Critical Race Theory

 On the site of National Review today (6/13) I read a pretty good article by Michael Farris on the utter disaster of Critical Race theory. In it Mr Farris correctly points out:

"Parents have simply had enough of the politicization of their local schools and the attempts to turn their children into young but full-throated activists for the progressive movement."

I want to add that it was not only today's parents but all our parents and grand parents who lived here before us who are and were responsible for the politicization of our school system. We followed in their missteps by by insisting that government "do something" to fix all of our non-political problems such as transportation, health care, education, insurance, in all sciences and anything in the economy.  We did not realize we were inviting/demanding the government to politicize everything i.e. we asked for it.

So how do we correct this problem of ours? We have to realize the insanity of turning our problems over to an institution that has a monopoly on the legal use of  physical force. We correct this by looking for and supporting candidates who promise--and have plans--to start tearing down the regulatory state and replacing it with rights protecting laws.

Unfortunately, way too many people today cannot tell the difference between rights protecting laws and laws that violate rights. For that I highly recommend Ayn Rand's essay "Man's Rights" and an accompanying essay "The Nature of Government" in her book "Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal" still in print.

Critical Race Theory is nothing more than an attempt to teach students to tie a person's social, political and moral values to his skin color or nationality which is exactly what racism does. It's using racism to defeat racism, a logical contradiction and cannot work. The most critical regulatory agency to dissolve is the Dept of Education. We need to start now.

Michael Neibel

To teach or indoctrinate, that is today's crisis.

 The Saturday May 29th edition of my local paper the Macomb Daily contributing editorial writer Cal Thomas wrote:

"Truth has become subjective and relative in modern times and is now personal. You have your “truth” and I have my “truth.” Even when they contradict each other, it doesn’t matter as long as we both feel good about it.

This flawed notion has contributed to our cultural decline.

Try this experiment if you want to see how far we have moved from objective truth. Go to any popular definition website and type in “truth.” They assume truth exists and can be discovered.

The truth is supposed to set us free, but if we can’t recognize or define it, we will be in bondage. Secretary Mayorkas should reread Orwell’s novel and then abandon any plans to indoctrinate schoolchildren."

I agree that truth exists and can be discovered. But what is being taught in our public schools today is subjectivism as Mr Thomas points out. This in turn leads to political and social relativism. For example: "Rioting should be legal for me when I'm frustrated but not for you." Which is what many Democrat governors and mayors have been allowing.

It was Ayn Rand who pointed out that truth is that which corresponds to reality. It's called the "Correspondence Theory of Truth" which she wrote about in her essays on epistemology and which I highly recommend. References below.

The only way to correct education and return it to a focus on objective reality is to begin  the process of getting the government out of education. As she also once pointed out "Mind and force are opposites." To mix the two as in public (government run) schools will lead to mind (learning) being forced out and replaced with indoctrination. 

Why must this be do? because when we turn our children's minds over to an institution with a monopoly on the legal use of force it's only a matter of time before government indoctrinates all its students with the value of government: how government control and government money will be the solution of all their future problems.

 Unfortunately, one or more generations of Americans have been thusly indoctrinated so that now whenever there is a problem say in transportation (infrastructure), in education, in health care, in any and all sciences, we reflexively turn to government and shout "Do something!"

When we do that we are saying in essence  'Go ahead government and use your monopoly on legal force and fix this particular problem.' This is insane.

Now is the time to look for political candidates who will promise to start privatizing education. It can be to non profit or for profit entities. The parts of the National Labor Relations Act that give unions the right to force teachers into union must be repealed. Teachers need to have professional organizations to represent them to the public. Not unions.

I highly recommend Rand's essay "The Comprachicos" in her book "Capitalism:the Unknown Ideal" and "Teaching Johnny to Think" by Leonard Peikoff. Plus "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology" All should be available at the Ayn Rand Institute or Amazon. But we need to start now.

Mr Thomas has identified the problem, Ayn Rand identified the answer.

Michael Neibel

Pay workers on unemployment $1000 to take jobs and get off unemployment?

 I was amazed to see this article in the Detroit News of April 29 that calls for Michigan to use some of the COVID-19 relief money to pay workers on unemployment $1K for taking a job. The article starts:

"A House panel is expected to approve a plan Thursday that would use federal COVID-19 relief funds to pay unemployed workers a $1000 incentive to leave unemployment and take available jobs in Michigan."

It continues with:

"About 800,000 people remain on unemployment in the state, even as businesses are hungry for more workers and the state unemployment trust fund continues to dwindle, said Rep Thomas Albert, the Lowell Republican who chairs the House Appropriations Committee."

 Amazing to me is a Republican willing to pay workers to go back to work after watching government give extra money on top of unemployment to stay home!   You'd think those politicians would know not to make staying home more profitable than working. Evidently, logical thinking is not a requirement for political leadership in Michigan.

No the workers won't be getting the money first. The article adds:

"To qualify for the incentive, people would need to be employed for at least 80 hours over a four-week period after leaving unemployment."

This is what happens when modern politicians schooled in Pragmatism start making decisions based on nothing more than the expediency of the immediate moment. And if their pragmatic solutions lead to disaster, they can always sing their standard pragmatic excuse "What was true in the past is not true today and what is true today will not be true tomorrow. So we had to take action, to do something. We can't know the future so it's not my fault."

If Republicans want to prevent this kind of economic lunacy in the future, they would hasten to repeal any and all laws giving the governor emergency powers lasting more than two weeks with no extensions.

The new world order is here.

 I'm sure all my readers can clearly see that the Democrat Party leadership has been taken over in its entirety by globalists seeking a one world dictatorship with them and international allies like the UN, the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization et al in charge.

They even have a motto they are openly pushing: "You will own nothing, and you will be happy." Please consider the real meaning of those words. They very accurately describe the attitude of a rancher toward his herd of cattle, or a shepherd toward his flock of sheep.

That is exactly how they see you and me. They are saying in essence "We (Globalists) will feed and look after you and tend to your physical needs." But the happiness they provide will not be your real happiness but rather their idea of what should be your happiness.

In fact, it won't even be happiness. It will be a forced contentment. Animals including pets can feel a perceptual joy at seeing their master or shepherd nearby, or at feeding time. But in my view, it is a perceptual joy, not the kind of conceptual happiness we humans experience when we accomplish the goals we want to achieve. There will be no achievement of your goals but rather theirs.

In short, you will be expected to give up your happiness for a forced contentment which you are expected to enjoy. Not only is this an assault on the concept of happiness but on life itself. Since to live your life you need to acquire those things that sustain your life and you need the right to possess those things. That is what the concept of property rights means. 

If you don't own the things that sustain your life then you must be renting them. From Whom? The real owners of everything, the globalist elite. That's their goal. 

The only antidote to this is the concept of individual rights and for us to start electing candidates who will promise to start tearing down the regulatory state by privatizing some and completely shutting down others. Government has gotten way too big. By refocusing our government on the protection of individual rights we can regain our right to our life, our liberty and our pursuit of our happiness.

Michael Neibel

I'm back blogging again.

  Sorry for not blogging recently. I've been busy with family and personal problems. The family problems seem to be subsiding for now as progress has been made in helping them out. On the personal side I've been somewhat in the dumps over the fact that so many people could still vote for democrats in federal and state elections. 

Are Americans really that stupid I wondered. But I know the mind numbing effect that Progressive Education has had on abut two generations of Americans in our colleges.

Prog Ed has refused to teach students to think in terms of principles which has had the effect of forcing them to rely on their feelings instead of their reasoning mind. But our feelings cannot tell us what is good for our survival and what threatens it. Only our reasoning mind can do that. No, I decided, today's citizens are not stupid but rather badly informed because of Progressive Education.

(Here I want to point out that this condemnation is largely confined to our college departments of the social sciences. They still teach some principles in the applied sciences.)

There is an excellent book still in print called "The Ominous Parallels" by Leonard Peikoff. It shows how the cultural ideas that were dominant in Germany in the 20 or so years before the rise of the NAZI party are ominously parallel to the ideas in today's Progressive America. It is truly scary. I highly recommend that book.

There will be more posts soon.

Mike Neibel

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.

Defund the Police?

 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.

"Systemic Racism" a false demon.

The June 25th print edition of the Detroit Free Press carried an oped by Suzette Hackney, Indianapolis Star columnist  who claimed that now is the time to crush "systemic racism."

We had "systemic racism" during the slavery years and again during the Jim Crow years. There is still some racism today but in no way is it 'systemic."

I reject the notion that every alleged instance of injustice by white cops to black suspects is caused by racism suggested in the phrases "we have all the facts we need" and "systemic racism." Really? I question that.

I watched that video many times of policeman Chauvin kneeling on Mr Floyd's neck. I looked for some clue that could indicate racist motive. I watched Chauvin's face for a hint of a smile that might reveal a racist pleasure. I saw and heard nothing. Kneeling on a suspect's neck while in handcuffs should be cause for punishment in my view. I can see kneeling to put cuffs on a suspect but not after he's been rendered harmless.

The whole thing looked very calm, calculated, deliberate as if the public were the intended audience. Chauvin knew he was being recorded and could not fail to know that it would cause riots if made public and probably the end of his police career. But why would he do that over a small time thief like Floyd? Self sacrifice for a higher goal? I saw no evidence of that or of racism. The coldness of it made no sense.

But these two men knew each other for some time. Was there any animosity between them? Grudges? Sure, it could have been rank racism on the part of Chauvin and I would like this question posed to him: What was your motive? But even then, we have to remember that a crime is in the action not the motive. Murder is murder regardless of motive.

I grew up in the Jim Crow era and I know there was much more racism then than there is now. The famous psychologist Eric Hoffer once said "Mass movements can rise and spread without the belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil." I submit that Ms. Hackney is presenting a demon--"systemic racism"--to be destroyed. But destroying an evil is not the same as creating a good, especially when that evil is a manufactured one.

To defeat an evil like racism one must define it precisely. However, in America today we have a systemic attack on defining anything precisely: Progressive Education. It is a pedagogic philosophy that teaches students to think in the approximate, the almost, the close enough. Progressive Ed teaches this stuff in reading and math curriculum in our schools today. If 23 + 23 = 44, well that's close enough. If an appearance of racism can be postulated, well, that's good enough too, he's guilty. No more evidence needed ("We have all the facts we need.")

I don't think so. In my view we need to get government out of education. Today all young people are not being taught how to think conceptually, so all they have to guide their actions are their feelings. Feelings not controlled by thoughts are political and moral disasters.

What powers are behind the shutdowns?

Some thoughts I had a few weeks ago. Still relevant.

As far as I can see this virus seems to be more contagious than others but also seemingly less deadly. I don't believe the death numbers projected by the government in past months.. The government on 04/09 reduced their death projections significantly with the possibility of further reductions to come. It is known in the testing industry there are often things called false positives.   But even if it was as deadly as the seasonal flu, why close the economy?

I think that what we are seeing with this shutdown of our economy is a trial run by the political powers that be who are following the orders of the philosophical powers that be.

These philosophical powers are the university professors in the social sciences. They are the army of foot soldiers marching to the strategy of political Progressivism.

The generals are the professors following the philosophic strategy of postmodernism. For more on this I recommend this essay Postmodernism by Stephen Hicks.

 These generals of philosophy are taking notes. They want to see how many Americans are willing to surrender their rights, freedoms and cash for a little safety. They're learning.

Progressives also want to see who and how many are resisting this policy of partial house arrest. They're also learning who they can rely on to be their enforcers when next the Democrats regain all three branches of government and declare martial law to save us from climate change.

They have to like certain governors and mayors who have reflexively threatened to prosecute doctors and other medical professionals for not 'following orders.'

* Here is link Mr Hicks essay on Postmodernism.

Our Birthday

Today we celebrate the 4th of July because it was then in 1776 we declared our independence from the British monarchy of King George. But it wasn't just the King that we were free from. It was freedom from tyranny, the rule by force of some men over the lives of others.

The founders had a new idea for creating a "more perfect union." It was to create a government that gets its just powers from the consent of the governed, an idea so radical it is still not understood as clearly as it should be today.

It was the concept of inalienable individual rights that made such a society possible. Even this concept of rights is also poorly understood today. Some people--and some politicians-- think a right is a right to things before before one earns them, like a right to a job or health care.

The right to life does not mean the government must provide us with the food, clothing and shelter we need. It means only that we are free to provide these things for ourselves with only one requirement: that we refrain from violating the same rights of everyone else.

In such a free market system the government does have a role. It is that of a protector of rights thus it must have a presence like that of a patrolman who is there to be summoned if a citizen's rights are violated.

It is a system where people are free to make a dollar servicing the wants and needs of other people. What a great win-win, life promoting, happiness creating system that is!

But this system is under attack because its principles are not being taught in our schools anymore. Our young people are finding it difficult to love and respect a nation they know nothing about and whose history has been reoriented to focus on most of her mistakes and not her accomplishments.

We have turned over to government our roads and bridges to maintain at their leisure, our children's education for it to decide what our kids will be taught and not taught. We let the government control our health care so the Gavin Newsomes, (California) Gretchen Whitmers (Michigan) and Andrew Cuomos (New York) et al, can decide what is good and bad for us and force it on us with the force of law.

Benjamin Franklin when asked what kind of society he and the founders were creating said: "A  Republic, if you can keep it."

Well we are in danger of losing it. Look how many so-called educated people today think we are supposed to be a democracy. So today let's thank the founders and resolve to take back our marketplace from the government and keep that freedom for future generations.