Skip to content

Tag: socialism

Are We Doomed?

Thanks to the government’s monopoly in the education business it is now a racket, in which the product at the end of K-12 is a lot of dumb, ignorant kids who know nothing about everyday life. Not only do they not know history, how to read or do everyday math, but many of them can’t think critically. And in addition to all that is the activist teachers indoctrinate the kids with “social justice” fanaticism, enviro-wacko pseudo-science voodoo mysticism, and government worship.

Unfortunately, for a century the schools have been indoctrinating kids with government worship, usually now referred to as nationalism. We hear it all the time on the radio with Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, et al., and of course, the big dumb nationalist himself, Trump. But unlike Trump, the conservative nationalists say they oppose the above “social justice” stuff, the enviro-wacko stuff and use a lot of free market rhetoric.

Both sides, though, are socialists. We know about the Bernie-Ocasio-Cortez-college snowflake socialists, who want “free stuff,” and who believe that if some male says he is a female he may very well go into the ladies room, and you had better not object. But the Trump-Limbaugh crowd worships their own government central planning in immigration controls, national security and police, and drug controls, all socialist schemes.

What is socialism? Socialism is government ownership of the means of production, industry and property. That’s my view on that. If you own a business here in Amerika you have to be obedient sheeple to whatever the dictators in government tell you to do, regarding your employment and payment matters, reporting everything to the commissars, and so on. So, you don’t really “own” your business. What the “socialists” here in Amerika want is for the government to seize all the businesses like in health care, finance and everything else. Because they are ignorant of history, they know nothing of how that turned out in Soviet Union, Cuba, and because they don’t pay attention to what’s going on in current times, they either don’t know or don’t care about what’s going on in North Korea, Venezuela, etc.

In Venezuela, the government seized the means of food production and distribution. Because government bureaucrats don’t know how to run things (except into the ground), such seizures and military enforcements of such seizures have caused shortages, empty store shelves, long lines, starvation, sickness, and death. Government takeovers, price controls and wage controls cause distortions, shortages, and chaos. That’s a fact of history.

So, when “socialists” want free health care, free education, etc., why aren’t they saying they want free FOOD? Isn’t food more important than health care? But we see what happens when government takes over the food business. And when government has been attempting to take over the health care industry, bureaucrats have been causing chaos! What is health care, anyway? And “education”? Look what government control over education has done to Amerika! (Why do you think it’s spelled with a “k” now, anyway?)

Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal has a post describing some of his experiences at the “Politicon” in Los Angeles, in which he is saying “The socialists are everywhere.” He attended a session, “Medicare For All” including Ana Kasparian, Bill Kristol, Dr. Drew Pinsky and George Halvorson. I know who Bill Kristol is. Why is Bill Kristol at a discussion on Medicare? Perhaps because he is in his mid-60s and wants Medicare. Who knows?

Wenzel writes:

But this crowd wasn’t interested in facts from a generally sympathetic panelist. They wanted 100% calls for universal healthcare immediately and nothing else.

Later in the day, I stopped in on the panel discussion, “Should We Be Socialist?”, the audience was once again large and loud, cheering loudly as every panelist was introduced.

The first three panelists all stated that they were in favor of significant intervention in the economy but all seemed to agree that “complete government takeover of all property” was not necessary. The audience cheered everyone of these panelists with their different takes on how government should control the economy.

And why NOT “complete government takeover of all property”? You might as well. So Wenzel writes,

If this is any indication of what is going on in America, there is a lot of trouble ahead. The socialists are everywhere. They are loud, aggressive and don’t want to listen to any kind of analysis. They just want power now to rule all of us so that they can declare free everything.

I think a lot of ignorant young people (and old people as well) are brainwashed and they like the idea of robbing their neighbors, although getting their beloved, worshiped bureaucrats to do the robbing for them. And getting free stuff.

But combine all this with the brainwashed narcissists wanting to force their perverted beliefs of “social justice,” irrational transgenderism, and race-obsessions onto the rest of us, by law and by force, and their wanting to use the armed power of police to suppress anyone’s objections to being subjugated in such ways, economically, personally and politically.

Not good.

More Cognitive Dissonance with Republicans and Talk Radio Ditto-Heads

In last night’s scream fest brawl debate between Elizabeth Warren and her Republican challenger Geoff Diehl (that they wouldn’t let Independent candidate Shiva Ayyadurai participate in), once again the Rethug Diehl shows more cognitive dissonance.

According to the Boston Glob, “The debate also highlighted the stark differences between the two candidates on a range of issues, including… the Republican-passed tax cuts (Warren called them a giveaway to billionaires and giant corporations, while Diehl defended them as a boon to the Massachusetts economy)…”

But at one point, according to the Globe,

During a testy debate on taxes, Warren and Diehl talked over each other several times, with Warren charging that Republicans were targeting Social Security to balance the red ink caused by the Republican-backed tax cuts. Diehl said that was a suggestion by Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell.

“I am not a Mitch McConnell Republican,” Diehl said. “I am a Massachusetts Republican that has worked with Democrats and Republicans.”

Warren quickly cut in. “Sorry, so when was it exactly that you called out Mitch McConnell on this and said you were opposed to a trillion-and-a-half dollars in tax cuts for billionaires?”

“I think I’m doing it right now,” Diehl shot back, talking over the Cambridge Democrat. “I think I’m doing it right now, Senator Warren.”

So, when Diehl says, “I am not a Mitch McConnell Republican … I am a Massachusetts Republican that has worked with Democrats and Republicans,” I think he means he’s a Republicrat or a Demopublican. (Or perhaps he’s a Rethuglicrat, who knows.)

And when Warren asks when Diehl “called out Mitch McConnell on this and said you were opposed to a trillion-and-a-half dollars in tax cuts for billionaires?” Diehl’s response is, “I think I’m doing it right now,” and he repeats that so we know he is against tax cuts, “I think I’m doing it right now, Senator Warren.”

So, he’s either for the tax cuts as the article on the debate pointed out, or he’s against the tax cuts. Another Romney.

And more cognitive dissonance from radio ditto-heads as well. Yesterday on Sean Hannity’s radio show, Hannity was pointing out polls and criticizing the Indiana Libertarian Party candidate for U.S. Senate, Lucy Brenton, for allegedly taking votes away from Hannity’s favored Rethuglican challenger, Mike Braun, in their challenge against incumbent Democretin Joe Donnelly. (The two Establishment party candidates included Libertarian Lucy in the debate, by the way.)

Awww, poor Hannity, he doesn’t like third party challenges, just like the fascists in Massachusetts who won’t let the Independent candidate Shiva Ayyadurai participate in the debates between Liz Warren and Geoff Diehl. Just another sign that, like the other hypocrite talk radio blabbermouths, Hannity is just another shill for the Establishment. We can’t have third parties elbowing their way in. God forbid.

Republican challengers like Braun and Diehl want to get a seat at the table, but what we need is someone who will get into Washington and knock the table over! I think that Trump was in some way one of those people — and previously, Ron Paul tried to be.

And also, I looked online at Indiana Libertarian Party candidate Lucy Benton‘s views and she’s very good on most issues. However, her stand on “illegal immigration” is the only one that’s not good, a bit mealy-mouthed, not particularly “libertarian.” She is concerned about immigrants getting here to get on welfare. The libertarian answer, and the real moral and practical answer, is to completely abolish the entire welfare state system, especially the racket that is run out of Washington. “Conservatives” never support that. They are as much welfare statists as the Democrats.

“Pay Up Or the Earth Gets It!”

James Corbett has this edition of Propaganda Watch on the IPCC’s use of not science and scientists but political officials to determine how threatening global warming and/or climate change is to us, and to decide just how much of your earnings the “concerned” environmentalists would like to steal from you, in the name of stopping global warming, or climate change, or whatever the latest label is.

Why Do Conservative Libertarians Support the Immigration Police State?

Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation has this excellent article pointing out supposedly libertarian conservatives’ cognitive dissonance in their claiming to be libertarians, claiming to believe in private property rights and the non-aggression principle, yet supporting the government immigration controls including the police state along the border (and the police state within the country as well).

Hornberger writes:

Whenever you see an article or a speech advocating immigration controls by a conservative libertarian, you will notice one glaring feature, without exception: the absence of any mention of the death, suffering, and the police state that inevitably accompany a system of immigration controls. There is a good reason for that silence: the conservative libertarians do not want libertarians to know that the system they are advocating for the libertarian movement comes with death, suffering, and a police state.

Hornberger says he is a “limited-government libertarian” (as opposed to a zero-government libertarian or a voluntaryist. I am a voluntaryist).

There actually are prominent libertarians who have been with the libertarian movement for decades and who claim to be “anarcho-capitalists,” but because of their belief in “preserving our culture,” or preserving our American culture, whatever that is now, these so-called anarcho-capitalist and conservative libertarians seem to tacitly support the current immigration police state, government central planning in immigration, and the central planners in Washington and their attempts to control the movements of millions of people, something which central planners can never do. However, those prominent anarcho-capitalists do not openly state their defense of such government controls, but such support is nevertheless implied in their articles and speeches, in my view.

Hornberger lists the several problems with government immigration controls that conservative libertarians seem to be supporting:

1. Fixed highway checkpoints. These are located on domestic highways. Federal agents stop domestic travelers who have never crossed into Mexico. They ask them questions. If people refuse to answer their questions, the agents will break their car window, drag them out of their car, and beat them up…

2. Warrantless trespasses onto farms and ranches within 100 miles of any U.S. border. No search warrants. No probable cause. No reasonable suspicion…

3. Roving Border Patrol checkpoints…

4. Violent government raids on private businesses, ones in which the business owner has decided to use his own money to enter into mutually beneficial labor relations with citizens of foreign countries. That’s what a police state is all about.

5. Forcible governmental separation of children from their parents…

6. Forcible deportations of people who are engaged in purely peaceful acts, such as exercising the fundamental God-given rights of pursuing happiness and entering into mutually beneficial economic relations with others. That’s what a police state is all about.

7. The construction of a Berlin Fence and the proposed construction of a Berlin wall along the U.S.-Mexico border…

8. Border Patrol agents boarding Greyhound buses in cities and towns within 100 miles of any U.S. border, which they are now doing all over the United States. They are targeting Hispanics and anyone else who doesn’t look like a genuine American and demanding to see their papers…

9. Complete searches of body and vehicle at international crossing points, including body cavities after the person is required to completely disrobe in front of federal agents…

In my view, the real answers to the immigration problems in Amerika are ending the drug war, dismantling the welfare state or at least not letting immigrants get government welfare, and, most of all, full decentralization of this entire territory, which, as I have repeatedly stated, is just too damn big a territory to be one single country!

Socialist Donald Trump and the Socialist Republicans

Laurence Vance writes on the LewRockwell.com blog:

Year-end data from the September 2018 Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the U.S. Government show that the deficit for fiscal year 2018 was $779 billion. The federal government spent $4,107.7 billion in fiscal year 2018 (which ended on Sept. 30, 2018), including $600 billion for defense offense (which is actually much higher if all “defense”-related spending is counted). The Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House. They are 100% to blame for the profligate spending. Republicans are big spenders just like Democrats. The only limited government they seek is a government limited to control by Republicans.

And Dr. Vance also has an article today that explains Donald Trump’s own socialist mentality and policies, in Trump’s love for Medicare, Medicaid and Socialist Security Social Security.

Will Ocasio-Cortez and Republican Pappas Debate on October 17th? (Updated Below)

I’m only writing about this one because Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been so popular as well as controversial in her campaign proposals. Ocasio-Cortez is the Democrat candidate for Congress for congressional district 14 in New York, New York, New York. She is the one who wants to spend tens of trillions of taxpayer dollars on “free” health care, “free” education and so on.

According to Rasmussen, that district’s race is “Strong Dem,” with an odometer- or speedometer-like image with the arrow pointing to the far left in blue. I guess if it were the fuel gauge it would be pointing to almost empty. But while that is obviously the case philosophically and intellectually, the Republican candidate, Anthony Pappas, is also running on empty, in my view.

Pappas (Is he related to Ike Pappas, CBS News?) is an “associate professor of economics and finance at St. John’s University,” according to this WNYC article.

I checked the Internet for whatever his actual views are, and it’s difficult to find. However, according to Pappas’s website, there is a debate scheduled between the two on October 17 at PS 69 School auditorium in Queens. Maybe we’ll find out at that time. On his website he considers himself a “moderate, independent Republican with a motto of producing ‘sensible solutions for a kinder, caring world’.” (Oh yeah, how so?)

Pappas is critical of Ocasio-Cortez’s far-left, “bizarre” ideas. He is repeatedly critical of her socialist proposals. But the WNYC article states that Pappas “calls himself a compassionate conservative who supports progressive taxation and lower government spending.” Hmm, “progressive taxation”? Sounds like a socialist to me. A Republican socialist as well.

Well, I wonder if he will suggest any kind of decentralization and de-monopolization away from governmental controls and tax-thefts, repealing the income tax, ending the drug war, or any kind of dismantling of the welfare state that continues to keep the masses in chains by Big Government. Probably not. Will they actually have the debate? I can’t find any other reference to the scheduled debate online except for on his own website.

And if there is a debate, will debate moderators or Ocasio-Cortez ask Pappas about his bitter 14-year-long divorce and his wife’s accusations of abuse, and his suing the judge and the courts? I wouldn’t be surprised, given just recently the circus at Brett Kavanaugh’s hearings, in which a lady’s accusations against him was discussed and discussed and argued, with yelling and screaming, but not much mention of his ignorance of the Constitution and the Fourth Amendment and his earlier rulings which will unleash brutal government tyrants on innocent people. (I wonder if Pappas has any views on the Bill of Rights.)

UPDATE: According to Pappas’s website, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has canceled their debate that was scheduled for October 17th. Pappas’s website states: “Unbelievable! In a last minute scam, Ocasio-Cortez cancels debate set for October 17th. Yes, you read that correctly. After challenging Dr. Anthony Pappas to a debate one month ago, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has announced her no-show at a debate set for this Wednesday, October 17, 2018.”

There is almost no mention online of the debate that was scheduled or its cancellation, just some mention of it on Reddit.