to be more successful in a society tending toward totalitarianism.”  That latter phrase is a perfect description of what America has become just in the last few months.  Hayek wrote this in his famous chapter 10, “Why the Worst Get on Top.”

“The worst” do not do it all alone.  The have help from a large segment of the population that assists them in making them their own de facto slaves.  This takes a large group, wrote Hayek, in order to present the appearance of legitimacy to the state’s totalitarian powers.  The perfect kind of large group, moreover, that is large enough to “impose their views on the values of life on all the rest” will be “those who form the ‘mass’ in the derogatory sense of the term, the least original and independent . . .”  Thus, the totalitarian fascist will be able to acquire the “support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently and loudly and frequently” (i.e., “We’re all in this together.  We’re all in this together.  We’re all in this together.  We’re all in this together . . .”).  It will be “those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who well swell the ranks of the totalitarian party,” wrote Hayek (p. 139).

You see these people every day all over America:  The man driving alone in his car wearing a face mask.  The couple out walking on a windy day wearing face masks and scurrying off whenever they see another human being; those who answer opinion polls in the affirmative when asked if the lockdown should last “until a vaccine is available;” the people giving you dirty looks at the grocery store, or complaining to the manger, that you are closer to them than six feet.  Everyone who Judge Napolitano calls “the sheeple,” in other words.

The “skillful demagogue,” Hayek continued, understands that it is “easier for people to agree on a negative program – on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off [the essence of Marxism] – than on any positive task.”  In the Germany of Hayek’s youth “it was the Jew” who “had come to be regarded as the representative of capitalism . . . .  German anti-Semitism and anti-capitalism spring from the same root . . . (pp. 139-140).

The U.S. government is constantly fabricating “another Hitler,” whether it is Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, the Sandinistas, Putin, and myriad others.  Even slicker, however, and a higher level of demagoguery altogether, is to define “the enemy” as something like “terror” or “the invisible enemy” of a virus that no one seems to understand.  Such things can be made to appear to be as common as the air that we breathe (literally, in the case of viruses), so that waging “war” against them, and the never-ending grabbing hold of more government power and the abolition of whatever is left of freedom, can go on forever.

The “docile and gullible” do not arise spontaneously as supporters of the fascist thugs who now rule over most of America.  They are cultivated by the political system.  The political ruling class of any country is always a tiny numerical minority that can be swept aside by the masses, who number in the millions.  Therefore, the state has an imperative to make at least a majority of “the masses” into docile and gullible serfs.  It does this by monopolizing all aspects of education.  As Murray Rothbard explained in his essay, “The Nature of the State”:  “Particularly important . . . is for the State to assume control over education, and thereby to mould the minds of its subjects.  In addition to influencing the universities through all manner of financial subventions, and through state-owned universities directly, the State controls education on the lower levels through the universal institutions of the public school, through certification requirements for private schools, and through compulsory attendance laws.  Add to this a virtually total control over radio and television – either through outright State ownership . . . or, as in the United States, by nationalization of the airwaves, and by the power of a federal commission to license the right of stations to use those frequencies and channels.”

  No one is born with an affinity toward being a slave; they have to be conditioned into thinking that way by the state’s totalitarian control of all aspects of “education.”  In return for being an essential part of the state’s relentless propaganda apparatus, the state’s “ideological minions,” by which Rothbard meant primarily university professors, are rewarded with endowed chairs at prestigious universities, government grants, awards, notoriety, fame, and positions as exalted advisors to the government.

All of this is why all of the home schooling spawned by all of the unconstitutional lockdown/stay-at-home orders created a genuine sense of panic among the state’s ideological minions.  So much so that they trotted out Harvard University educational “researchers” to proclaim that one insidious and harmful effect of the lockdowns has been the increase in independent-minded educational instruction that is not so directly under control of them and the powers that be for whom they work.  Their biggest fear, in other words, is that a widespread realization that homeschooling works could be a Trojan horse, or the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent that could expose the truth that emperor does not really have a fine set of clothes after all.

Be seeing you

 

 

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

The Rutherford Institute :: Technofascism: Digital Book Burning in a Totalitarian Age | By John W. Whitehead |

Posted by M. C. on May 6, 2020

Journalist Matt Taibbi gets its: “The people who want to add a censorship regime to a health crisis are more dangerous and more stupid by leaps and bounds than a president who tells people to inject disinfectant.”

Don’t fall for the propaganda.

Translation: the CCDH evidently believes the public is too dumb to think for itself and must be protected from dangerous ideas.

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/technofascism_digital_book_burning_in_a_totalitarian_age

By John W. Whitehead

“Those who created this country chose freedom. With all of its dangers. And do you know the riskiest part of that choice they made? They actually believed that we could be trusted to make up our own minds in the whirl of differing ideas. That we could be trusted to remain free, even when there were very, very seductive voices—taking advantage of our freedom of speech—who were trying to turn this country into the kind of place where the government could tell you what you can and cannot do.”—Nat Hentoff

We are fast becoming a nation—nay, a world—of book burners.

While on paper, we are technically free to speak—at least according to the U.S. Constitution—in reality, however, we are only as free to speak as the government and its corporate partners such as Facebook, Google or YouTube may allow.

That’s not a whole lot of freedom. Especially if you’re inclined to voice opinions that may be construed as conspiratorial or dangerous.

Take David Icke, for example.

Icke, a popular commentator and author often labeled a conspiracy theorist by his detractors, recently had his Facebook page and YouTube channel (owned by Google) deleted for violating site policies by “spreading coronavirus disinformation.”

The Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which has been vocal about calling for Icke’s de-platforming, is also pushing for the removal of all other sites and individuals who promote Icke’s content in an effort to supposedly “save lives.”

Translation: the CCDH evidently believes the public is too dumb to think for itself and must be protected from dangerous ideas.

This is the goosestepping Nanny State trying to protect us from ourselves. Read the rest of this entry »

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

Tucker Carlson Is Astonishingly Wrong About Any Looming Threat of Totalitarianism in America

Posted by M. C. on May 2, 2020

In contrast was Rubin. At 14:00, he announced: “I’m quite enthused about the world right now.” About what? This: “There’s a new world coming on the horizon” (14:07). It is a world in people will be able to work where they want because of telecommuting. He offered a 30-second sermon on liberation. He said: “This is still America.” Yes, it is. He had admitted that there is a problem with the suppression of information, but he makes it clear that he does not believe that this is a technological imperative, nor does he believe that it is a political imperative.

https://www.garynorth.com/public/20823.cfm

Gary North

I am impressed with Tucker Carlson.

I don’t watch Fox News, but I watch Carlson’s verbal editorials several times a month.

He has a gift for public speaking. He discusses things rationally. He also has a gift for rhetoric. He doesn’t just state the facts. He interprets them and then gives people encouragement to resist some of the trends of our day. There are a lot of really bad trends in our day. But, then again, there always are.

Recently, he came up with this term: “flu d’tat.” Anyone who could do this is my kind of guy.

He writes his own editorials. No one else could. Then he delivers them verbally.

This video is worth watching. It is worth watching because he skewers some leftists who really deserve to be skewered, including the ever-petulant Mark Zuckerberg. Second, he made a major error that needs to be nipped in the bud.

This is an almost flawless editorial. He showed a clip from the suppressed YouTube video by the physicians. He showed a clip from a YouTube spokeswoman defending the removal of the video. He showed a clip from Zuckerberg on Facebook’s suppression of inconvenient ideas.

He did this to present his case that we are facing a totalitarian movement. We have moved to a new phase of American history.

There was a major flaw in this editorial. You may have missed it. This flaw calls his editorial into question. Did you spot it?

The flaw was the man he interviewed. That man has it right. Carlson has it wrong.

The man was polite. He didn’t call Carlson’s thesis into question. Carlson seemed unaware of the fact that the man was overturning his case for the editorial. His name is Dave Rubin. He has written a book: Don’t Burn This Book (2020).

Rubin is a technician. He is trying to set up alternative sources of online communications to challenge YouTube and Facebook. I don’t think he’s going to be successful in this, but I certainly approve of the attempt. If he can make a profit doing it, so much the better. If he doesn’t make a profit, then it’s a futile effort.

Rubin did not use the word “totalitarian.” He used the word “authoritarian.” This distinction may not seem to be important, but, conceptually speaking, it is the heart of the matter.

Carlson kept bringing up the word “totalitarian.” This was a mistake. It made for a riveting editorial. It was a persuasive rhetorical term. But it made for bad analysis.

Because Rubin is correct, at the end of the interview, he displayed remarkable optimism. It is this optimism that we should adopt. But, before we do this, I must discuss definitions.

GETTING OUR DEFINITIONS RIGHT

Totalitarianism is a very specific kind of political order. It is an order in which the central government not merely undermines but actively destroys voluntary organizations. These organizations possess legitimacy. People trust them to deliver certain benefits in their lives. These organizations therefore possess authority. They are independent of the central government. The central government has to either destroy them or take them over by force. This is what was done in the Soviet Union. It is what was done in Communist China. It is what is done in North Korea.

In contrast, authoritarians recognize that they need the support of independent organizations. They know that they cannot stamp them out entirely. Therefore, they attempt to influence them indirectly. They may even subsidize them. They grant carrots, but there are sticks attached to the carrots. They buy off the leaders of these decentralized agencies of authority. Sometimes, they outlaw certain activities of these organizations, but they do not attempt to stamp them out. The authoritarian recognizes that he needs the support of decentralized organizations that possess legitimacy.

If you want a familiar example of this, consider tax exemption. It is granted by the Internal Revenue Service. This is a tremendous benefit to nonprofit organizations. Donations are tax-deductible. So, more money comes in for the causes. But, in order to get this grant of exemption, the organizations must not indulge in political activity. They can sometimes lose their tax exemption if they pursue certain policies that are considered politically incorrect by the nation’s bipartisan leadership. The threat of the loss of the tax exemption pressures the leaders of these organizations to toe the line on certain issues, but certainly not on all issues. The granting of tax exemption is not a mark of totalitarianism. It is a mark of authoritarianism. There is a difference.

Two generations ago, Hannah Arendt wrote a book: The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951). There is a Wikipedia entry on the book. It is one of the most important books of the 20th century. Wikipedia offers an extract, which is representative. She discussed the character and intellect of totalitarian leaders.

Intellectual, spiritual, and artistic initiative is as dangerous to totalitarianism as the gangster initiative of the mob, and both are more dangerous than mere political opposition. The consistent persecution of every higher form of intellectual activity by the new mass leaders springs from more than their natural resentment against everything they cannot understand. Total domination does not allow for free initiative in any field of life, for any activity that is not entirely predictable. Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty.

Read the rest of this entry »

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