Blog

CFR President Richard Haass Admits the UniParty is Real

CFR President Richard Haass Admits the UniParty is Real

It used to be—think about it, until recently it didn’t really matter all that much who won an election at the presidential level. Don’t get me wrong, obviously there were differences between the parties. But if I can use a sports metaphor, the differences between Republicans and Democrats, per se, were within the forty-yard lines. Yeah, there’d be differences but actually what Democrats and Republicans had in common was far greater than what they did not.

– Richard Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations (June 1st, 2023)

Besides the “until recently” part, I fully agree with Mr. Haass.

Consider the overlap between Democrats and Republicans. Both support:

  • National Security Agency spying on Americans
  • CIA
  • FBI
  • The military invading countries based on lies and murdering civilians
  • NATO
  • The Federal Reserve
  • State involvement in healthcare
  • State schooling
  • Occupational licensing
  • Taxation (sales and income)
  • Commercial licensing
  • Tariffs
  • Immigration restrictions
  • Agricultural subsidies
  • Increasing military spending
  • State police force 
  • Increasing the Federal Budget
  • The drug war
  • Food stamps
  • Social Security
  • FDA
  • EPA
  • OSHA
  • Capital gains tax
  • Bank bailouts
Getting Money Out of Politics: Abolish the IRS

Getting Money Out of Politics: Abolish the IRS

[I]f you don’t get money out of politics, then yes in the long term it’s hopeless. But we must, we must get money out of politics.

Cenk Uygur, creator of The Young Turks

Progressive Cenk Uygur said these words without realizing the fact that the primary source of money in politics comes from the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service, two institutions he proudly supports.

What he is most likely talking about, are voluntary political donations. In other words, people choosing to give their money to candidates is wrong, but those very same politicians should have the right to coercively fund themselves via the IRS. Unlike Netflix or Amazon, the IRS gets to put people in prison for choosing to disassociate with them.

Recap:

Millions in donor funds = Pure Evil

$6.27 Trillion annually taken by force = Progressive Social Justice

Political democracy means you get a 1 in 10,000,000 vote on who wins an election, and Democrats call this representation. However, when people actually choose to do things that have a direct effect on their lives, Cenk supports the state forcibly stopping them. Mandating by law, that people chip in for things they might oppose (taxation), Cenk strips people of their right of actual representation. By supporting commercial and occupational licensing, Cenk strips them of the right to achieve thier goals in life.

As a wise man once said, Progressivism is simply domestic Imperialism.

Roland Fryer’s Shocking Conclusion

Roland Fryer’s Shocking Conclusion

On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.

– Roland G. Fryer J. An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force. Journal of Political Economy. Forthcoming.

Watch on Odysee

The “Rich Get Richer” Myth

The “Rich Get Richer” Myth

Some 94 percent of Americans who reach “top 1 percent” income status will enjoy it for only a single year. Approximately 99 percent will lose their “top 1 percent” status within a decade.

Now consider the top 400 U.S. income-earners—a far more exclusive club than the top 1 percent. Between 1992 and 2013, 72 percent of the top 400 retained that title for no more than a year. Over 97 percent retained it for no more than a decade.

– Chelsea Follett, High Turnover Among America’s Rich

The Non-Existent Difference Between National Socialism and Democratic Socialism

The Non-Existent Difference Between National Socialism and Democratic Socialism

Summary: National Socialism and Democratic Socialism both advocate institutionalized violence by the state against peaceful people only differing in rhetoric.

The most popular self described Democratic Socialists in America today are Senator Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Although Americans account for roughly 5% of the global population, these candidates focus primarily on American well-being at the expense of the other 95% of human beings.

Is it because Americans are the poorest people on Earth in need of the most help? Hardly, most Americans today have access to products and services the wealthiest people in history never had access to.

Surely if they opposed Nationalism and supported Democracy, they would spend more time drafting policy proposals for the 1.3 billion Chinese, 1.2 billion Indians, and 1.2 billion Africans. Their actions (along with every single American Democratic Socialist I have ever met) display the reality that they too care mostly about their own “nation” and are therefore Nationalists.

Nothing wrong with that, but the sanctimonious dismissal Democratic Socialists have of people who are proud of their country drives me up the wall. They tell us loving your country is wrong, except if you live in Ukraine as of 2022. They tell us you cannot take pride in your ancestors accomplishments, but must forever pay for their sins via reparations and harassment by academics. They tell us imperialism is bad and also all 330 million Americans must obey Washington D.C., everyone who supports secession is Benito Mussolini.

Both National and Democratic Socialists support the following:

  • The existence of a state apparatus which has a legal monopoly on the right to initiate violence against peaceful people (aka government supremacy)
  • The state monopolizing the money supply (central bank)
  • State compulsory education
  • State regulation of economic activity between consenting adults
  • Anti-Trust laws
  • Commercial and Occupational licensing
  • Higher taxes on “the rich”
  • Tariffs
  • Immigration restrictions
  • Both constantly vilify “the banks and big business” (See National Socialist 25 Point Program)
  • Taxation, the right of the state to coercively collect its funding in a manner which no other group has the right to do
  • State Police (which is why “Defund the Police” was clearly a scam, they know the state needs police to enforce regulations and taxes which they impose on us.)
  • State Military apparatus (not something every country has, private security is cheaper and more reliable, the state itself is an expropriating property protector.)
  • Both constantly obsess over race and explicitly judge people by skin color

There are two ways to achieve your ends in life. Either through mutually beneficial voluntary exchanges, or acts of violence and threats thereof. Both types of socialists seek to coercively control hundreds of millions of strangers under the guise of “helping”.

A Response to My Memorial Day Critics

My article against Memorial Day drew a lot of ire and attention. This should not have been surprising; I was making a controversial statement. What did surprise me, however, was that many critics were self-described libertarians or former libertarians. There were many rebukes, but few dealt with the content of my article, either saying that it was just simply wrong or attacking my character, neither of which were sufficient. I stand by my article, but I think that in light of the criticism, the argument needs to be stated one more time with feeling.

It is not honorable to sacrifice yourself for the state. Likewise, we should not honor those sacrifices. To dance around that fact is to accept a minimal state or reject libertarianism entirely. A consistent libertarian will be against a holiday which honors these sacrifices as well as being against federal holidays in general.

As noted in the article, the way Memorial Day started was spontaneous and as a day of prayer for peace. War was shown for what it was, an evil, whereas today, Memorial Day has been co-opted.

Critics replied that it’s a time to honor those that gave the “ultimate sacrifice.” The ultimate sacrifice for what? Sacrificing to the state, to special interests, to pointless wars, and to the whims of bureaucrats, is not honorable, whether they knew what they were doing or not. Unfortunately, many say that the soldiers died protecting our freedom and liberty. Every libertarian should recognize this is just not the case.

The “ultimate sacrifice,” whether done in good faith or not, is vicious. Attacking Memorial Day is not about attacking the soldiers who were tricked, but about attacking the culture that led to these soldiers laying down their lives.

Not honoring them may be painful, but it will be worse for the military state. Anger over the dead will be less satiated. Anger can be directed at the state instead of being transformed into solemnity or redirected at those enemies of the U.S. who dare attack our values.

Furthermore, the young men who become enchanted by patriotic events during Memorial Day and other militaristic traditions will be discouraged from enlisting. The horrors of war may be emphasized at events, but the nobility of those that suffered those horrors are pronounced even more.

That is one reason why I said that it is “like Valhalla” (notice how I used “like” because I did not mean Memorial Day was literally Valhalla; some people didn’t understand that). Traditions like Memorial Day immortalize and reward the fallen soldier. Ironically, those who criticized the use of “Valhalla” would be mortified to see that “Valhalla” was explicitly and frequently referenced on Memorial Day posts on Twitter. Check for yourself if you don’t believe me.

There are definitely good Memorial Day events. Libertarians have done much to salvage this holiday which has given opportunities to emphasize the death and destruction that follows war-making. I fully acknowledge that, but to think that libertarians are controlling the narrative during this national holiday is delusional. The vast majority of Americans make it about honorable sacrifice and protecting American values of freedom and democracy.

I am not against showing sympathy for the fallen; however, I am against honoring the kind of sacrifice that Memorial Day celebrates and praises, a vicious sacrifice. To pretend otherwise is to be blind to the reality that is in your face every Memorial Day. The sacrifice that Memorial Day celebrates should not be honored or encouraged in any way.

Ignoring Political Gossip & Sticking to Principle

Ignoring Political Gossip & Sticking to Principle

In the private sector, firms must attract voluntary customers or they fail; and if they fail, investors lose their money, and managers and employees lose their jobs. The possibility of failure, therefore, is a powerful incentive to find out what customers want and to deliver it efficiently. But in the government sector, failures are not punished, they are rewarded. If a government agency is set up to deal with a problem and the problem gets worse, the agency is rewarded with more money and more staff — because, after all, its task is now bigger. An agency that fails year after year, that does not simply fail to solve the problem but actually makes it worse, will be rewarded with an ever increasing budget.

– David Boaz, Liberating Schools: Education in the Inner City (1991, Cato Institute).

Watch on Odysee

Podcasts

scotthortonshow logosq

coi banner sq2@0.5x

liberty weekly thumbnail

Don't Tread on Anyone Logo

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

Pin It on Pinterest