Mob Rule

Describing the feral left as a mob has been trending hard over the last week, and with good reason.  While most of the left contracted Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) 2-3 years ago it has moved into a more worrying stage the past few months.  Throughout the election cycle and all of Trump’s presidency the left has been violent.  Far more violent than the right.  As I mentioned recently the leaders of the left have even begun to call for mob rule and violence.  And their calls are coming to fruition.

This clip below surfaced from Portland, Oregon over the weekend.  They are trying to direct traffic and claim that it’s their first amendment right to do so.  I know you’re looking for a logical explanation of their thinking here but I cannot provide that.

These are disgusting people both inside and out.  The democratic party has shamelessly weaponized and mobilized these cretins and it’s going to blow up in their faces.  They’ve lost control.  And I think they realize it.  You can only try and group up so many disparate races, religions, and political ideologies before the obvious differences between them erupt into in-fighting and outward violence as well.  A large portion of their constituency has gone too far.  The leaders know they cannot win on a platform of abolishing ICE.  They know the childish behavior at the Kavanaugh hearings doesn’t look good.  But when you’ve encouraged this sort of behavior for so long it is hard to turn it off like a light switch.  Especially when the people you are weaponizing are heavily medicated and mentally unstable.

But no matter.  The Democratic leaders, mostly white, have created a monster that will eventually vote them all out of office anyways.  We’ve seen this in New York with Alexandria Octavio-Cortez and even stalwarts like Diane Feinstein face serious opposition from Kevin de León (born Kevin Alexander Leon but that doesn’t sound foreign enough to garner the minority vote).  The tricky balance is allowing the Democratic party to devour itself while minimizing the collateral damage to the rest of the country.  Thankfully, we have the only possible Commander in Chief strong enough and prepared enough to deal with it.

Elizabeth Warren is a communist

Elizabeth Warren introduced the “Accountable Capitalism Act” which of course isn’t capitalism at all and seeks to put more restrictions and add more regulation.  From her website:

  • Requires very large American corporations to obtain a federal charter as a “United States corporation,” which obligates company directors to consider the interests of all corporate stakeholders: American corporations with more than $1 billion in annual revenue must obtain a federal charter from a newly formed Office of United States Corporations at the Department of Commerce. The new federal charter obligates company directors to consider the interests of all corporate stakeholders – including employees, customers, shareholders, and the communities in which the company operates. This approach is derived from the thriving benefit corporation model that 33 states and the District of Columbia have adopted and that companies like Patagonia, Danone North America, and Kickstarter have embraced with strong results.
  • Empowers workers at United States corporations to elect at least 40% of Board members: Borrowing from the successful approach in Germany and other developed economies, a United States corporation must ensure that no fewer than 40% of its directors are selected by the corporation’s employees.
  • Restricts the sales of company shares by the directors and officers of United States corporations: Top corporate executives are now compensated mostly in company equity, which gives them huge financial incentives to focus exclusively on shareholder returns. To ensure that they are focused on the long-term interests of all corporate stakeholders, the bill prohibits directors and officers of United States corporations from selling company shares within five years of receiving them or within three years of a company stock buyback.
  • Prohibits United States corporations from making any political expenditures without the approval of 75% of its directors and shareholders: Drawing on a proposal from John Bogle, the founder of the investment company Vanguard, United States corporations must receive the approval of at least 75% of their shareholders and 75% of their directors before engaging in political expenditures. This ensures any political expenditures benefit all corporate stakeholders.
  • Permits the federal government to revoke the charter of a United States corporation if the company has engaged in repeated and egregious illegal conduct: State Attorneys General are authorized to submit petitions to the Office of United States Corporations to revoke a United States corporation’s charter. If the Director of the Office finds that the corporation has a history of egregious and repeated illegal conduct and has failed to take meaningful steps to address its problems, she may grant the petition. The company’s charter would then be revoked a year later – giving the company time before its charter is revoked to make the case to Congress that it should retain its charter in the same or in a modified form.

What Elizabeth Warren wants to do here is create yet another government office to regulate corporations here in America, to centralize power over any corporation receiving greater than $1 billion in annual revenue.  The wording is so opaque and up for interpretation.  “The new federal charter obligates company directors to consider the interests of all corporate stakeholders – including employees, customers, shareholders, and the communities in which the company operates.”  What does that even mean?  Consider the interests?  Isn’t that done by necessity already?  If a customer is not happy with a product they will simply choose to buy elsewhere.  An employee can leave companies if they so choose.  With such wishy-washy rules who knows how an infraction can be interpreted and then like that your charter is removed.  Meaning what?  The company is done altogether?  The government completely seizes it?  That’s an awful lot of power for the government to have, and to control ALL industries.

This is yet another step closer to full blown communism.  Centralizing power to control all industries is not a good thing.  It has never worked.  And there are much better ways to go about reforming the problems with corporations.  I actually like some of the proposals in here, mainly the stock option clause and the political contribution bit.  Those make sense and are a good way to control how a corporation operates without seizing the company outright.  Further, what does she think will happen to business here if she actually passed this disaster?  What would the incentive be for corporations to remain here?

Which leads to the next point, which is she probably knows this has zero chance of ever passing but will help her succeed in winning the hearts of the feral-extreme left.  It’s virtue signaling, plain and simple.  What politicians do best; blather on about x, y, and z and preaching about major reformations but knowing it’ll never happen.  She claims she’s not running in 2020 but I don’t believe her for a second.

The best thing that could happen to this country would be to drastically reduce the size of government.  De-centralization serves to stabilize a country.  To use some terminology from NN Taleb large, centralized governments are inherently fragile.  In order to reduce the chance of a major black swan event that could lead to total government collapse, reducing this central power is key.  Name one industry that was ever run better and more efficiently when under increased government control.  The education system has been a disaster since the government took control.  What more is there to say about health care.  Aerospace is another great example.  How many times were we told it’s impossible to launch re-usable rockets?  Now SpaceX launches rockets for a tenth of the cost they previously cost, after finally being given the chance to compete with the very limited private partners they allowed.

Pirates of the Caribbean II: Welcome to Venezuela

Lawlessness abounds in socialist nations.  I don’t think bringing back piracy to the Caribbean was what they had in mind.  The Washington Post actually does a pretty good exposé on this.

There have been reports of piracy over the past 18 months near Honduras, Nicaragua, Haiti and St. Lucia. But nowhere has the surge been more notable, analysts say, than off the coast of Venezuela.

An economic crisis in the South American country has sent inflation soaring toward 1 million percent, making food and medicine scarce. Malnutrition is spreading; disease is rampant; water and power grids are failing from a lack of trained staff and spare parts. Police and military are abandoning their posts as their paychecks become nearly worthless. Under the socialist government of President Nicolás Maduro, repression and corruption have increased.

The conditions are compelling some Venezuelans to take desperate action.

One Venezuelan port official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to address official corruption, said that Venezuelan coast guard officers have been boarding anchored vessels and demanding money and food. He said commercial ships, in response, are increasingly anchoring farther off the coast, and turning off their motors and lights to avoid being seen at night.

It’s important to remember that this could happen to us.  Socialism is often times a slow creep.  It’s part of the reason there was such a huge outcry to Obamacare.  In the United States, health care is about 20% of the gross domestic product.  Thankfully, we’ve elected a President who recognizes this disaster and has tried to dismember it, or encourage Congress to do so.

Venezuela turned to socialism in 1998 with the election of Hugo Chavez.  He redistributed land to the poor and in 2007 took over many of the major oil projects.  Oil is half of the country’s GDP and accounts for nearly 100% of its exports.  Price control, a heavily government controlled economy, and plummeting oil prices have wrecked what should be a prosperous nation.  Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world.  There is no reason they should be floundering this badly, or having to cross into Colombia to buy simple necessities such as toilet paper and milk.

Forbes.com has a nice little slideshow here which highlights many other countries that have tried socialism and failed.  The dumbing down of the populace is one of the greatest injustices we have ever seen.  There should be absolutely no reason socialism and communism are as popular as they are, especially among millennials.  Via The Washington Times:

The majority of millennials would prefer to live in a socialist, communist or fascist nation rather than a capitalistic one, according to a new poll.

In the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation’s “Annual Report on U.S. Attitudes Toward Socialism,” 58 percent of the up-and-coming generation opted for one of the three systems, compared to 42 percent who said they were in favor of capitalism.

The most popular socioeconomic order was socialism, with 44 percent support. Communism and fascism received 7 percent support each.

Let that sink in.  This falls directly on us and our educational system.  This isn’t altogether surprising as the vast majority of academia consists of far left professors and administrators.  While immigration is our most glaring problem right now, reforming the education system is just as important though a much longer process.

Let us not forget the horrors of socialism.  Nationalizing major industries and redistributing wealth always leads to disaster.  The faster we can leave industry to the free markets and disband welfare and other government programs that force redistribution of wealth the safer and better off we will be.

The Most Dangerous Game

The left is crossing into dangerous territory.  It’s not just hyperbole when I say they are pushing us ever closer to a civil war.  They are continually attacking Constitutional liberties that were set in place to protect all citizens.

For a long time the second amendment was their issue du jour.  Their ultimate goal is to ban all firearms, an incredibly naive and short sighted move.  The power players on the left use the majority of the left as “useful idiots” to further their actual agenda.  The useful idiots push the narrative under the guise that they think everyone will be safer if nobody has weapons.  This is a common tactic we’ll see throughout our dealings with the Cabal and the agenda they are pushing.  Whether it’s guns, free speech, or other forms of indoctrination they will continually use the left to push these points under the guise of a different reason.

Anybody who has studied any history knows that disarming the populace is not the path towards a safer society but rather towards an oppressive regime and genocide.  There are well known examples in Russia, China, and Germany.  Great Britain likes to boast they are basically gun-free and how is it going for them?  Or Venezuela?  Hitler famously said, “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police.“.

This issue tends to creep up after another shooting.  Always in a gun-free zone, but that’s besides the point.  Of course, only when it suits their agenda.  Did you hear about the 72 people shot, 13 people killed in Chicago this weekend?  Me neither.  MSM will not report this stuff on a grand scale.

At the moment, they’ve moved up to attacking our greatest freedom, which is of course freedom of speech.  This past week has been a circus, with much buzz about InfoWars being deplatformed on Facebook, Google, Apple, and Spotify.  Again, this is a blatant attempt of the left to suppress free speech, and more specifically speech they disagree with.  A few sites have stuck up for Alex Jones, notably Twitter (surprisingly).

How do they think this will end?  We know what the ultimate goal of the Cabal is in this case, but your ordinary, garden variety left leaning person agreeing with this is troubling.  How short sighted are these people?  Do they really see that this precedent could someday (and inevitably) be used against them?  We already see it now.  When Obama was in office and they had control of the House and Senate they used tactics and many executive orders to get what they wanted.  Now that the other side uses similar tactics all they do is complain.

So called “hate speech”, a completely absurd yet clever spin concocted by the left is what needs to be protected most of all.  It’s easy to defend the stuff you agree with, not so much the stuff you don’t want to hear.  It’s clear many on the left are short sighted so they cannot see the implications of their actions when they cry for the government or big tech companies to ban websites and personalities they do not like.  And given that big tech is almost completely comprised of left leaning types at this point in time it’s easy for them to suppress voices and opinions they disagree with.  Facebook and Twitter have recently come under attack for selectively censoring viewpoints they do not agree with.

I say again, how do they think this will end?  Do they really think the portion of the country that is selectively policed by the other side, while they’re being told “hey it’s for your own good” is just going to sit there and take it when they see the rules used differently for some people as compared to others?  We’re continually told “don’t worry, we can be trusted in how we police” yet there is zero evidence they can be trusted and a mountain of evidence on the contrary.  We know this to be entirely true.  Recently, conservative journalist Candace Owens retweeted something racist NY Times journalist Sarah Jeong wrote about white people, but replaced “white” with “Jewish” and “black”.  What was the result?

Twitter later responded by saying it was a mistake.  Right.  Funny how these mistakes only seem to happen to people on the right.  This is the double standard I speak about all the time.  As if the useful idiots won’t have this turned against them once the purge is complete.

Rightly so, conservatives are pushing alt-tech to create new platforms that truly respect freedom of speech.  Sites like BitChute and Gab have made some nice inroads but have a long way to go.  Sadly, even these sites are not entirely safe from leftist policing.  Microsoft has threatened to stop hosting Gab due to supposed “hate speech” posts.  They truly are pushing for such segregation that nothing will be able to be shared between those who believe in freedom and those who want more government control and suppression.

This will not end well.  Those who still believe in the principles this country were founded on will only take so much before they finally snap and hit back.  It is imperative we try and solve this peacefully if at all possible.  I wish I could say for sure that this was achievable, but the violent and oppressive tactics the left have been using will force the hand of those reasonable people on the other side eventually.  Perhaps it’s as good a time as any to remind ourselves of Rudyard Kipling’s poem, The Wrath of the Awakened Saxon.

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.

They were not easily moved,
They were icy — willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the Saxon began to hate.

Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.

Universal Basic Income program scrapped in Canada

Ontario is ending their universal basic income program over a year earlier than originally intended because it wasn’t tenable.  Via The Daily Wire:

Universal basic income is “clearly not the answer for Ontario families,” explained Children, Community, and Social Services Minister Lisa MacLeod, adding that the program was “not sustainable.”

Though the welfare program was intended to last three years, it will be coming to an end this week, announced MacLeod. She promised the program’s exit would be done “ethically” and would provide “more detail at a later date.”

Roughly 4,000 Canadians, regardless of unemployment status, are enrolled in the program. “[A] single person could have received up to about $17,000 a year, minus half of any income he or she earned. A couple could have received up to $24,000 per year. People with disabilities could have received an additional $6,000,” reports CBC.

MacLeod was lambasted for pulling the plug on the unsustainable system by Canadian politicians and program recipients. Andrea Horwath, the Ontario provincial NDP leader, for example, said the call to end the program was “shameful.”

“And this callous, mean-spirited premier sees this as a priority? Making poverty worse? Making life worse for families? Absolutely disgraceful. Shameful,” blasted Horwath.

Dave Cherkewski, a program recipient, complained, “I had a three-year plan and now it’s gone.”

As President Trump and his brand of politics continues to spread and fundamentally alter the political landscape, I suspect people like Andrea Horwath will slowly fade away, and not a moment too soon.  Socialism is one of those ideologies that is easy to talk about how great it would be for everyone, but those who spread this dangerous message rarely ever have to suffer the consequences of their virtue signaling.  Sorry, Andrea, but it is not “shameful” or “mean spirited” to end a program that would bankrupt the country.  Isn’t it possible that MacLeod may have some concern for the rest of the country and those paying into the system in the first place?  And Mr Cherkewski, perhaps you should re-tinker your 3 year plan to one that doesn’t depend on free handouts to succeed?  Just a thought.

It’s been said many times before but universal basic income at this juncture isn’t sustainable.  Theoretically in the future as more automation and robotics develop maybe that will be a different story.  Even so, is it the best thing to do?  Will rewarding slothful behavior really yield positive benefits down the road?  The entire argument against Communism and Socialism is that people want to be justly compensated for the work they put in.  Not this “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” Marxist BS.  It is far too easy to job the system and human nature is clearly more suitable for a more capitalistic ideology.  The gall of Andrea Horwath to call it shameful.  Where exactly does she think this money is coming from?  Yet another black mark on our educational system that the most basic of economic principles isn’t taught properly or entirely ignored in schools.

Venezuela’s prez admits socialism failure

Even Venezuela’s president now admits that socialism has been a complete failure.  Via Yahoo:

Under-fire Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro admitted his economic model has “failed” in the wake of food and medicine shortages and public service paralysis, such as Tuesday’s power failure that affected 80 percent of Caracas.

“The production models we’ve tried so far have failed and the responsibility is ours, mine and yours,” Maduro told his ruling PSUV party congress, as Venezuela looks to tackle chronic inflation the International Monetary Fund predicted would reach one million percent this year.

The apologists will come out of the woodwork as per usual to defend socialism at every turn and lecture us about how Venezuela’s model wasn’t real socialism.  (They hope you’ll forget the fact they were praising Venezuela just a few years ago.)

Venezuela has centralized hundreds of industries.  It’s difficult to name even one industry that has ever been better off being run by the government rather than private enterprise.  This, perhaps more than any other reasoning, should be the approach when trying to explain to those championing socialism the inherent dangers therein.  It’s easy to get frustrated (as I often do) at these people, but we also must remember they’ve been under government programming for 12+ years of the educational system.  Sometimes trying to explain things from a financial basis can be too much for some people to understand.

Financial advice in a socialist country

One of the greatest problems of any civilization is forgetting about the past.  We can’t learn from history’s mistakes if we don’t read up on it, or as is more often the case with our education system these days, if we’re not taught about it in the first place (or taught an alternate version).  Enter socialism, a system that no matter how many times it proves to be a total trainwreck, rears its ugly head over and over again.  And we’re promised that “last time it didn’t work, but this time it totally will”.  This article from The Economist explains some of the pains many in Venezuela have to go through because of socialism.

ASK the chief investment officer of a fund-management firm how to spread your investments and you will be told to put so much in stocks, so much in bonds and something in hedge funds or private equity. Chances are that white-elephant buildings, eggs and long-life milk will not feature. But in Venezuela, where the inflation rate is in the tens of thousands, things that people elsewhere would shun for fear they will lose value have become stores of real wealth.

That is why you can see scaffolding and other signs of a building boom dotted around Caracas, the capital of a country that has endured an economic collapse. Businesses need to park their earnings where they will not be wiped out by inflation. A smaller-scale response to galloping prices is the emerging “egg economy”. Eggs hold their value better than cash, for a while at least. They make for a convenient currency, too. It is easier to carry around a half-dozen eggs than a trunkful of banknotes. And many tradespeople would be happier to receive the eggs.

Is that the kind of place we want to live?  Where eggs are the currency and hold more value?  Or where a car is a better investment vehicle (har har) than a mutual fund?  The nation that has the largest oil reserves by country in the world should never in any circumstances be in the kind of financial trouble that they are in.  Socialism has the ability to destroy even the richest of natural resources.

Let this serve as a reminder to us.  Socialism, not now, not ever.

socialism