- Socialism: Science Or Cyanide?
Socialism: Science Or Cyanide?
Authored by Lawrence Reed From the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE),
Editor’s note: Marianna Davidovich, head of external relations at FEE, recently published a booklet titled “The Buried Stories of Communism & Socialism.” The following essay by FEE’s president emeritus, Lawrence W. Reed, appears in it as the Afterword.
In this volume, Marianna Davidovich vividly recounts the world’s horrific experiences with the evil of communism. It’s a ghastly record, littered with the bodies of a hundred million victims and the lost liberties of hundreds of millions more. No one should have ever expected otherwise; even the founder of modern communist ideology, Karl Marx, advocated extreme violence as a necessary ingredient in the communist formula.
What the world refers to as “communist” countries—such as the Soviet Union of Lenin and Stalin, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Mao’s China, Castro’s Cuba, and others Marianna discusses—would not be labeled as such by Karl Marx himself. He postulated that communism would be the end game of all history and would be characterized by government “withering away” after a period of socialism and its brutal “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
So, what we widely refer to as communist countries are, according to both Marx and the governments of those very countries themselves, socialist. None of them called themselves communist; all of them proudly adopted the socialist label. The full name of the old Soviet Union, for example, was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Marx’s prediction that socialist dictatorships would eventually dissolve into government-less, communist utopias was embraced by pseudo-intellectuals as some sort of messianic prophecy. But how could Marx know the future of his own country, let alone that of others? Was he a palm reader? Did he use tarot cards, a crystal ball, or a Ouija board? Or did God (in whom he didn’t believe) generously gift him with visionary powers that no one else has?
Of course, none of those things apply here. Marx was no fortune-teller. He was a charlatan, an angry and nasty scribbler with vile, racist, and anti-Semitic tendencies. He mooched off others all his life. As British historian Paul Johnson explained in his book, “Intellectuals,” Marx was cruel to his own family. He yearned for the violence his predicted socialist dictatorships would produce. Hardly anyone showed up for his funeral.
Marx’s notion that under communism, government would “wither away” was always a nonsensical non-starter. He never explained how or why that would occur. What would possibly prompt dictators with absolute power to one day just walk away from it? That’s more like a dumb fairy tale than a prophecy.
Now that Marianna has provided the awful details of death and destruction in the countries influenced by Marx’s teaching, the big remaining question is WHY? Why does socialism so naturally produce mayhem on an industrial scale?
Wait a minute, you ask.
What about the peaceful “democratic socialism” of Scandinavia?
Scandinavian countries are not socialist. They have no minimum wage laws, almost no interference with prices and the market forces of supply and demand. They have lower taxes on business and more school choice than the United States. They boast trade-based, globalized economies, and few if any nationalized industries.
The prime minister of Denmark recently declared, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” The Index of Economic Freedom ranks Denmark, Norway, and Sweden as among the freest (most capitalist) in the world.
It’s true that after World War II, Scandinavian countries stumbled into generous welfare states, but being no more than a welfare state is not by itself dictionary socialism. More to the point, those nations eventually turned away from even that—cutting taxes and spending and reviving private sector entrepreneurship. Margaret Thatcher forced the same changes in Britain when, by the late 1970s, her country’s welfare state turned Britain into “the sick man of Europe.”
When countries adopt a blend of socialism and capitalism—a formula once termed “the middle way”—socialists claim credit for progress real or imagined. But repeatedly, such situations reveal that most if not all the “progress” such places achieve is not because of the socialism they’ve adopted, but because of the capitalism they haven’t yet destroyed. Capitalism produces wealth (even Marx admitted to that), whereas socialism and socialists simply confiscate and redistribute it.
Back to the central question: Why does socialism so naturally produce mayhem on an industrial scale?
One very big reason is its accumulation and centralization of power, the most toxic motivation in human history. The desire to dominate and control, to plan other people’s lives, to push others around and take their stuff, to monopolize one corner of society after another—all these elements of a “power trip” are part and parcel of the socialist vision.
But socialism promises to help the poor and the needy, you say! Well, of course, it promises such things. How far would it get if its advocates told the truth? Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, etc. all proclaimed “solidarity with the people,” especially the poor. They never honestly declared, “Give us power, and we will crush dissent and throw you to the dogs for opposing our plans!”
Socialism is rightly and widely perceived as diametrically opposed to capitalism. So, it can’t possibly be defined as acts of caring, sharing, giving, and being compassionate toward the needy. There is demonstrably more caring, sharing, giving, and compassion toward the needy under capitalism!
Even when it comes to most foreign aid, capitalist countries are the donors and socialist countries are the recipients. You can’t give it away or share it with anybody if you don’t create it in the first place, and socialism offers utterly no theory of wealth creation, only wealth confiscation and consumption.
Note that socialists do not propose to accomplish their objectives by mutual consent. They do not advocate raising the money for their plans by way of bake sales or charitable solicitations. Your participation is not voluntary. From start to finish, socialism’s defining characteristic is not so much the promises meant to beguile but rather, the method by which it implements its agenda—FORCE. If it’s voluntary, it’s not socialism. It’s that simple.
In theory, practice, and outcome, socialism is profoundly anti-social. Here’s why:
-
The plans of socialists are more important than yours. Why? Because they say so. Isn’t that reason enough? “The more the State plans,” wrote Austrian economist F. A. Hayek, “the more difficult planning becomes for the individual.” But socialists don’t care about that because what they have in mind is surely more noble than anything us peasants are thinking. Socialism is profoundly anti-individual because it seeks to homogenize people in a giant, collectivist blender.
-
Socialists are know-it-alls and know-nothings, simultaneously. This is a remarkable achievement, perhaps socialism’s singular contribution to sociology. Even if a socialist’s own life is a mess, he still knows how to run everybody else’s. Even if he doesn’t believe there’s a God, he thinks the State can be one. F. A. Hayek nailed it when he wrote, “The curious task of economics is to convince men of how little they know about what they imagine they can design.”
-
Socialism rejects biological science. No climate-change denier denies that climate exists. But socialists claim that if there’s such a thing as human nature, they can abolish and reinvent it. Humans are individuals, with no two alike in every way, but socialists believe they can homogenize and collectivize us into an obedient blob. It doesn’t bother them to punish individual success and achievement even if the result is equal impoverishment. They believe that human beings will work harder and smarter for the State than they will for themselves or their families. This is much closer to witchcraft than science.
-
Socialists call the cops for everything. Have you ever noticed that the socialist agenda is not a page of helpful suggestions, or a list of tips for better living? When they’re in charge, you don’t get to say, “No, thanks.” Freedom of choice? No, sir! Socialist ideas are so good, the old saying goes, that they must be mandatory and opposing views must be censored. Deep inside every socialist, even the naïve but well-meaning ones, a totalitarian demon is struggling to get out. This is what socialists eventually do with such monotonous regularity that you can absolutely count on it.
-
Socialism is more than anti-capitalism. It’s anti-capital. In his remarkable book, “Intellectuals,” British historian Paul Johnson penned a blistering chapter about Karl Marx. Johnson quotes Marx’s own mother as famously remarking that she wished her son Karl “would accumulate some capital instead of just writing about it.” Mrs. Marx was on to something. Karl and his acolytes, to one degree or another, make war on the single most powerful generator of the material wealth that improves the lives of people—namely, private property and its accumulation by private, profit-seeking individuals who invest and create and employ. Wherever such lunacy gains power, it marches its subjects backward towards the Stone Age.
-
Conflict is their God. From Marx to socialists of the present day, conflict is everything.If it’s not present, they will invent it. After all, everyone is either a victim or a villain, an oppressor or part of the oppressed. Conflict is the way history unfolds, so they tell us. And like palm readers and tarot card practitioners, they declare the future to be on their side. This always-angry perspective rules out a spirit of gratitude, especially toward capitalists. Socialists never show up at a business of any size with signs exclaiming “Thank you for taking risks, providing products and employing people.”
One of the greatest economists ever, Ludwig von Mises, wrote this eloquent summation:
A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.
Communism as envisioned by its intellectual father Karl Marx is an unachievable and undesirable fantasy. In the real world, efforts to realize Marx’s delusions are simply full-blown, unadulterated socialism. And that’s the cyanide that both Mises and Marianna are warning us about.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 23:50 -
- Moana, Wicked, Gladiator II Set To Shatter Thanksgiving Box Office Records
Moana, Wicked, Gladiator II Set To Shatter Thanksgiving Box Office Records
The Hollywood Reporter cited impressive data showing that Disney’s Moana sequel, Universal’s Wicked, and Paramount’s Gladiator II are set to break US box-office records for the Thanksgiving holiday week.
“Thanks to the potent combination of Disney’s Moana sequel, Universal’s Wicked and Paramount’s Gladiator II, overall five-day revenue will hit a high for the long Turkey Day holiday, or well north of $400 million (the previous best was 2018 with $316 million),” the media outlet wrote in a report on Friday.
Here’s more from the report:
Disney’s fantasy musical Moana 2 opened to a record-shattering $57.5 million on Wednesday, followed by $28 million on Thursday — the biggest Thanksgiving of all time and the fourth-biggest Thursday for a non-opening day. Rival studios show the animated sequel opening north of $200 million — as in $225 million or more — but Disney won’t comment until Friday so as to avoid what happened last weekend when Wicked and Gladiator II came in millions lower than estimated.
…
Moana 2 will shatter numerous records in its launch, including becoming the top Thanksgiving opening of all time for the five days, beating Frozen ($94 million). It will also pass up Frozen II ($125 million) to become the top earner for the five days. And it has already served up the top opening day ever for a Walt Disney Animation title and the third-biggest opening day for any animated title behind Incredibles 2 and Inside Out 2, not adjusted for inflation. It was also the third-biggest day of 2024 to date behind Deadpool & Wolverine and Inside Out 2.
As of early Friday afternoon, Bloomberg dropped this headline…
- DISNEY SEES ‘MOANA 2’ SETTING THANKSGIVING WEEKEND RECORD
‘Moanapocalypse’ hits the box office.
‘MOANA 2’ already crossed $100M globally.
The film had a $150M budget. pic.twitter.com/JKSyqLAGKS
— The Hollywood Handle (@HollywoodHandle) November 29, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday week, AMC Entertainment Holdings, the world’s largest movie theater chain, reported record revenue last weekend. The chain operates 900 theaters with 10,000 screens globally, including 660 theaters and 8,200 screens in the US.
“Naturally, we are pleased that at our US theatres, AMC just recorded our highest revenues for a pre-Thanksgiving weekend in AMC’s entire history. Similarly, it is thoroughly satisfying that fully 4.6 million people graced our AMC Theatres in the US and Odeon Cinemas abroad over the just completed four days Thursday to Sunday. What a wonderful way to head into what we expect will be a busy and entertaining holiday moviegoing season,” AMC Chairman and CEO Adam Aron wrote in a statement.
In markets, the ‘meme’ stock AMC hovers around the $5 handle as traders on this quiet half-day overlooked this week’s Thanksgiving box-office blowout.
Bloomberg data shows 13.3% of the float is short, or about 49.8 million shares.
We covered AMC earlier this week in a note titled “‘Meme’ Stock AMC Reports Pre-Thanksgiving Revenue Record.”
Redditors are more focused on crypto pumps than meme stocks…
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 23:15 - What Kennedy Must Do To Defeat Regulatory Capture
What Kennedy Must Do To Defeat Regulatory Capture
Authored by Bretigne Shaffer via The Brownstone Institute,
President-Elect Donald Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to head the Department of Health and Human Services is cause for celebration for anyone who cares about the pharmaceutical industry’s influence over regulatory agencies, and the deleterious effect it has had on the health of Americans.
It is nearly impossible to express just how remarkable and potentially world-changing this is. Only a few years ago, it would have been beyond the imagination of any serious political commentator. Those of us who believe in the freedom of medical choice – and especially those who have been personally harmed by the industry – have every reason to be ecstatic.
But even if Kennedy is confirmed, and even if he manages to implement his ideas, will they be enough to bring about real, lasting, change?
One of Kennedy’s primary targets will be the regulatory capture that practically defines the pharmaceutical industry and the agencies tasked with overseeing it. He has spent decades tirelessly battling this particular beast, and has recently articulated a number of specific policy ideas aimed at rooting out the “corruption” that characterizes the regulatory agencies as well as the world of medical research. But is that even possible?
In order to answer this question, we need to examine the nature of the regulatory state itself.
The Regulatory State
There is nothing new about private commercial interests seeking to use government force to subvert the free market to their advantage – and to the disadvantage of everyone else. The medical and pharmaceutical industries are hardly unique in this regard. Generally, interest groups, or individual corporations, do this by convincing politicians to erect barriers – in the form of laws and regulations – to those who would compete with them.
Much has been written about the extent to which the regulation of business sprang, not from a desire to protect consumers, but rather from the desire on the part of a few businesses to secure for themselves an environment in which they are insulated from competition. In their 1993 paper, “The Protectionist Roots of Antitrust,” for example, Don Boudreaux and Tom DiLorenzo look at some specific examples of business interests lobbying government to enact antitrust legislation that would stifle their competition.
They write:
“(F)or over a century the antitrust laws have routinely been used to thwart competition by providing a vehicle for uncompetitive businesses to sue their competitors for cutting prices, innovating new products and processes, and expanding output. This paper has argued that, moreover, antitrust was a protectionist institution from the very beginning; there never was a ‘golden age of antitrust’ besieged by rampant cartelization, as the standard account of the origins of antitrust attests.“
The world of health care as we know it today in America is the result of similar efforts by some practitioners and professional associations to defeat their competitors, not by outperforming them in the marketplace, but by enacting laws to limit their ability to practice.
Most notorious among these efforts was the 1910 Flexner Report. Commissioned by the Carnegie Foundation, the Report recommended closing down the vast majority of medical schools; streamlining medical education to exclude non-allopathic modalities (and mostly eliminating medical schools for women and African Americans); giving state governments the power to approve medical schools; and dramatically tightening medical licensing restrictions.
In fact, the Flexner Report was, for the most part, an unpublished 1906 report written by the American Medical Association (AMA). At the time, the AMA made no secret about its motives in seeking the reforms to which Abraham Flexner lent his name. It sought to reduce the supply of physicians in order to further enrich its own members. In 1847, the Association’s committee on educational standards reported that:
“The very large number of physicians in the United States…has frequently been the subject of remark. To relieve the diseases of something more than twenty millions of people, we have an army of Doctors amounting by a recent computation to forty thousand, which allows one to about every five hundred inhabitants…No wonder, then, that the profession of medicine has measurably ceased to occupy the elevated position which once it did; no wonder that the merest pittance in the way of remuneration is scantily doled out even to the most industrious in our ranks…”
The very history of the regulatory state informs us that it was not implemented for the purpose of protecting consumers from powerful corporate interests, but to protect the interests of certain powerful corporations and groups of professionals. It is important to remember this when we hear critics bemoan the “corruption” in the regulatory agencies, and insist that this can be remedied if we just put the right people in charge of them.
No. “Corruption” is the primordial swamp from which these agencies emerged. It is in their DNA. It is, in fact, their very reason for being. There is no “reforming” that which is operating precisely as it was designed to operate.
Moreover, even if these agencies had been designed with the interests of the public in mind (and never mind that “the public” is not a single entity with uniform interests to begin with), the reality remains that there is no mechanism by which they can be made accountable to us.
Accountability between two parties can only come when each party has choice regarding whether or not they interact with the other. This is not the case with regulatory agencies. These are imposed upon us. We are forced to use their “services” whether we are happy with them or not; whether they do a good job or not; whether they make our lives more dangerous than they otherwise would be or not. No matter how badly regulatory agencies perform, we are not free to take our business elsewhere.
The FDA
What this means is that – just as with all other political actors – the leaders of these agencies are removed from the consequences that their actions have on others. In the case of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), this has led to decades of malfeasance and error that have cost many, many, lives.
Perhaps the most infamous example in recent times is the FDA’s complete failure to protect the public from the painkiller Vioxx. The agency approved the drug in 1999, following which it is believed to have killed as many as 55,000 Americans before being withdrawn in 2004. Significantly, the FDA did not withdraw Vioxx from the market, Merck did that itself. In fact, it appears that the regulatory agency worked to suppress information about the known risks of the drug:
“A Merck memo uncovered in November showed that Merck scientists were aware in 1996 that the drug might contribute to heart problems. Then in 2000, a Merck study found that patients taking Vioxx were twice as likely to suffer heart attacks as patients taking older painkillers. Meanwhile, mid-level FDA officials who warned of these dangers were shunned by the agency. In FDA parlance, those with a “point of view” on Vioxx were unwelcome in certain meetings concerning the drug.’”
To believe that the Vioxx scandal was an isolated event would be a mistake.
Indeed, the history of the agency is littered with similar stories. Worse, it also uses its power to prevent people from having access to treatments that may help them, but that would not be very profitable, or which might otherwise go against the interests of the agency’s industry benefactors. We witnessed this in the extreme during the past few years, when the FDA and the rest of the regulatory establishment waged a war on Covid-19 treatments such as hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and even Vitamins C and D.
The FDA does not fail to protect the public because it happens to have bad people in its leadership, or because they are “incompetent.” It fails to protect us because it has no incentive to do so. We are captive “customers.” We cannot take our money elsewhere. The leadership at the FDA has no tangible reason to care about our interests. And there is no amount of “draining the swamp” that can change this.
What Can Be Done?
The only hope, within this kind of system, is to defy the odds – and not insignificantly, to defy the vast sums of industry lobbying money – and get someone into a position of power over the regulatory agencies who has the will to force them to act contrary to their own incentives within the system. That person right now is undoubtedly Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and, should he be confirmed as Secretary of HHS, he will undoubtedly do some good things.
But what happens after he is gone? The system itself will not have been changed. The incentives that are in place now will still be in place then. What happens when there is no longer a good person, with good intentions, in a position of some power over these agencies? Should our right to informed consent, for example, rely on our being fortunate enough to have “good people” in charge of fundamentally unaccountable agencies? Agencies that have the power to withhold potentially life-saving products from the marketplace, while at the same time providing a false sense of security about the dangerous ones they allow?
One of the proposals Kennedy has put forward is to reform the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. He writes:
“Pharmaceutical companies pay a fee every time they apply for a new drug approval, and this money makes up about 75% of the budget of the Food and Drug Administration’s drug division. That creates a barrier to entry to smaller firms and puts bureaucrats’ purse strings in the hands of the pharmaceutical industry.”
Reforming, or better yet, eliminating, this fee would be a step in the right direction. But it would not change the fundamental nature of the FDA. It would not magically make that agency accountable to the public, nor would it remove the ability of those in the pharmaceutical industry to make other forms of payments to the agency.
Even now, the industry has other ways of exerting its influence, including the infamous “revolving door,” whereby agency officials who do well by a particular drug company while working for the FDA are later rewarded with lucrative positions in that company. And according to an investigative report by Science, post-approval payments in varying forms are also common.
Science examined payment records between 2013-2016, and found that:
“Of the more than $24 million in personal payments or research support from industry to the 16 top-earning advisers—who received more than $300,000 each—93% came from the makers of drugs those advisers previously reviewed or from competitors.”
Critics of this kind of industry capture have long called for “getting money out” of the regulatory structure. But it remains unclear how this might be achieved. Certainly, specific payment channels, such as the Prescription Drug User Fees, can be eliminated or banned. But to imagine that those in the industry would not contrive of other ways to buy influence is not realistic.
Just as critically though, even if pharmaceutical companies were somehow prevented from being able to pay off the agencies that regulate them, this would still not render those agencies accountable to the public, or to anyone other than themselves.
The only way to “get money out” of the regulatory state is to stop giving that state favors to sell. It is to eliminate the state’s power to restrict market entry and market participation. These are the political favors that powerful industry interests bid for. If we want to stop that from happening, we need to eliminate those favors.
But We Need the Regulatory State to Keep Us Safe!
Astonishingly, even after the past four years, there are still a great many people who believe that the regulatory state exists to keep us safe. That it withheld potentially life-saving therapeutics from us, not out of malice or the interests of its corporate cronies, but for our protection. That it worked hard to censor information about these therapeutics, and about the dangers of the experimental product it was promoting, for the same reason. That maybe some mistakes were made during this time, but that really, truly, these agencies are designed to protect us and if we just get the right people in charge, and maybe do a little tinkering with the machinery, they will work as they are supposed to.
Again, no. They are working precisely as they are supposed to.
But for those who remain unconvinced, for anyone who still believes that existing laws against fraud, malpractice, and other torts are not enough, that we need some sort of government oversight over the medical industry, let’s look a little closer.
Economist Milton Friedman famously recommended abolishing both medical licensing and the FDA. He wrote:
“The FDA has done enormous harm to the health of the American public by greatly increasing the costs of pharmaceutical research, thereby reducing the supply of new and effective drugs, and by delaying the approval of such drugs as survive the tortuous FDA process.”
Others who have examined the agency’s track record concur that the agency does more harm than good.
Nobel laureate George Hitchings, for instance, estimated that the FDA’s five-year delay in introducing the antibiotic Septra to the market resulted in 80,000 deaths in the US.
Drug regulation expert Dale Gieringer says that the death toll resulting from the FDA forcibly keeping new medications from the market far outweighs any benefits it may have produced. He writes:
“The benefits of FDA regulation relative to that in foreign countries could reasonably be put at some 5,000 casualties per decade or 10,000 per decade for worst-case scenarios. In comparison…the cost of FDA delay can be estimated at anywhere from 21,000 to 120,000 lives per decade.”
Economist Daniel Klein notes that, prior to the FDA’s powers being expanded in 1962, existing tort law did a good job of protecting consumers:
“The FDA was much less powerful before 1962. The historical record—decades of a relatively free market up to 1962—shows that free-market institutions and the tort system succeeded in keeping unsafe drugs to a minimum. The Elixir Sulfanilamide tragedy (107 killed) was the worst in those decades. (Thalidomide was never approved for sale in the United States.) The economists Sam Peltzman and Dale Gieringer have made the grisly comparison: the victims of Sulfanilamide and other small tragedies prior to 1962 are insignificant compared to the death toll of the post-1962 FDA.”
He goes on to compare medical regulation to safety regulation in other industries:
“How is safety assured in other industries? In electronics, manufacturers submit products to Underwriters’ Laboratories, a private organization that grants its safety mark to products that pass its inspection. The process is voluntary: manufacturers may sell without the UL mark. But retailers and distributors usually prefer the products with it.
“Suppose someone proposed a new government agency that forbade manufacturers from making any electronic product until approved by the agency. We would think the proposal to be totalitarian and crazy. But that is the system we have in drugs…”
Conclusion
As long as regulatory powers exist that allow state entities to restrict entry into markets, and to dictate how producers may participate in those markets, there will always be those who are incentivized to gain access to the levers of that power and use it to further their own ends. Those who have the means to pay for this power will always find ways to do so.
What many call “corruption” is rather the predictable and inevitable outcome of institutions that are, by their very nature, unaccountable to those they purport to serve. The solution is not to get “better people” in charge of these institutions, nor is it to engage in a never-ending battle to stop participants from following the incentives the system has created for them. The solution is to remove those incentives. The solution is to remove the powers of the regulatory state itself.
If Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is confirmed as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, he will undoubtedly strike some blows against regulatory capture. Whatever he does in this position can only be an improvement over what we have now, and it is possible that some of his reforms may even endure beyond his own tenure. But he has the chance to do much more.
The regulatory state is a Gordian knot, and it is not enough to work at untangling its various components. It needs to be sliced through once and for all. The way to do this is simple: Abolish the FDA, abolish the NIH, abolish the CDC. End all medical licensing and accreditation. Get the government out of health care everywhere.
Perhaps this sounds like a political impossibility. And perhaps it is. But until very recently, RFK, Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services was a political impossibility. I submit that we do not know what is possible and what is not.
Kennedy has an unprecedented opportunity to strike at the root of what makes our healthcare system so dysfunctional: to dismantle the institutions that stifle the production of medicine, distort information about its safety, and suppress alternatives. He has an opportunity to make a profound difference not only for the next four years but for generations to come. We should all hope that he does not waste it.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 22:40 - Democrat Mayors Say They Will Use Police To Obstruct Trump's Deportation Of Illegals
Democrat Mayors Say They Will Use Police To Obstruct Trump’s Deportation Of Illegals
There are only two issues that Democrats might care more about than the national legalization of abortion: Blocking the passage of voter ID laws, and, blocking the mass deportation of illegal immigrants.
The reason should be relatively obvious – Keeping the border open and illegal immigrants flowing into the US is the key to election victory for progressives in the long run. If leftists are going to exterminate millions of future voters in the womb, then their only other option to fill ballot boxes is to import people from the third world and give them as much free stuff as possible so they’re sure to vote blue.
Democrats have been pushing for a sweeping amnesty for illegals for years. If they had won the 2024 election by a comfortable margin it’s a certainty that an amnesty would be at the top of their priority list. The open border policies and sanctuary actions of the political left are in direct violation of US immigration law, but Democrats act as if these laws are a suggestion rather than the rule. Without federal enforcement squarely in their corner blue cities and states only have one option left – Pretend they have the moral high ground and drum up as much civil unrest as possible.
This might work in deep blue sanctuary cities, but the Trump Administration won the election in a landslide which included the popular vote. The majority of Americans want deportations and these cities do not have significant national backing. Despite this fact, some Democrat mayors are threatening to utilize local police forces to obstruct Trump’s mass deportation efforts.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston claims the deportation of illegals is “unconstitutional” and he initially threatened to use local law enforcement to block federal agencies from entering the city to carry out migrant arrests. He ultimately walked these comments back, but only to a point, saying he’s ‘willing to go to jail’ to prevent deportations.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston suggests using Denver police to block mass deportations under Trump , calling it a ‘Tiananmen Square’ Moment is now walking back those comments after some backlash @NewsNation pic.twitter.com/WeuXbpB29v
— Jorge Ventura Media (@VenturaReport) November 25, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
For leftists the standard procedure is to wait and see how effectively they can use activist groups as a shield and then they change their rhetoric accordingly. If they can get the mob to show up on the doorsteps of DHS and ICE officials like they did with Supreme Court judges in 2023 then they may feel emboldened to escalate. Johnston seemed to tone down his chest puffing theatrics after incoming Border Czar Tom Homan gave him a reality check.
“You are absolutely breaking the law. All he has to do is look at Arizona v. U.S. and he would see he’s breaking the law, Homan said flatly. “But, look, me and the Denver mayor, we agree on one thing. He’s willing to go to jail, I’m willing to put him in jail.”
Incoming Border Czar Tom Homan:
“Me and the Denver mayor, we agree on one thing: He’s willing to go to jail. I’m willing to put him in jail.”
Let’s go!! pic.twitter.com/mnVOJwfesv
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) November 26, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Democrats don’t have the testicular fortitude to go into any fight alone, but the deportation debate is within their favorite wheelhouse, which is “resistance against the man”. For the past four years progressives have had the support of every government institution, almost every corporation and every NGO in the US and abroad, yet, they still tried to pretend they were the underdog fighting a rebellion against an oppressor. Now they truly are the underdog and they will certainly try to play to that image using the deportation drama as a background.
The Mayor of Tuscon, Regina Romero, has also threatened the use of local police to obstruct deportation arrests. Her messaging is once again centered on the claim that deportations of illegals are a violation of higher moral standards. The law and the will of the voters must therefore take a back seat to the superior virtues of the progressive ideology.
The mayor of Tucson in Arizona is now vowing to work with local police to resist
Trump’s mass deportation plansCan’t wait to see this moron arrested
— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) November 28, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
It should be noted that members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua have been intercepted in Denver County and in Cochise County just east of Tuscon. They are specifically organizing in sanctuary cities with lax immigration standards, and they often recruit from illegal migrant shelters already in these areas.
Multiple blue cites have stated publicly that they intend to refuse help to immigration agents during deportations. This includes the catch and release of violent criminals in order to prevent their arrest by ICE. In other words, Democrats would rather see rapists and murders back on the streets than hand them over to Trump. The thought process here seems utterly insane, but again, it makes perfect sense when one realizes how much time and energy Democrats have invested in their amnesty model.
Without a massive third world voting block bought off with US tax dollars, it’s unlikely that progressives will win another election for a very long time.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 22:05 - US Firms Compete For 'Huge Contracts' To Control North Gaza Security
US Firms Compete For ‘Huge Contracts’ To Control North Gaza Security
Israel is examining the launch of a “pilot program” that could see US private security firms replace the army in northern Gaza to “accompany food and medicine convoys” for Palestinians who remain in the devastated region, according to a report by Israeli daily Globes.
Among the top competitors for the multi-million dollar contract are Constellis, the direct successor to infamous mercenary company Blackwater, and Orbis, a little-known South Carolina company run by former generals that has worked with the Pentagon for 20 years.
Image source: silentprofessionals.org Officials say the pilot program for north Gaza aims to “prevent Hamas or other gangs from taking over the aid trucks and free the IDF soldiers from the dangerous mission.”
In recent weeks, Gaza’s interior ministry established a new police force to deal with groups of bandits and gangs that have been raiding humanitarian aid shipments and blackmailing international organizations in the southern Gaza Strip.
The UN has said these gangs are likely “benefiting from a passive if not active benevolence” or “protection” from the Israeli army.
In October, a third US security firm – Global Delivery Company (GDC) – which describes itself as “Uber for warzones” – claimed to be working with another firm to create and manage “humanitarian bubbles” in Gaza.
GDC is run by Mordechai Kahane, an Israeli businessman who worked with Israeli intelligence during the war on Syria to arm extremist groups seeking to topple the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Although no official figure exists about the size of the contracts being offered by Tel Aviv for these mercenary firms, Globes cites Lt. Col. Yochanan Zoraf, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) and former advisor on Arab affairs in the Israeli army, as saying the figure will likely reach “billions of shekels per year.”
“These are not companies that will manage the daily lives of the residents,” Zoraf claims, adding that “peripheral responsibility for the defense of [north Gaza] as well as the civil responsibility itself” falls at Israel’s feet.
The former army officer also says Tel Aviv will likely “ask that the US – or an outside party – finance the program.”
On Tuesday, Israel Hayom reported that the pilot program has yet to receive approval from the security cabinet “due to legal difficulties in defining the occupation” based on international law.
“In order to circumvent the legal obstacles, the security services are examining bringing in external funding from humanitarian aid organizations or foreign countries for the [mercenary firms], which costs tens of millions of dollars to operate,” the report adds.
Hundreds of citizens get flour from aid trucks in northern Gaza. pic.twitter.com/bUGxHa4iiK
— Eye on Palestine (@EyeonPalestine) November 5, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Since the start of what UN sources and others denounce as the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, the Israeli government has turned to mercenaries to overcome an enlistment crisis. This includes cooperation with German intelligence to recruit asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria.
“Over the past seven months, the Values Initiative Association and the German–Israeli Association (DIG) have worked to enlist these refugees from war-torn Muslim-majority countries as mercenaries for Israel. Offered monthly salaries ranging between €4,000 to €5,000 and fast-tracked German citizenship, many have joined the fight. Reports suggest that around 4,000 immigrants were naturalized between September and October alone,” writes The Cradle columnist Mohamed Nader al-Omari.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 21:30 - China Discovers World's Largest Gold Deposit Worth $83 Billion
China Discovers World’s Largest Gold Deposit Worth $83 Billion
Chinese scientists have uncovered a “supergiant” deposit of high-quality gold ore hidden near some of the country’s existing gold mines. The vast reserve, which could be the largest single reservoir of the valuable metal left anywhere on Earth, could end up being the largest known deposit of the precious metal anywhere in the world, and is worth more than $80 billion.
As LiveScience reports, the new deposit was uncovered at the Wangu gold field in the northeast of Hunan province, representatives from the Geological Bureau of Hunan Province (GBHP) told Chinese state media on Nov. 20. Workers detected more than 40 gold veins, which contained around 330 tons (300 metric tons) of gold down to a depth of 6,600 feet (2,000 meters). However, using 3D computer models, mining experts have predicted that there could be up to 1,100 tons (1,000 metric tons) of gold — roughly eight times heavier than the Statute of Liberty — hidden at depths of up to 9,800 feet (3,000 m).
If true, the entire deposit is likely worth around 600 billion yuan ($83 billion), GBHP officials said.
Researchers drilled down around 6,600 feet below the ground and identified more than 40 veins of gold ore. Officials revealed that the maximum quality of the new deposit was 138 grams of gold per metric ton of ore, which is relatively high compared with most other gold mines around the world. “Many drilled rock cores showed visible gold,” Chen Rulin, an ore-prospecting expert with GBHP, told state media.
More gold was also found during test drills around the new site’s “peripheral areas,” suggesting there are more large deposits waiting to be tapped in the future, experts said.
It is hard to keep track of the amount of gold left in the various mines across the world due to fluctuations in the rate of extraction at each site and a lack of transparency in reporting results. However, as of 2022, the largest known remaining gold reserves on Earth are found in South Africa’s South Deep gold mine, which has around 1,025 tons (930 metric tons) of gold, according to Mining Technology. This means the new deposit could be the largest known natural stockpile of gold on the planet.
Mining experts believe that the new deposit contains up to 1,100 tons of gold News of the discovery sent ripples through the mining community and the wider global economy. As LiveScience notes, the price of gold jumped to around $2,700 per ounce – just below a record high set earlier this year – although it is unclear why a surge in gold supply would push the price of gold higher.
China is already the biggest producer of gold in the world, accounting for around 10% of global output in 2023, according to Reuters. However, the country still uses more gold than it can produce, consuming around three times as much of the precious metal as it can dig up. As a result, China relies heavily on importing gold from countries like Australia and South Africa.
China currently mines around 10% of the world’s newly dug up gold every year. The new gold deposit could help alleviate this issue but will not solve the problem completely. Based on current consumption rates, the entire deposit would only supply the country’s needs for around 1.4 years.
By the end of 2023, an estimated total of 234,332 tons (212,582 metric tons) of gold have been dug up in human history, with more than two-thirds of this being extracted since 1950, according to the World Gold Council.
This may seem like a lot. But if you were to melt down all the gold ever mined and put it into a single cube, it would only be around 72 feet (22 m) across, according to the World Gold Council, slightly shorter than the length of a blue whale.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 20:55 - A Top Priority For The DOGE Commission: Decentralizing The Federal Government
A Top Priority For The DOGE Commission: Decentralizing The Federal Government
Authored by Fred Fleitz via American Greatness,
One of the best ideas I heard from Donald Trump for his second term is to move as many as 100,000 federal employees to “new locations outside the Washington Swamp” to places “filled with patriots who love America.”
This initiative will save tax dollars and help depoliticize federal agencies. There also are important security and fairness reasons to relocate these agencies across the United States.
I speak from experience.
In the early 1990s, the late Senator Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) drafted legislation to move thousands of CIA employees to West Virginia. Bryd proposed closing 21 CIA offices in Washington, DC, and its Virginia and Maryland suburbs and moving them to large campuses in Jefferson County, West Virginia.
My wife and I were CIA employees at the time, and we were thrilled about the potential move of our office out of the DC area. We were unable to afford a house without a lengthy commute on our federal salaries because the large presence of federal workers and contractors had driven housing prices through the roof.
(Five of the seven wealthiest U.S. counties are in the DC suburbs.)
We also disliked the liberal culture and high taxes of the DC area.
Unfortunately, the Washington establishment, including many well-paid senior CIA officers and contractors, blocked Senator Byrd’s attempt to relocate CIA offices to West Virginia. As a result, when my wife could no longer work full-time because of the disability of one of our children, we ended up buying a house 50 miles from DC with a roundtrip commute of 2.5 to 3 hours per day.
Moving federal agencies out of the DC area to areas with affordable housing and reasonable commutes are two good reasons why the Trump administration should decentralize the federal government. The current practice of locating these agencies within a few miles of the White House and Congress reflects a bygone era before telephones, email, and video conferences. Most federal employees rarely interact with members of Congress and the White House and can do their jobs more efficiently and economically in more affordable and less congested areas of the country.
There’s also the issue of fairness.
DC, Maryland, and Virginia receive huge tax revenues from federal employees’ salaries and retirement checks. They also benefit from large federal expenditures like the DC Metro, DC airports, free federal museums, etc. Since technological advances have made it unnecessary for these agencies to be located near our nation’s capital, it is time to share the wealth of federal agencies by spreading them across the United States. There is no reason why this government spending and jobs should continue to be concentrated in one part of the country.
Many of these moves would make these agencies more effective and accountable to the American people.
For example, relocating the Agriculture Department headquarters to a farming state would move the agency closer to the Americans it was created to serve. Agriculture employees could interact with farmers and ranchers on a daily basis. The Agriculture Department could also hire many employees who actually live on farms and ranches.
The same would be true for moving the headquarters of the Transportation Department to Detroit or the Interior Department to Utah or Wyoming. Other possibilities: move the Department of Health and Human Services to North Carolina’s Research Triangle, move the FBI headquarters to the Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama, move the Energy Department headquarters to the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and move the Environmental Protection Agency headquarters to Florida. Large portions of the Pentagon, CIA, State Department, Department of Homeland Security, IRS, and other agencies should also be moved to locations across the U.S.
There are two other crucial reasons for decentralizing U.S. government agencies away from the Washington, DC area.
The most important is security. Given growing threats from nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons; drones; and violent demonstrations by radical groups, keeping large numbers of federal agencies and employees in the Washington, DC, area is a significant and avoidable threat to national security and the continuity of government. Spreading federal agencies across the United States would make it harder for a U.S. adversary to deal a devastating blow to the federal government with a single attack.
Decentralizing federal agencies also would help depoliticize them and fight the so-called “deep state.” The resistance by federal employees to the president’s constitutional authority as the head of the federal government is driven by a self-serving Washington, DC, culture consisting of entrenched employees, former employees, federal contractors, think tanks, and the mainstream media. Many of these employees do little work and are extremely hard to fire. Even worse, nearly 90% of federal government office space in Washington is vacant because most federal workers began working from home during the COVID pandemic and never returned to their offices.
Moving federal agencies out of the corrupting influence of the DC bubble would weaken deep state resistance to presidential control of federal agencies. It would also attract new employees from other parts of the country who are more interested in working hard to serve their country.
An added bonus of moving federal agencies to other areas of the U.S. is that many career employees in the DC area will quit instead of moving to new offices in the heartland.
Such relocations can thus be a way to get past the red tape of downsizing these agencies and firing problem personnel. This was proven in 2019 when President Trump moved the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to Grand Junction, Colorado. Of 328 BLM employees given relocation orders, only 41 agreed to move. Unfortunately, President Biden reversed this move in 2021.
Decentralizing the federal government should be a top priority for Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Despite the many good reasons for doing this, DC’s entrenched bureaucrats and interest groups will fight hard to stop this initiative. Only a disrupter administration like the second Trump presidency can pull this off.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 20:20 - Haitian Migrants Flee Springfield, Ohio Ahead Of Trump Inauguration
Haitian Migrants Flee Springfield, Ohio Ahead Of Trump Inauguration
Is an open border reckoning at hand? Migrants brought to the US under shady temporary legal status changes made by the Biden Administration seem to think so. In June of this year Biden granted special immigration benefits to at least 300,000 Haitians (out of 500,000 already allowed into the US) brought into the country in 2022, allowing them to remain until early 2026. The plan included minimal background checks and was originally touted by Biden as a way to “slow illegal border encounters”.
Biden offered migrants from Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela easy access to work visa programs and special benefits so that the same people wouldn’t cross into the US illegally. In other words, Biden was desperate to reduce embarrassing border crossing numbers so he paid vast sums of money to transport and house hundreds of thousands of migrants under a veil of legality.
The administration, however, did not renew legal status protections in 2024 for a large percentage of these immigrants and they will be required to leave the US in the near term. A host of NGOs advise migrants on how to use legal loopholes to stay within the country for extended periods of time, usually dragging out the clock until they can apply for permanent residency. None of this, however, will matter much in the wake of Donald Trump’s mass deportation plans.
In response to the impending cleanup of Biden’s immigration mess, Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio are reportedly fleeing the area and relocating to sanctuary cities in an attempt to avoid deportation. The president of the Haitian Support Center in Springfield says some families have left the city for locations like Dayton and Columbus because of uncertainty about the changes in government.
“Some of them, they relocate in those areas just to follow or observe the unfolding of the situation with the expectation that they can come back if everything gets back to normal,” said Viles Dorsainvil, Haitian Support Center president.
“We still have some kind of anxiety going on, of fear just because people do not know what will be happening with the upcoming the next administration…”
The media has attempted to portray deportation policies as a threat to all immigrants, even those that have been in the US for many years following the legal citizenship process.
Haitian illegal aliens are fleeing Springfield Ohio as 47 prepares for mass deportations
pic.twitter.com/mJPSFZKM9x— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) November 25, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
But for every story of a migrant that has actually added something of value to their new community, there are thousands of migrants feeding off government subsidies. Democrats often claim that illegals and migrants under TPS don’t receive government benefits. This is false.
The majority of Haitian migrants under the Biden program are eligible for cash assistance, medical assistance, employment preparation, job placement, English language training, and other services offered through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).
They may also be eligible for federal “mainstream” (non-ORR funded) benefits, such as cash assistance through Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), health insurance through Medicaid, and food assistance through Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
This is on top of cash aid provided to Haitians by pro-immigration NGOs.
Over 20,000 Haitian migrants were shipped to Springfield, Ohio; the city originally had a population of only 60,000. That’s a 33% increase in total population made up of a third world demographic, all in the span of a couple years. This was done subversively without any warning or input from native residents. The situation became national news after locals reported increasing disappearances of pets and park wildlife after the arrival of the migrants, which Donald Trump commented on during the second presidential debate.
The ability of migrants living in the US under tenuous circumstances to fight deportation is limited. Democrats and sanctuary city officials suggest they can tie up the DHS and ICE for months or years on each case, exhausting the Trump Administration with legal battles. This is not reality.
Trump can indeed place a moratorium on asylum requests and revoke Temporary Protection Status (TPS) applications. He did this during his first term and he can do it again. Legal battles are harder to fight when the person in question is booted out of the country where the courts reside. There is nothing that can stop deportations, including ambiguous sanctuary city protections. One way or another, most migrants in the US illegally and those under Biden’s TPS policy will be sent back to where they came from.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 19:45 - Florida Authorities Recover 37 Gold Coins Stolen From 1715 Fleet Shipwrecks
Florida Authorities Recover 37 Gold Coins Stolen From 1715 Fleet Shipwrecks
Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,
Florida authorities have recovered 37 gold coins worth more than $1 million that were stolen from the 1715 Fleet shipwrecks, the state’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) said on Nov. 26.
The FWC said the gold coin recovery marked “a major milestone” in a years-long investigation into the theft and illegal trafficking of historical artifacts.
The gold coins were initially found by contracted salvage operators for the 1715 Fleet—comprising Spanish ships that sank in a hurricane off Florida’s coast in 1715—off Florida’s Treasure Coast in 2015.
There were 101 gold coins found from the wreckages, but only 51 of them were reported and adjudicated, while the remaining gold coins were not disclosed and were later stolen, the FWC said in a statement.
FWC investigators launched a probe with the FBI after new evidence came to light in June this year, leading to the arrest of Eric Schmitt, whose family had been contracted to salvage the centuries-old fleet.
Schmitt was connected to the illegal sale of stolen gold coins between 2023 and 2024, the FWC stated.
During the probe, investigators carried out multiple search warrants and recovered coins from private residences, safe deposit boxes, and auctions. Five coins were retrieved from an auctioneer living in Florida, who had purchased them from Schmitt, the FWC stated.
Investigators also used advanced digital forensics to identify metadata and geolocation data, which linked Schmitt to a photo of the stolen coins taken at the Schmitt family condominium in Fort Pierce.
The FWC said that Schmitt also took three of the stolen gold coins and placed them on the ocean floor in 2016, which were subsequently found by new investors of the 1715 Fleet.
“This case underscores the importance of safeguarding Florida’s rich cultural heritage and holding accountable those who seek to profit from its exploitation,” FWC investigator Camille Soverel said in a statement.
Authorities said the recovered artifacts will be returned to their rightful custodians, though the probe is still ongoing to locate 13 remaining stolen gold coins and hold those involved in the illegal sale accountable.
The custodian and salvaging company of the 1715 Fleet, Queen Jewels LLC, said it was “shocked and disappointed” by the theft and has been working with law enforcement and the state in the case.
“We take our responsibilities as custodian very seriously and will always seek to enforce the laws governing these wrecks,” the company said in a statement.
“The recovered coins are now going through the proper process for legal adjudication.”
The FWC said it partnered with the 19th and Ninth Judicial Circuits to bring charges against Schmitt for dealing in stolen property.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 19:10 - Hezbollah Believes It Lost Up To 4000 Fighters Killed, Far Surpassing 2006 War
Hezbollah Believes It Lost Up To 4000 Fighters Killed, Far Surpassing 2006 War
Reuters has cited Hezbollah and Lebanese sources to say that Hezbollah believes the number of its fighters killed by Israel over the last year of fighting could be as high as 4,000.
A fragile ceasefire has held for the last three days, and the Shia group backed by Iran has been burying its dead this week. Ground fighting has been most intense in the last two months before the ceasefire was agreed to.
“The sources’ estimate far outstrips tallies published by the group, but skews close to Israel’s announced figure and could provide a window into the extent to which Israel was able to damage the powerful Iranian proxy, which saw its leadership largely decapitated and its rocket arsenal significantly depleted, according to authorities,” Reuters says.
AFP/Getty Images According to more, based on a source cited by Reuters, “the Iran-backed group may have lost up to 4,000 people — well over 10 times the number killed in its monthlong 2006 war with Israel.”
Tens of thousands of Lebanese have been moving back into their southern villages and towns, some of which are in rubble and ruins. Bodies are still being searched for under the rubble.
The Lebanese army is also moving into southern districts in coordination with UN peacekeeping authorities, as part of the truce deal to monitor for potential ceasefire violations.
“The concerned military units are moving from several areas to the South Litani Sector, where they will be stationed in the locations designated for them,” the Lebanese military said in its first statement following the truce going into effect.
Meanwhile, amid a war-weary and devastated Lebanese population, Hezbollah might be more unpopular then ever. The economy was already in tatters even long before Oct.7, 2023.
“Hezbollah’s claim of victory holds little weight outside its core constituency,” Imad Salamey, a Middle Eastern politics professor and analyst at the Lebanese American University, has explained.
“The war was not widely popular among the Lebanese people, many of whom are more focused on the devastating economic losses inflicted during the conflict,” he added.
Despite some positive indicators that the ceasefire will hold, including the cessation of daily rocket fire onto northern Israel, the conflict might not be over
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 18:35 - Divide & Conquer: Political Riptides Threaten To Overwhelm The Nation
Divide & Conquer: Political Riptides Threaten To Overwhelm The Nation
Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must–at that moment–become the center of the universe.”
– Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize Speech
Once again we find ourselves approaching that time of year when, as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln proclaimed, we’re supposed to give thanks as a nation and as individuals for our safety and our freedoms.
But how do you give thanks for freedoms that are constantly being eroded?
How do you express gratitude for one’s safety when the perils posed by the American police state grow more treacherous by the day?
How do you come together as a nation in thanksgiving when the powers-that-be continue to polarize and divide us into warring factions?
You can see this struggle—to reconcile the hope for a better, freer, more just world with the soul-sucking reality of a world in which greed, meanness and war continue to triumph—in John Lennon’s two songs, “Imagine” (which exhorted us to “Imagine all the people livin’ life in peace”) and “Happy Xmas (War Is Over)” (which was part of a major anti-war campaign, which were released within months of each other in 1971.
Lennon—a musical genius, anti-war activist, and a high-profile example of the lengths to which the Deep State will go to persecute those who dare to challenge its authority—made clear that the only way to achieve an end to hunger, violence, war, and tyranny is to want it badly enough and work towards it.
All these years later, we still don’t seem to want those things badly enough.
Peace remains out of reach. Activists and whistleblowers continue to be prosecuted for challenging the government’s authority. Militarism is on the rise, all the while the governmental war machine continues to wreak havoc on innocent lives.
For those of us who joined with Lennon to imagine a world of peace, it’s getting harder to reconcile that dream with the reality of the American police state.
Those who do dare to speak up about government corruption are labeled dissidents, troublemakers, terrorists, lunatics, or mentally ill and tagged for surveillance, censorship or involuntary detention.
And then there are those who remain silent while the world falls apart.
By doing nothing, the onlookers become as guilty as the perpetrator.
It works the same whether you’re talking about kids watching bullies torment a fellow student on a playground, passersby watching someone dying on a sidewalk, or citizens remaining silent in the face of government atrocities.
There’s a term for this phenomenon where people stand by, watch and do nothing—even when there is no risk to their safety—while some horrific act takes place: it’s called the bystander effect.
Historically, this bystander syndrome in which people remain silent and disengaged—mere onlookers—in the face of abject horrors and injustice has resulted in whole populations being conditioned to tolerate unspoken cruelty toward their fellow human beings: the crucifixion and slaughter of innocents by the Romans, the torture of the Inquisition, the atrocities of the Nazis, the butchery of the Fascists, the bloodshed by the Communists, and the cold-blooded war machines run by the military industrial complex.
Psychological researchers John Darley and Bibb Latane mounted a series of experiments to discover why people respond with apathy or indifference instead of intervening.
According to Darley and Latane, there are two critical factors that contribute to this moral lassitude. First, there’s the problem of pluralistic ignorance in which individuals in a group look to others to determine how to respond. Second, there’s the problem of “diffusion of responsibility,” which is compounded by pluralistic ignorance. Basically, this means that no one acts to intervene or help because each person is waiting for someone else to do so.
Their findings underscore the fact that evil prevails when good people do nothing.
We see it all the time: when people are vocal about politics but silent in the face of human suffering and injustice, tyranny triumphs.
For instance, psychologist Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment studied the impact of perceived power and authority on middleclass students who were assigned to act as prisoners and prison guards. The experiment revealed that power does indeed corrupt (the appointed guards became increasingly abusive), and those who were relegated to being prisoners acted increasingly “submissive and depersonalized, taking the abuse and saying little in protest.”
This is how imperial presidents preside over police states.
So, what can we do? Be modern-day Good Samaritans and do your part to push back against the darkness. Recognize injustice. Don’t turn away from suffering. Refuse to remain silent. Take a stand. Speak up. Speak out.
“If you think there is even a possibility that someone needs help, act on it,” advises Zimbardo. “You may save a life. You are the modern version of the Good Samaritan that makes the world a better place for all of us.”
This is what Zimbardo refers to as “the power of one.” All it takes is one person breaking away from the fold to change the dynamics of a situation.
Here’s what I suggest: this holiday season, do yourselves a favor and turn off the talking heads, shut down the screen devices, tune out the politicians, take a deep breath, then do something to pay your blessings forward.
Find something to be thankful for about the things and people in your community for which you might have the least tolerance or appreciation. Instead of just rattling off a list of things you’re thankful for that sound good, dig a little deeper and acknowledge the good in those you may have underappreciated or feared.
When it comes time to giving thanks for your good fortune, put your gratitude into action: pay your blessings forward with deeds that spread a little kindness, lighten someone’s burden, and brighten some dark corner.
Engage in acts of kindness. Smile more. Fight less. Build bridges. Refuse to let toxic politics define your relationships. Focus on the things that unite instead of that which divides.
Do your part to push back against the meanness of our culture with conscious compassion and humanity. Moods are contagious, the good and the bad. They can be passed from person to person. So can the actions associated with those moods, the good and the bad.
Acts of benevolence, no matter how inconsequential they might seem, can spark a movement.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, all it takes is one person to start a chain reaction.
For instance, a few years ago in Florida, a family of six—four adults and two young boys—were swept out to sea by a powerful rip current in Panama City Beach. There was no lifeguard on duty. The police were standing by, waiting for a rescue boat. And the few people who had tried to help ended up stranded, as well.
Those on shore grouped together and formed a human chain. What started with five volunteers grew to 15, then 80 people, some of whom couldn’t swim.
One by one, they linked hands and stretched as far as their chain would go. The strongest of the volunteers swam out beyond the chain and began passing the stranded victims of the rip current down the chain.
One by one, they rescued those in trouble and pulled each other in.
There’s a moral here for what needs to happen in this country if we only can band together and prevail against the riptides that threaten to overwhelm us.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 18:00 - Zelenskyy Offers To End 'Hot Phase' Of War In Exchange For NATO Membership
Zelenskyy Offers To End ‘Hot Phase’ Of War In Exchange For NATO Membership
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he’s willing to end the “hot phase of the war” with Russia – including ceding captured territory – in exchange for NATO membership that includes Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaks to Sky’s Stuart Ramsay “If we want to stop the hot phase of the war, we need to take under the Nato umbrella the territory of Ukraine that we have under our control,” he told Sky News, adding “We need to do it fast. And then, on the occupied territory of Ukraine, Ukraine can get them back in a diplomatic way.“
Zelenskyy said that a ceasefire was needed to “guarantee that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin will not come back” to take more Ukrainian territory,” or that “he [Putin] will come back.”
In short, to end the war, Zelenskyy wants the thing that started the war.
Ukrainian president @ZelenskyyUa told @ramsaysky NATO membership would have to be offered to unoccupied parts of the country to end the “hot phase of the war”, as long as the NATO invitation itself recognises Ukraine’s internationally recognised borders.https://t.co/yqZZ8aFrwm pic.twitter.com/NuburSX6hw
— Sky News (@SkyNews) November 29, 2024
The comments are a drastic departure from previous statements – as Zelenskyy has long-asserted that Ukraine’s sovereignty is non-negotiable, including over Crimea.
Putting things in recent perspective, Zelenskyy’s comments come as NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte admitted to Fox News that Ukraine is not in a strong enough position to negotiate an end to the war, explaining that there is not enough battlefield leverage to “prevent the Russians from getting what they want.”
“I think that’s crucial that we have a good deal because the whole world will be watching what type of deal will be struck between Russia and Ukraine when it comes to it,” Rutte said.
“We have to make sure that Ukraine is in a position of more strength than they are at the moment,” Rutte continued, “so that a deal can be struck which is favorable not to the Russians — and therefore to China, North Korea and Iran — because they all will be watching.”
It also comes amid pressure from the Biden administration to lower the draft age in Ukraine to 18 so it has enough troops to continue fighting Russia, aka more meat for the grinder.
Former British PM Boris Johnson – who allegedly scuttled early peace talks in Turkey that might have ended the Ukraine war – has called for NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, again.
Johnson also asserted that if Russia gets the upper hand in the conflict then Britain may deploy it’s forces regardless in order to “defend Europe.” Ukraine’s eastern defenses are currently being overrun by ongoing Russian attrition tactics. This reality in combination with Trump’s avalanche election win seems to have triggered establishment ghouls into a frenzy of escalation with Joe Biden giving the greenlight on long range missile strikes coordinated directly by NATO forces.
Watch the entire interview below:
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 17:41 - India's GDP Growth Slows To Two-Year Low
India’s GDP Growth Slows To Two-Year Low
Two weeks ago, when looking at the recent sharp drop in Indian stocks and the concurrent slide in earnings expectations, we asked whether the Indian stock bubble – one of the most resilient of the past decade – had finally burst.
Today we got another confirmation that the answer appears to be yes, when we learned that India’s economy grew at its slowest pace in almost two years, dampening the outlook for the full year and putting pressure on the central bank to cut interest rates.
GDP grew 5.4% in the three months to September from a year earlier, the Statistics Ministry said in a statement on Friday. That was the worst reading since the fourth quarter of 2022 and lower than the central bank’s projection of 7% for the period. It is also well below the roughly 10% growth pace observed in the pre-covid era.
The data will prompt economists to further downgrade their GDP growth forecasts for the year through March 2025. Investment banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc. are already predicting growth as low as 6.4%.
The figures will also put pressure on the Reserve Bank of India, which has been predicting growth of 7.2% for the full year, to cut interest rates. The next monetary policy decision is scheduled for Dec. 6. The yield on India’s 10-year bond fell 5 basis points to 6.76% after the GDP release. The rupee was steady, having closed before the data.
“While we expect the RBI to keep the policy rate unchanged at its meeting next week, the possibility of a move in the February policy for a rate cut has increased,” said Sakshi Gupta, an economist at HDFC Bank Ltd.
The slump in last quarter’s growth was largely due to weaker manufacturing and electricity and gas production, while mining contracted.
Slumping company profits, falling wages and inflation have hurt the economy’s breakneck speed in recent months. The central bank has kept rates unchanged for almost two years now, with Governor Shaktikanta Das recently reiterating that a rate cut at this stage would be “very risky” given inflation risks.
Prominent ministers in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, including the finance minister, have recently stated that high borrowing costs are hurting the economy. Weak growth will make it difficult for India to cash in on its demographic dividend. Joblessness, especially among young people, emerged as a key concern for voters in India’s election this year, contributing to Modi’s worse-than-expected showing at the polls.
Despite the rapid slowdown in growth, India’s economy continues to grow notably faster than that of India, which is officially expected to grow by 5% but unofficially is stagnant at best if not contracting.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 17:30 - The "Let It Rip" Canard: Reflections On Jay Bhattacharya
The “Let It Rip” Canard: Reflections On Jay Bhattacharya
Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,
Early in the Covid period, the skeptics of government closures and universal quarantines were denounced as favoring a policy of “let it rip.” The phrase has been in use since the 19th century. It is apparently drawn from experience with steamships. When you released power to its maximum extent, it made a ripping sound.
The implication is that when you let it rip, you let go of all controls and just wait to see what happens.
Think about the application to infectious disease, at least in the context of the debate over lockdowns. The theory is that if you don’t force people to stay home, force businesses to close, and force schools and churches to shut down, people will mindlessly move about here and there and cause infection to spread wildly. No one will have a clue about what to do about it.
The implication is that people are unbearably stupid, lack all personal incentive to protect themselves, and somehow cannot but be as reckless as possible.
There will be no strategies, no methods of mitigation, no therapeutics, no limits on the spread of incurable sickness.
We need geniuses like Anthony Fauci to give us police-enforced guidance in order to stay safe from the consequences of our own choices. We don’t have brains. We don’t have habits born of experience. We don’t have any social mechanisms embedded in our traditions. We don’t have anything.
We are worse than an anthill, which at least has a rules-based order born of instinct. In this view, human behavior is purely randomized and rote, moving about here and there, fully unable to process information about guidance, lacking completely in any capacity to be careful, wise, or otherwise govern ourselves.
This is the essence of the push for lockdowns. Anything less than totalitarian control of the human population amounts to utter chaos in which the virus rules us all whereas the geniuses at the controls of government power know all things.
This is the essential worldview of all those who said that lockdown opponents merely want to let the virus rip.
This was of course the core criticism of the Great Barrington Declaration of which NIH Director-nominee Jay Bhattacharya was the main author. It advocated no such thing as “let it rip.” Instead, it called for public health to recognize the existence of human intelligence and consider the costs of overriding it with police-state edicts that ruin businesses and lives. It came out six months after lockdowns began and already revealed themselves to be devastating. There should not have been anything even slightly controversial about the statement.
And yet truly there was something about those times that tempted intellectuals toward grave extremes of utopian thinking. Remember the “Zero Covid” movement? Talk about insane.
I just read an outrageous paper in Frontiers of Health (date March 2021!) that claimed to have the magical solution to Covid. The plan would defeat the disease in “one day” by ordering simultaneous universal testing, forcing all positive tests to isolate, and monitoring all public spaces with concentration camp guards. The authors proposed this seriously, forgetting that a respiratory virus with a zoonotic reservoir cares nothing for such antics. To have signed one’s name to such a suggestion should confine one to a lifetime of ill repute as an intellectual.
There is also the slight problem of human rights and freedom. But, hey, anyone who yammered on about those topics was then accused of being an advocate of “let it rip.”
The truth is that we do have intelligence and brains. Older people have always known to avoid large crowds in flu season. Pick up any geriatric magazine and you can discover that this is true. Even our habits of the season reflect that. Intergenerational family units tend to stay indoors as we enter winter months and get out and about in the spring when threats of infectious disease die down. “Focused protection” is embedded in the habits of the calendar year.
We are also capable of reading data on risk demographics. We knew from February 2020 that Covid posed a medically significant risk mainly to the aged and infirm. There was never a serious risk associated with beach parties or schooling. We knew this at least intuitively, and vast numbers of people also knew to disregard the crazy fear-mongering from the top that was designed to prepare the population for the shot.
Society knew better than its managers. It is this way in every sector of life in a world in which society is trusted as the primary manager of itself.
It’s true in economics. Now that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are pushing for radical deregulation of all things, the same critique is being offered. They merely advocate that enterprise “let it rip.” It’s the new name for laissez-faire, another smear term from the 19th century.
But in the same sense that people have the intelligence to judge disease risk, society generates systems and institutions that put limits and guardrails up for enterprise too. The existence of rivalrous competition with easy entry and exit keeps prices, profits, and costs toward an equilibrium. Producer accountability is instilled with user ratings, reputation, and strict liability (unless you are a vaccine maker enjoying full indemnification).
People forget that the best institutions assuring quality and safety are not government agencies but private services like Underwriters Laboratory, which has been around since the 19th century, long before the federal government had a single agency regulating even food quality. Remove the regulations, abolish the agencies, and competent and well-run private institutions would appear in every area, the same as professional credentialing now.
Trusting people to manage infectious disease based on realistic risk assessments is no different from trusting property owners, workers, prices, and markets to work out the best possible solutions to the problem of scarcity in the material world. It doesn’t mean full throttle come what may any more than not locking down means zero control over our health.
In other words, this whole phrase has been deployed against the idea of freedom itself. In fact, the proponents of lockdowns were not opposed to smearing that word too, spelling it as freedumb.
Early on in the pandemic response, I was interviewed in Germany and the person asked what the best rhetorical strategy would be to push for a reopening. I suggested they campaign for freedom. The response: that is not possible because the word itself has been discredited. My response: if freedom is discredited, we have no cause of hope at all.
The legacy of Jay Bhattarcharya’s actions during Covid – joining what felt like a half-dozen of us immediate critics of these awful policies – is not only his attention to science and facts; it is also a reverence for the idea of freedom itself, which really means to trust that society can manage itself with the best-possible outcomes apart from the dictates of pretentious and powerful people at the top.
In a beautiful irony, Jay now inherits the position of the man who called him a “fringe epidemiologist” and called for the censors to do a “quick and devastating takedown” of his work. It’s been a very long journey lasting nearly five years, but here we are, the man who led the opposition to the worst-imaginable public health policies now in a position to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again.
Savor this moment: it’s a rare one when justice prevails. As for accountability and the truth about what happened in those dark days, there is a good phrase for what should happen to the information flows that should now happen: let it rip.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 17:00 - Looming Trump Tariffs Spark Wave Of Freight Frontloading From China
Looming Trump Tariffs Spark Wave Of Freight Frontloading From China
Anticipating that President-elect Donald Trump will fulfill his promise of a 25% tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on imports from China, importers are frontloading freight before the tariff wall takes effect in less than two months.
Bloomberg reports that international cargo flights out of the world’s second-largest economy are ramping up to new records in the weeks after the presidential election.
According to the Ministry of Transport data, there were 3,485 international cargo flights in or out of China last week, the most since March 2023—or about the time when China reopened its economy after a few years of lockdowns. Last week was the third consecutive week with more than 3,400 flights.
Souce: Bloomberg “The threatened tariffs on Canada and Mexico will motivate US importers to frontload imports and accumulate inventories, regardless of whether the tariffs are implemented,” Barclays analyst Pooja Sriram wrote in a note to clients earlier this week.
Sriram said, “The 25% tariffs could intensify this pull-forward effect, leading to an even stronger surge in imports in late 2024 and early 2025, thereby widening the trade deficit.”
Several Chinese manufacturers, including Shenzhen Lingke Technology, a lighting products manufacturer, told Nikkei Asia that major US retailers have already increased orders.
“The thinking is that American clients want to lock in as many profits as possible before a new round of tariffs kick in,” Wu Zhiqiang, CEO of Shenzhen Lingke, told the media outlet.
Nikkei reported, “Microsoft, HP and Dell are scrambling to obtain as many electronic parts as they can before January.”
“We think shipment could be front-loaded, boosting exports in the first half of 2025 before dampening them in the second half,” other Barclays analysts wrote in a note. Analysts at the bank expect a 30% tariff increase from the U.S. on Chinese goods next year, which would cap China’s economic growth in 2025 to about 4%.
Mike Beckham, CEO of Simple Modern, which produces drinkware and other lifestyle production in Oklahoma, although it relies on components from China, warned there is a lot of tarrif “uncertainty right now.”
“Some companies are attempting to ship as much as they can right now, but it has not been a major driver of strategy for the companies I am close with,” Beckham said.
China’s export boom bodes well for logistics firms, such as freight forwarders and carriers, in the short term, as the panic to pull forward as much product as possible before tariffs go into effect early next year.
A report from Judah Levine, head of research at Freightos, noted that air cargo prices out of China “have still not spiked and carriers report being busy but not overwhelmed even as December approaches,” adding, “Capacity additions to these lanes and shippers who adjusted and planned ahead may prove to be enough to prevent extreme rate climbs and congestion through the end of the year.”
Trump announced earlier this week he intends to levy a 25% tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on imports from China. Tariffs on Mexico and Canada would remain in place until the flow of “drugs, in particular fentanyl, and all illegal aliens stop,” while tariffs on China would remain in place “until such time as [the drugs that are pouring into our country] stop.” He also stated that on January 20, he would “sign all necessary documents” to implement the tariffs on Mexico and Canada as one of his “many first Executive Orders.”
Overall, the tariff announcement is reminiscent of the first Trump administration, when such tariffs were announced as a negotiating tactic, rather than the more systematic tariff policies (e.g., the 10-20% “universal baseline tariff”) Trump frequently discussed during the campaign.
Deutsche Bank’s chief FX strategist, George Saravelos, wrote a note late this week outlining the ten biggest takeaways his desk had about the incoming Trump tariffs.
Saravelos pointed out the countries that would be most affected by tariffs, including Mexico, Vietnam, and Canada.
The great pull-forward of freight to hedge against Trump tariffs is well underway—reminiscent of 2018. The only problem is that freight demand will likely slide once frontloading is over.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 16:30 - Syrian Jihadists Mount New Assault On Aleppo After Surprise Advance
Syrian Jihadists Mount New Assault On Aleppo After Surprise Advance
Authored by Jaston Ditz via AntiWar.com,
The Syrian proxy war never really ended, but it certainly had quieted down for a time, with various factions confined to various areas, and the Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seeming stuck in Idlib Province. Today the war is flaring up again in a big way.
HTS forces have pushed eastward out of Idlib into the western part of Aleppo Province and toward Aleppo itself, seizing several towns along the way. It is being reported that around 182 people have been killed Thursday alone in the fighting on the ground in the area. That includes 102 HTS fighters and 80 fighters including both Syrian troops and their allies.
Via Middle East Eye The battles are still ongoing, and the toll continues to increase all the time. The Syrian military seems to be seeing substantial backing from Russian air assets in the area. The HTS is also reported using Ukrainian drones against the Syrian forces. It has been reported for months that Ukraine has offered “drones for fighters” to HTS, but this would mark the first time such drones are being used in a big way in combat.
On top of those killed in the ongoing fighting, the Syrian and Russian air forces have caused substantial civilian casualties. 19 civilians were killed in attacks in and around al-Atareb and Darat Izza, and at least 26 others were wounded. Both of those cities are about 25 km from Aleppo itself, the largest city in Syria, underscoring how quickly the HTS has advanced.
A number of other towns and villages reported airstrikes in the area. Al-Nayrab is by far the closest town to Aleppo to have reported strikes, saying they were hit twice. They are only about 10 km from Aleppo, making them virtually a suburb of the major city.
HTS formed in early 2017 as a merger of several Islamist militant groups, centering initially around fighting Jabhat al-Nusra but ultimately merging with them as well. Jabhat al-Nusra was effectively the Syrian wing of al-Qaeda, though they broke with them publicly in 2016. Despite that, HTS maintains much of the underlying rhetoric of al-Qaeda.
Publicly, HTS and their leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani has tried to disavow al-Qaeda and ISIS and has courted favor with the US. He has styled the civilian body in HTS-dominated Idlib the Syrian Salvation Government.
It has long been suspected that this rebranding was more about trying to turn Syrian Sunni Islamist factions into a more palatable partner for Western involvement in the region than any major ideological differences with the international jihadists.
⚡️Al Nusra terrorists on the outskirts of Aleppo pic.twitter.com/cS6jbdRl7g
— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) November 29, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The West has a history of backing some of the more local Sunni Islamist groups in the Syrian War. Indeed, the HTS ties with Ukraine’s government underscores that many see them as a practical partner in their respective regional wars.
This could be a growing concern for the Syrian government, as what was once a contained problem in the Idlib Province looks to explode outward starting many of the same fights all over again.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 16:00 - Trump Taps Chris Rufo To Help De-Wokify Ivy Leagues Receiving Federal Funding
Trump Taps Chris Rufo To Help De-Wokify Ivy Leagues Receiving Federal Funding
President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is ramping up efforts to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in higher education. In a significant move, key conservative figure Christopher Rufo has been invited to present a proposal to slash federal funding for universities that maintain such programs.
Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a prominent critic of DEI efforts, plans to outline how federal funds could be conditioned on the removal of these programs. The proposal aims to eliminate perceived discrimination in university practices, arguing that DEI programs violate the Civil Rights Act by favoring certain racial, ethnic, or gender groups.
“If you don’t stop discriminating and violating the law, you will no longer be qualified for federal funding,” Rufo emphasized. He anticipates that institutions, particularly Ivy League universities that receive billions annually in federal research funding, would quickly comply.
Rufo’s presentation is part of a broader cultural and political strategy supported by Trump’s incoming administration. Russ Vought, tasked with spearheading government efficiency efforts, is hosting Rufo at Mar-a-Lago to discuss the proposal. Notably, Vice President-elect JD Vance has voiced strong support, citing the need to dismantle DEI in education and proposing significant taxation on university endowments.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Vance views Rufo as “a leading voice in the movement to restore merit and excellence” to universities, adding that Vance believes Rufo “recognizes schools and universities exist to equip American students to face tomorrow’s challenges, not to indoctrinate them with the fringe beliefs of the far left.”
Universities have said they are legally and ethically responding to the changing demographics of the nation. Photo: Scott Eisen/Getty Images This effort mirrors Trump’s earlier actions during his presidency, including banning federal race and gender bias training programs—a measure reversed by President Biden.
As the WSJ notes:
From his perch outside Seattle, the 40-year-old documentary filmmaker and writer has become one of the country’s most influential—and effective—culture warriors, waging public fights against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in schools, businesses and government.
Rufo exposed plagiarism in the academic scholarship of Harvard President Claudine Gay and in the writings of Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris. His reports played a role in Gay’s subsequent resignation in January of this year and damaged Harris’s campaign. He has also taken aim at diversity practices in large companies, most recently at Boeing.
…
Rufo said he is meeting with members of the Trump administration next month. He has said he thinks colleges and universities have been taken over by the left, and he wants to recapture them by cutting federal money to schools that continue to engage in DEI practices. He also wants to excise race-based affirmative action from any institution with which the federal government does business.
Impact on Universities
The proposed restrictions could have profound financial implications for universities reliant on federal grants and student aid. For example, Harvard University received $686 million in federal research funding in the last academic year. Institutions like Harvard, already under scrutiny for race-based admissions policies, have begun scaling back DEI efforts.
Critics of these programs, including investor Bill Ackman, have linked them to broader cultural issues, such as antisemitism and the suppression of free speech on campuses. Protests and demonstrations have intensified these debates, particularly following the recent conflict in Gaza.
“I hope the president turns the screws on DEI in the Ivy Leagues,” Rufo told Bloomberg. “This would put conditions on federal funding, especially the Ivy Leagues, if they practice discrimination regarding DEI.”
While universities are a great start, Rufo says the incoming Trump administration envisions a broader crackdown, including denying federal contracts to corporations that continue DEI efforts. This aligns with growing opposition from corporate leaders like Elon Musk, who recently praised Walmart’s decision to scale back diversity initiatives.
“Now the fight returns to the White House, the center of power for the country as a whole,” Rufo said.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 15:30 - Playing Nuclear Chicken
Playing Nuclear Chicken
Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,
We continue to climb steadily up the World War III escalation ladder.
Last week, Biden foolishly gave Ukraine the green light to strike deep into Russian territory using U.S. missiles.
Now Russia has responded, as Putin promised they would.
On November 21st Russia launched a new hypersonic missile known as the Oreshnik. It is a unique weapon designed to send a clear message.
The Oreshnik utilizes a system similar to MIRV (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) technology common on nuclear ICBMs.
This new missile has 6 warheads which each have 6 submunitions. That’s 36 projectiles per missile in total.
Here is a still shot of one of the sets of 6 submunitions just before reaching its target.
It is important to note that the projectiles are not glowing due to rocket engines firing. The warheads separated from the booster engine at a much higher altitude and are now gliding.
The submunitions are glowing due to the plasma bubble created by friction against the dense atmosphere at speeds of around Mach 10 (7,600 mph). That’s 2.1 miles per second.
At such speeds, even if the Oreshnik’s submunitions lack significant explosive payloads, the kinetic energy alone would make for an effective strike asset. This is similar to the sci-fi weapon concept colloquially known as “rods from God”, in which inert tungsten rods are flung down from orbit.
The U.S. and NATO have no defense against the Oreshnik. Targeting 36 independent projectiles traveling at 7,600 mph is a fool’s errand. Striking the missile before the warheads separate is also unlikely, as it has a variable-speed solid rocket engine which makes its trajectory unpredictable.
This new missile adds to Russia’s impressive hypersonic arsenal:
- Kinzhal – Mach 10 air-launched ballistic missile
- Zircon – Mach 9 ship-launched cruise missile
- Iskander – Mach 7 ground-launched ballistic missile
- R-37M – Mach 6 air-to-air missile
Each of these weapons is fully operational, in full production, and has been used successfully during the Ukraine war. To date, these weapons have only been used with conventional explosives. But the first three can also be armed with nuclear warheads.
NATO air defenses have not found much if any, success against Russian hypersonics. And with new options such as the Oreshnik, which would likely target air defenses and ballistic missile sites, the balance in conventional weaponry in Ukraine has moved further in Russia’s favor.
Meanwhile, the U.S. is struggling to get our first hypersonic conventional missile, the Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW), in service. The U.S. has long worked on hypersonic missiles, but the engineering challenges are extreme. Traveling at speeds of Mach 5+ generates massive amounts of heat and friction.
America’s bloated defense sector has been unable to meet the requirements so far. Hopefully, Trump finds success in revitalizing our military-industrial complex. Otherwise, we will continue to fall behind.
Nuclear Options
As Biden goads Russia, he is implicitly relying on America’s nuclear weapons stockpile as a deterrent. At this point, we cannot match Russia when it comes to conventional missile technology.
So when Biden willingly crosses Russia’s red lines, he is counting on the threat of American nuclear weapons to prevent full-out war. He also appears to be attempting to sabotage President Trump’s promise to end the war in Ukraine.
This is incredibly reckless behavior. One major problem is that Russia has an even larger and more modern nuclear arsenal.
If Moscow or a nuclear power plant is targeted by Ukraine using American missiles, there is a possibility that Russia retaliates with a nuclear strike. We are in essence calling their bluff. And they need to preserve their own defense deterrence posture, or they could look weak.
From there, things could get very ugly very quickly.
In a nuclear war, there are no winners. Biden and his handlers are playing a dangerous game. They are gambling with hundreds of millions of lives.
All of this is simply to drag out another unwinnable conflict. Have we learned nothing from the War on Terror? America’s reign as a lone superpower is over. That’s a reality that needs to sink in so U.S. policy can adapt accordingly.
The sooner the Deep State realizes this, the better off we’ll all be.
The lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis were clear. Lesson One is to avoid escalation. Lesson Two is that if escalation begins, it’s crucial to de-escalate. Failure to abide by these lessons is a straight path to nuclear war.
Russia has signaled that it is ready to begin immediate negotiations with the Trump administration. Trump’s upcoming presidency may be the only thing preventing WW3.
Inauguration Day can’t come fast enough.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 15:05 - Meta Plans $10 Billion Undersea Global Fiber Network In "W" Formation To Avoid Sabotage
Meta Plans $10 Billion Undersea Global Fiber Network In “W” Formation To Avoid Sabotage
A new report from TechCrunch reveals that Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—one of the largest drivers of internet usage globally, accounting for about 10% of all fixed and 22% of mobile traffic—is planning to secure its own undersea fiber-optic cables to “avoid areas of geopolitical tension.” This move comes amid alarming sabotage incidents of undersea cables from the Baltics to the Red Sea region.
Sources familiar with the plans say Meta’s new undersea fiber pipe will begin with a project cost of $2 billion and could rapidly expand to upwards of $10 billion as the project expands in the years ahead.
Sources close to Meta confirmed the project but said it is still in its early stages. Plans have been laid out, but physical assets have not, and they declined to discuss budget. The expectation is that Meta will talk more publicly about it in early 2025, when it will confirm plans for the cable, including intended route, capacity, and some of the reasoning behind building it.-TechCrunch
Ranulf Scarborough, a submarine cable industry analyst, told the tech media outlet that cable ships are in extremely “tight supply” at the moment, adding that many of these vessels are usually booked several years ahead.
Sources explained that the planned 25,000-mile cable project is expected to track from the US East Coast to India via South Africa, then to the US West Coast from India via Australia, essentially making a giant “W” worldwide.
Sources pointed out that the “W” formation allows Meta to avoid “areas of geopolitical tension,” such as areas in Middle Eastern waters where a cable sabotage incident was reported earlier this year (read here) and the most recent sabotage incident in the Baltics (read here).
For years, Meta has been part-owner of 16 existing undersea fiber networks. However, this new cable project would allow the big tech firm to have first dibs on capacity to support expanding traffic across its platforms in the era of AI.
More from TechCrunch, “Sources close to the project tell us that it’s too soon to say whether AI is part of the equation for Meta in this project, describing it as part of the “long tail” of considerations and possibilities, along with whether Meta would open capacity to other users alongside itself.”
Tyler Durden
Fri, 11/29/2024 – 14:40
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
