Here follows a reprint of a column from 2014, which I thought pertinent to the tumults preoccupying current headlines. I here add only the comment that the remarks below pertain only to those foolishly but honestly deceived by the slogans of the masters.
Can I buy stock in any companies that sell prepper supplies?
I no longer view “preppers” as crazy. Maybe they were right, just early. Better early than late. The post first appeared on Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion .
Why is it all but impossible to get from the Mainstream, excuse me, the Government Media solid data like the three charts provided this morning by Issues & Insights that demonstrate rather conclusively that Covid casualties are on a steady decline?
While the sharp rise in Delta-variant COVID cases has sparked a renewed push for mask mandates, lockdowns, and vaccine “passports,” there’s been little attention paid to just how dangerous this variant is. Perhaps that’s because the evidence suggests it is far less of a public health concern than previous outbreaks.
Just how much less of a threat isn’t precisely known. But there are ways to gauge the risk. One is to look at the number of COVID cases and the number of deaths happening right now, compared with what happened a year ago.
What do you find? First of all, there are fewer cases than last year. From June to August this year, there have been more than 2 million recorded COVID cases in the U.S.
Over the same days last year, the total number of COVID cases was above 3.1 million.
How about deaths? From June 1 through Aug. 9, the total number of COVID fatalities was 20,149. Last year, the death count was 62,287.
In other words, cases are 41% lower than during this time last year, and deaths are 66% lower.
Source: NO, DELTA VARIANT IS NOT WORSE:
Numerous aspects of what unfolded during the Capitol riot have been hotly debated in the months since it happened, but few have been as contentious and emotional as the debate over the officer-involved shooting death of Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt.
The 35-year-old Air Force veteran was shot and killed by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6th after she tried to climb through a glass-paneled door after parts of it had been shattered by another rioter, identified as Zachary Jordan Alam.
Babbitt, who reportedly had been standing next to Alam, was shot.
In April, the Biden Department of Justice announced they had closed the investigation into the fatal shooting and would not be pursuing criminal charges against Byrd, citing “insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution.”
Just last week, the Capitol Police confirmed a report from NBC News that they had exonerated Byrd, a 28-year veteran of the force. They stated in a press release that Byrd – who they did not name – “will not be facing internal discipline” because in their view Byrd’s conduct “was lawful and within Department policy, which says an officer may use deadly force only when the officer reasonably believes that action is in the defense of human life, including the officer’s own life, or in the defense of any person in immediate danger of serious physical injury.”
On the heels of the USCP exonerating Byrd, he did an interview with NBC News anchor Lester Holt, identifying himself publicly for the first time.
Instead of clearing things up, the interview only intensified the debate over his actions and whether they were justified.
Georgetown University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley, who has long been a critic of official media narratives surrounding the shooting, said that instead of confirming that the respective decisions by the DOJ and the Capitol Police not to pursue action against Byrd were the right ones to make that Byrd “proceeded to demolish the two official reviews that cleared him” after he admitted he could not determine whether Babbitt was armed…
“Legal experts and the media have avoided the obvious implications of the two reviews in the Babbitt shooting. Under this standard, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6 — and officers in cities such as Seattle or Portland, Ore., could have killed hundreds of violent protesters who tried to burn courthouses, took over city halls or occupied police stations during last summer’s widespread rioting. In all of those protests, a small number of activists from both political extremes showed up prepared for violence and pushed others to riot. According to the DOJ’s Byrd review, officers in those cities would not have been required to see a weapon in order to use lethal force in defending buildings.”
See also these comments from Mike McDaniel, a retired police officer.
Author Louisa May Alcott got dragged off to one of these, writes Lawrence W. Reed at FEE:
Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women was published more than a century and a half ago–in 1868–and all these decades later, it remains a popular novel. What the author’s many fans may not know is that as a young girl, Alcott learned firsthand just how ridiculous a utopian socialist commune is.Alcott was just 11 when her father moved the family to the experimental village of Fruitlands in Massachusetts. It was not a promising place. Elizabeth Dunn at History.com writes,
Fruitlands was founded in Harvard, Massachusetts, as a self-sufficient farming community by Charles Lane and Bronson Alcott, two men with no practical experience in either farming or self-sufficiency…Settlers were forbidden to eat meat, consume stimulants, use any form of animal labor, create artificial light, enjoy hot baths or drink anything but water. Lane’s ideas later evolved to include celibacy within marriage, which caused no small amount of friction between him and his most loyal disciple, Bronson Alcott, who had relocated his wife and four daughters [Louisa being one of them] to Fruitlands in a characteristic fit of enthusiasm.
At least 119 utopian, communal or socialist settlements were founded in the early 1800s in America. As most of the country reveled in newly won freedoms and a market economy that allowed the enterprising to create wealth, a few malcontents sought a different life. They spurned private property in favor of sharing material things in common. They preferred a “planned” community over the supposed “chaos” of the market’s spontaneous order. They thought if they just worked out on paper what their preferred society would look like, everything and everybody would just fall into place.
Black Lives Matter is a despicable, anti-freedom, anti-Semitic organization that hates our country’s core values of equal opportunity, law and justice, and free enterprise. Don’t anyone dare lecture me about race.
And this is why so many people — people who are able to easily recognize totalitarianism in cults and foreign countries — cannot perceive the totalitarianism that is taking shape now, right in front of their faces (or, rather, right inside their minds). Nor can they perceive the delusional nature of the official “Covid-19” narrative, no more than those in Nazi Germany were able to perceive how completely delusional their official “master race” narrative was. Such people are neither ignorant nor stupid. They have been successfully initiated into a cult, which is essentially what totalitarianism is, albeit on a societal scale.
– C. J. Hopkins, writing a mere 8 months in, this article has aged very well.
Source: Samizdata quote of the day
(Don Boudreaux) This letter in the Wall Street Journal is excellent:
Regarding Joseph Epstein’s op-ed “Black Lives Matter Poisons a Young Athlete’s Mind” (Aug. 17): In criticizing the negative messages of the BLM movement and naming many heroic civil-rights leaders of earlier generations, Mr. Epstein asks, “Why hasn’t a stronger black leadership arisen since this earlier generation of brave and highly intelligent men?”
It has arisen, though it is mostly overlooked by the mainstream media. Among today’s great black public leaders, such as Robert Woodson Sr., Carol Swain, Glenn Loury, Jason Riley, John McWhorter, Thomas Sowell, the late Walter Williams, Ian Rowe and Shelby Steele among others, can be found an optimistic and grateful strain of thought on black agency, progress and life in America.
I had the privilege of hearing Mr. Woodson and Ms. Swain speak to a racially mixed audience. They noted how much improvement they’ve experienced in their lifetimes and their optimism for the future. Mr. Woodson characterizes his outlook as “radical grace,” encouraging his people to look ahead, not back, and to exercise agency for their personal and family success. “Things that are all black should not be seen as bad,” nor should black success depend on “what white people do or think of us,” he said. Ms. Swain noted that she was not raised to hate white people but to accept individuals as they come, and judge them likewise. She, too, has no time for self-pity or worrying about what some may think of her.
Arnold L. Goldman
Source: Some Non-Covid Links
The crisis unfolding in Afghanistan makes a compelling case that a central contention of critical race theory is fatally flawed.
The absence of the U.S. military has led to vile and almost unimaginable levels of evil and suffering.
This would come as a surprise to promulgators of critical race theory. CRT-inspired teachings claim that America is fundamentally racist. Our founding ideals — that all men are created equal and have unalienable rights — were a façade used to disguise the country’s inherent white supremacy.
That foundational belief leads to some radical claims. The United States uses “race to establish and justify systems of power, privilege, disenfranchisement and oppression,” which gives “privileges to white people resulting in disadvantages to people of color,” a Bank of America training memo stated. Journalist Christopher Rufo released the training materials.
“At some point we are going to have to stop denying that we have metastatic racism,” Ibram X. Kendi, author of “How to Be an Antiracist,” said in a 2019 speech. “Because if you didn’t already know, it is literally killing America. It is literally killing this world.” The solution, Kendi contends, is to change the “very underpinnings and structures and systems of this country.”
What happened in Afghanistan over the past few weeks was in many ways an ideal scenario for testing the CRT hypothesis. The United States quickly went from an established military presence to having virtually no influence in the country. Even our embassy has been overrun. If U.S. racism is “literally killing this world” as CRT-inspired advocates claim, the U.S. withdrawal should have advanced human flourishing.
Instead, the Taliban filled the power vacuum — creating a government characterized by overt structural oppression enforced by large doses of violence.This is what CRT gets wrong. The United States isn’t uniquely evil. Evil has been the norm throughout human history. People around the world have slaughtered and enslaved each other for thousands of years in pursuit of power and money.
What’s unique is a country that eliminated slavery because it violated its principles. What’s unique is a country that eventually offered full civil rights to women and minorities in pursuit of those ideals. What’s unique is a superpower that could conquer the world — and didn’t — because it believes in liberty.
Afghans are risking their lives and handing their children over fences for the chance of living under the American institutions and ideals that CRT seeks to destroy.