Victims of Whitmer?

 Some people in Michigan are fighting back. There is now a blog titled Victims of Whitmer.com where Michiganders can write in telling their story of how they and/or their families were hurt by the Governor's lock downs. I'll be complaining about my grand kids being denied in person school. Perhaps other states may follow if they haven't already done so.

Insane delusion

 Wow! I knew the collectivist media would be beside themselves with giddiness at Biden winning the presidency. The Sunday Jan 17th Detroit Free Press printed an editorial on the presidential changeover by its editorial editor Brian Dickerson.

His headline reads:

"Biden takes charge during America's Dunkirk moment."

Are you kidding me? 

To liken President Joe Biden's election as taking charge and saving a nation from a pandemic to Winston Churchill's authorizing a massive civilian rescue of over 300 thousand British soldiers is, well, insanely delusional. It is the height of disrespect to Churchill.

He goes on to say;

"Not even the most deluded imagined that Donald Trump will devote another minute of his fleeting tenure to stemming the virus spread, or accelerating the manufacture, distribution and administration of the vaccine for which he claims primary credit."

I wouldn't say Trump claims primary credit. But he did fast track the development of vaccines for which he has the right to take a bow--provided the vaccines turn out to be as effective as the seasonal flu vaccine.

President Trump has done some praise worthy good for Americans like the "Choice" program for veterans, cutting taxes for the rich and the poor, creating record low unemployment for Blacks and Hispanics, and other benefits.

It has been said that an honest man gives credit when and where credit is due. I know Mr Dickerson hasn't given a summery of Trump's total 4 years (as far as I know). So I'll wait and see.

Certain thinking not allowed?

 My local paper, The Macomb Daily,--in Macomb County Michigan--carried an editorial by Joan Bregstein, a health-care worker in a New York hospital extolling the arrival of a covid-19 vaccine as if it were another V-Day. But she laments the idea that there are others who declined the vaccine.

"But I was shocked to discover that several health care workers I know declined their vaccine dose. In the staff lounge this week, I heard: “Too early; I’ll wait and see.”

“Not interested.”

“Not for me.”

It’s the same attitude you find among people who don’t vote: “Too much trouble.”

“One more vote won’t count.”

“Someone else will do it.”

We cannot allow such thinking to take hold. As with voting, the only way our nation can succeed in moving on from this pandemic is if we all do our part."

What is meant here by "not allow such thinking to take hold"? Does she mean government should force everyone to get the vaccine? Or does she mean we must advocate--use persuasion--for the benefits of the vaccine? 

In a rights respecting nation people are not "allowed" to decide for themselves but have an inalienable right to do so. This right needs to be protected, adamantly.

So what is meant by "do our part"? Does that mean submit to government authority i.e. legal force? Or does she mean we should agree with her view of the virtue of vaccine?

Thankfully, she tell us:

"In March, we asked you to stay home to help us save lives. Now we are asking you to get vaccinated. Next phase will be the elderly and essential workers. When you are called, please say yes."

So persuasion is her preferred MO and that is a good thing. But we need to be careful of our choice of words, to qualify their meanings to avoid confusion like in the meaning of "allow such thinking", and "do your part" and  the vaccination is not enough. We need to get 61% of the population or herd immunity. 

While I disagree with this last, I think the vaccination should protect others from contagions from you since the vaccine is supposed to be preventing the virus from reproducing thus killing it. It's my hope that legislators will remove the governor's authority to order lock downs to fight viruses.

 

 

Promoting Objectivism

 Here is a copy of a letter from Tal Tsfany reporting on the growing success of the Ayn Rand institute. I reprint it here because I'm a big fan of Rand's ideas. This growth is great.

Dear friends, A few weeks ago, Ayn Rand Institute board member John Allison wrote an eloquent letter describing how, regardless of the state of the world, Ayn Rand’s ideas can transform your life for the better. And, he noted, ARI is helping countless people around the globe use Rand’s ideas to do just that—transform their lives for the better. One of the things I discovered when I became CEO of the Ayn Rand Institute two and half years ago was how much I, a long-time supporter, didn’t know about the scale of ARI’s impact. ARI was founded 35 years ago to advance the philosophy of Objectivism. As we near the end of 2020, I want to give you a brief glimpse into our achievements—and an indication of what lies ahead.  From the start, ARI has believed that the best spokesman for Ayn Rand’s ideas is Ayn Rand. And so, a core part of our strategy has been to promote her books—especially to young people, who are actively forming their philosophic convictions.  To date, our essay contests have attracted submissions from more than 440,000 students—and some of the best intellectuals we have today started as participants in our essay contest program. Our Free Books to Teachers program has distributed 4.5 millions books to students and we estimate that, in total, more than 9 million students have read these books as teachers reuse those books. With the awareness of Ayn Rand’s ideas that this program has created over the years, Rand is more widely regarded as an important writer today than she was during her lifetime. Her books keep inspiring young minds toward better, more fulfilled lives. Once someone has read Ayn Rand’s books, it’s vital that they have avenues through which they can increase their understanding of her ideas. On our YouTube channel, for example, ARI has made available nearly 1,000 videos, covering every topic from art to epistemology to morality to politics to current events. These videos have collectively been viewed over 7 million times and our channel is growing faster than ever. Last year, we saw our subscribers increase from 30,000 to 45,000; this year the number is more than 64,000. Thousands of people discover Ayn Rand and her ideas every month and go on to watch hours of Objectivist content on our YouTube channel, our mobile app and our online campus. ARI is charged with preserving Ayn Rand’s legacy, which includes storing, cataloguing and maintaining tens of thousands of items in the Ayn Rand Archives. We are currently heavily investing in upgrading the infrastructure, the systems and, eventually, the presentation and accessibility of the treasure trove that is the Ayn Rand Archives. Both the physical and digital items of the archives are managed with great care to ensure that Rand’s legacy is preserved for generations to come. We plan to bring forward many more collections that will allow interested individuals to learn more about Ayn Rand’s genius and the heroic life that she led. For the community of people who agree with Ayn Rand’s philosophy, we offer an array of products such as advanced courses and ARI’s annual summer conference, OCON, which this coming year takes place June 29–July 5 in Washington, D.C. For those who choose to become supporters of ARI, we offer a series of web meetings called ARI Donor Roundtables, where we dive into different aspects of the Objectivist philosophy and feature community members who are successfully applying Rand’s philosophy in their lives and productive careers. For those who are serious about careers as professional intellectuals or intellectual professionals, we’ve created the leading training program on Objectivism: the Objectivist Academic Center (OAC). Participation in the OAC has never been higher, with 120 students and auditors taking classes on Objectivism, philosophic thinking, and objective communication. In our view, the OAC is the best school of philosophy in the world. Starting with the Objectivist Graduate Center, the precursor to the OAC, more than 1,000 students have taken part in our training programs. Some of those students have gone on to become professors. Others are working at influential think tanks or have started their own successful think tanks. And yet others have launched or are engaged in successful businesses, careers in the arts, activism efforts, and other endeavors.  Finally, ARI believes that in order to help people to properly approach and grasp Ayn Rand's radical system of ideas, we need to offer meaningful educational engagements. Last year, despite the pandemic, we gathered the largest number of conference attendees (both in person and online) we’ve had in any year: 2,874 participants. The year before that, our in-person conference attendance reached 1,547. We are planning to continue to offer the unique experience of an Ayn Rand Conference in the US, Europe, Latin America and hopefully other regions of the world.  We are rightly proud of these achievements, and we’re grateful to you for helping make them possible. But the question we ask ourselves each and every day is: what more can we be doing?  I’ll be talking about this in our annual report, which you should be receiving in a few weeks. For now, I’ll just say that as we enter 2021, our core strategy is to better leverage our strengths—and to grow our skillset and become even better at reaching people. There are many exciting projects in the works. I’m an optimist. But I’m not blindly optimistic. My optimism about the future is based on the fact that Rand’s ideas are true—and that there is clear evidence of a continual increase in interest in Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. We see readers and viewers around the world discovering Objectivism and, with your help, we’ll continue to demonstrate how her ideas help people around the world live richer, happier, freer lives.  But I want to underscore “with your help.” Right now, the enemies of reason, individualism, and freedom are able to raise billions by appealing to duty, fear, guilt, and the phony moral superiority that comes with endorsing socially popular causes. What I’m appealing to is your self-interest.  Today is “Giving Tuesday”—though we prefer to call it Trading Tuesday. On this occasion, if you believe that Ayn Rand’s ideas are true, if you believe they are important, if you would like to see thousands more trained by the OAC and millions more reading and studying Ayn Rand, then please consider trading with ARI by increasing your support. We will make sure that whatever you rationally allocate to supporting this cause will be used effectively and efficiently to create a better world—for you and the people you love.  What could be more selfish than that? Tal Tsfany CEO, Ayn Rand Institute

SUPPORT ARI

Formalism

 

Formalism - definition of formalism by The Free Dictionary

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/formalism

Define formalism. formalism synonyms, formalism pronunciation, formalism translation, English dictionary definition of formalism. n. 1. Rigorous or excessive adherence to recognized forms, as in religion or art. 2. An instance of rigorous or excessive adherence to recognized forms.

 

Or:

 

Formalism | Definition of Formalism by Oxford Dictionary ...

https://www.lexico.com/definition/formalism

'Juridical formalism is but a substitute for religious formalism.' 1.2 The basing of ethics on the form of the moral law without regard to intention or consequences. 'Analytic ethics has been very fairly impoverished given the postivist legacy of emotivism, the formalism of Kantian ethics and the technicalism of utilitarianism.'

 

 

 

In my view, Anthony Fauci has been practicing formalism by advising the Trump administration to deny people--especially those infected--the freedom to take a chance on the new vaccines which haven't been tested by a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, clinical trial.yet. The Doctor was placing one aspect of medicine-testing-as if it were more important  than the purpose of medicine, to heal. Thus sick people just have to die. This should not happen in a freedom loving, rights respecting nation.

But it is happening because we are no longer one of those nations. Instead we are a nation not of rights but of permissions. How long do you think we can live like that? Especially since Dr Fauci recently said, from memory, "its time to do what you are told." Are those the words of a rights respecting government?

For now I want you to imagine that a baseball team recruits a new player. But at every at bat this player bunts the ball even if no teammate is on base. He doesn't swing the bat to get a single, double, triple or home run. He just bunts the ball. The coach sees that the player is placing one aspect of hitting--bunting--as more important than the purpose of hitting, getting on base and scoring runs. So the coach benches the player.

President Trump should have benched Dr Fauci long ago. 

 

We need to be on the lookout for other forms of irrational formalism in government regulations as well.

 

The Real Presidential Election was Rigged in 2018

The Real Presidential Election was Rigged in 2018

 From Sultan Knish aka Daniel Greenfield

"The Republican failure to put up a serious fight against Proposal 3 in 2018, long before the pandemic, had largely doomed Michigan."

 

A shameful expose of Republican weakness in the face of an all out assault on America's founding principle of individual rights. There are so many people in this world who would have no problem destroying this nation for the chance to be rich. They sold their souls to the collectivist devil, Marxism.

Democrats Say AT&T, Comcast and Disney Decide Presidential Elections

 Wow! A closer look at the powers that be. More importantly, a bird's eye view of how a nation is destroying itself by allowing government to regulate and thus place businesses in the service of politicians getting elected who then reward these businesses with lucrative government--taxpayer funded--contracts. It is a recipe for systemic corruption and that is what we have. MN

 

Democrats Say AT&T, Comcast and Disney Decide Presidential Elections

Post update

 I'm re-posting this from Sept 8th because I think it is very important and I noticed I failed to make a point I wanted to include. So I put it at the end of the essay in brackets.

Defund the Police update.

 The Antifa and BLM rioters have been calling for de-funding the police across the nation with a lot of support from the Democrat Party and the mainstream media (MSM). But what would that mean? To find out we have to take a more fundamental look at the concept of 'police.'

In my view, the American policeman is an enforcer and what he enforces is the laws of the U.S. Constitution as determined by the judicial branch. All those laws are supposed to  be based on our founding principle of inalienable individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

But how many police men and women will continue to work for less or no money? My guess is next to none. So if there is no one protecting our rights, then in fact, we will not have any such rights. How can we have a right to anything, like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,  if it isn't going to be enforced? We can't and won't.

But there will be order of some kind. There has to be in any human group activity. As soon as these Democrat governors and mayors discover that their anti-violence social workers cannot persuade thugs not to bash in their skulls with a tire iron, they will see a need for brute force enforcers.

Here we need to make a critical distinction in the kind of force used. The American policeman was supposed to be charged with the retaliatory use of force only and to be used on behalf of victims against their aggressors. 

But the new enforcers will have the power to use initiatory force--the starting of the use of force--to exact obedience to the governors' and mayors' notions of governance. Those notions will not include your right to life or anything else. Our Constitution will have been nullified when its enforcers were laid off (de-funded).

What will that future look like? I can only surmise it will be some version of the New World Order as determined by the United Nations and other globalists seeking a one world dictatorship. The Democrat Party is dying to make it happen. They see themselves as major commanders of that dictatorship. 

You see, the United States has the most powerful military on the planet. And the most productive/wealthiest economy. It is not unreasonable to conclude that many of today's Democrats lust for control of this future dictatorship.

History shows us that the bloodiest dictatorships of the last century, to retain power, had to reduce their  populations to a manageable number.  It's been estimated Soviet Russia starved and executed up to 20/30 million of its own citizens. Mao's Red China estimated to have starved up to 60 million of theirs.

If you think today's Democrat Party is not capable of this kid of behavior, well, look at the nonchalant, devil-may-care attitude of Democrat governors and mayors towards the wanton destruction of the lives and livelihoods and futures of their own citizens at the hands of terrorist groups like Antifa and BLM etc.

A global New World Order is the ultimate goal. But for now the goal of the America haters is to nullify the Constitution. Getting rid of its enforcers is the chosen method for now. We can't let that happen.

[ Speaking of enforcers, I forgot to point out from where the new enforcers will be recruited. They will come from the ranks of the thugs who are right now applying for that job,  Antifa, Black Lives Matter and any other fringe groups who may have joined in.

"Look at how destructive, brutal and deadly we can be! We'll be the best enforcers you ever had. No one will dare disobey your orders." 

If our government doesn't put an end to Antifa and BLM, this is the future I see coming our way.]

Private Censorship?

"Justice and liberty are ill-served by large concentrations of tyrannical, unaccountable power, regardless of whether those concentrated power sources are public or private."

This from the New York Post reveals an enormous ignorance of the difference between political power (legalized force) and economic power (the power to voluntarily trade with other people for mutual benefit. 

https://nypost.com/2020/10/16/

The New York Post  is claiming Facebook and Twitter are practicing censorship by deleting conservative views. But those companies are private companies that offer private citizens a wide platform for citizens to express whatever views they want, within certain decency standards. 

Only a government can forcefully suppress freedom of speech. Facebook and Twitter do not have the power to forcefully suppress anything. There are other social networks out there that citizens can use on which to express their views and they are growing.

I want to add there has been a particularly insidious attack on capitalism and free markets for a long time by its enemies: the alleged evil of "bigness" as some kind of uber evil that must not be allowed to exist. Big Oil, big Agriculture, big Labor, big Pharma, and now big Tech et al.

I was disappointed to see one of my favorite Senators Ted Cruz, jump on the "big tech is evil bandwagon." Size is no indication of good or evil. That lots of people like to use Facebook is a tribute to the owner's ability to make its customers happy

On this point I think FB owner Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey should each be wanting to have as many people as possible on his platform and viewing as many commercials and ads as possible regardless of political orientation. Evidently, such is not the case. 

 What might be the case though, is an answer to the question are the political powers that be putting any political pressure on these two formats to delete conservative views? I'd like to know.

It may be true that many people use Facebook and Twitter to post liberal or collectivist/Democrat views which seem to dominate. So what? The power Facebook enjoys is economic power not the political power to silence opposing views. I will be checking out Parler as an alternative to FB. There are others as well. But we must not support any attempts by government to censure or promote any private political beliefs.

 

The Chinese Lockdown-and-Mask Model Failed. Now Its Proponents Need Scapegoats

This is one of Mr Greenfield's best essays.  It shows the utter destruction of life when governments are given the power to forcibly collect sacrifices. It also shows how eager democrats are to start the use of force against their own citizens, something no government should be allowed to do.


The Chinese Lockdown-and-Mask Model Failed. Now Its Proponents Need Scapegoats

The blame Trump game.

 The Sunday Sept 20th Detroit Free Press carried an editorial smearing President Trump blaming him for doing nothing about the virus early on. It starts:

"Donald Trump's election was a tragedy whose cost Americans have scarcely begun to reckon. It's most conspicuous casualties are the disproportionate number American lives extinguished by a pandemic that raged unchecked for months while the president shrugged off, mocked and occasionally obstructed the medical community's urgent efforts to contain it."

This of course is a wild rewrite of what actually happened. Trump did play down the importance of the virus at first because that is what he was advised to do by government so-called 'experts' Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx. Dr Fauci actually said masks were not necessary then later said they were. But the Free Press won't mention that because it might interfere with their desire to blame Trump. The editorial continues:

"Continuing to pay the price of Trump's negligence are the tens of millions of U.S. workers still languishing in unemployment, even as their counterparts in other developed countries - countries whose leaders recognized the the pandemic's seriousness and acted promptly to curtail the spread--return to work, and secure incomes."

The actual negligence was the CDC's regulation forbidding all the labs and diagnostic clinics that were begging the CDC to let them make testing kits, from doing so. The CDC insisted on forcing the nation to use its--the CDC's--kits. In another failure of the Freep's god--the government--those kits were flawed. They didn't work. Americans-like the ones the Freep pretends to care about--died. Obviously their lives are not as important as getting rid of Trump. 

Lastly, it wasn't the virus that caused those 'tens of millions of U.S. workers still languishing in unemployment.' It was the states' governments irrational exuberance to use initiatory force against their own citizens by shutting down everyone's livelihood over a virus that 99.7% of those who get it will survive it. 

It is the lust to use legalized force against their own citizens as a means of solving social problems that has infected the Democrat Party and the mainstream media. And they get it from the professors in our college departments of social sciences which is why it should be everyone's goal to get government out of education.