The Transgender Crusades: Another Case for Abolishing Government Schools

May 4, 2022

Here is my latest article on Activist Post: The Transgender Crusades: Another Case for Abolishing Government Schools

Revelations regarding the sexualization of children and transgender crusades are making a good case for abolishing government schools, also known as “public schools.”

The uproar over the schools’ mistreatment of children can now join other past scandals involving sexual exploitation of children, such as the scandal with the Boy Scouts, and the Catholic priests, especially in the Boston area. An atmosphere of enabling abuse has been seen in other areas, including show business, media and the arts.

For example, Harvey Weinstein, and other celebrities for years got away with their sexual misconduct and abuse amid an enabling Hollywood culture which has also been plagued with pedophilia scandals

Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose and other media celebrities were also enabled with silence by colleagues and managements.

And in the classical music world, the late opera conductor James Levine chased after teenage boys, with some of Levine’s alleged victims having described the atmosphere of control as a “cult.” Apparently orchestras and their managements turned a blind eye to the tête-à-têtes between Levine and teenage boys.

And then there is the intentional confusion of the genders in our society, such as in the corporate world.

Disney, for example, is “committed to ‘exploring queer stories’ and has created a ‘tracker’ to make sure they are creating enough ‘gender nonconforming characters,’ ‘canonical trans characters,’ and ‘canonical bisexual characters’,” according to Christopher Rufo.

Are the people at Disney living in some alternate universe?

Such seems to be the case in education, sadly.

Not only is there apparently an enabling atmosphere of sexualizing childhood in the schools, but an enthusiastic atmosphere.

The crusade to sexualize childhood with sex discussions and sexually explicit children’s books in the classrooms, has been going on for years, as reported recently by Michelle Malkin.

It sure makes me want to again call for getting government out of the education business.

The sexualization of children in their earlier years sets the stage for further, more direct exploitation and sexual abuse of students by teachers in middle and high school. Reported incidents involving sexual contact by teachers or coaches, as well as including the use of pornography and explicit sexual language, have been on the rise. And such incidents of sexual misconduct and abuse involve students against students as well.
Besides the general trend of the schools enabling the sexualization of childhood, could the destructive transgender crusade be contributing to a culture of abuse?

More recently in the news was the Florida “don’t say gay” bill that had nothing to do with not saying gay but merely prohibited the inclusion of sexual and gender-related discussions in the school curriculum.

During that controversy, various videos were posted on the Internet including a self-proclaimed transgender kindergarten “teacher” who, in an apparent remote-learning video lesson, discussed transgender issues with kids ages 5 to 7. The self-proclaimed transgender “teacher” inappropriately gets into details of his/her own personal gender-related situation.

Now, why exactly are so many people now insisting on discussing sexual issues with little kids? It’s like a crusade now, to have to discuss transgender, sexual orientation or otherwise LGBT topics — with little kids!

And while this cultish transgender movement is going on in the private schools as well as government schools, it is still a good case for throwing government-run and government-controlled “education” into the dustbin of history, in my view.

And it’s not just discussion in general. The “teachers” are getting very personal and intrusive toward the kids. Why is it necessary to have to drill some kind of “gender affirming” (or denying) regime into little kids? Why do the children have to announce their gender or gender identity to the class?

Can you see the intrusiveness of such treatment by these “teachers” of the little kids? I can imagine the feelings of intimidation and humiliation experienced by the kids. Why else would a teacher continue to ask a child, for example, “Are you sure you’re a boy?” if not to intimidate and humiliate the child?

Now that is what I would call “bullying” by teachers, i.e. ideologues. Is the teacher trying to make the child feel shame for being a boy, or being a girl?

The truth is, what these “woke” activists are doing, and as a matter of their official curriculum, is confusing children and messing them up emotionally more than the kids might already be. 

And in some cases, the activists tell the kids something like, “Don’t tell your parents about this,” and so on. Hmm, what are they hiding? That’s the kind of thing that child molesters would say to their victims.

No, I’m not saying the transgender activists are child molesters. But I am saying some of the things I have heard make these people sound like child molesters, especially given their apparent avoidance of being exposed.

Another example of how “teachers” try to hide their indoctrination and invasiveness  from parents is the phenomenon of the “secret gender transition closets.” Here, the kids change into their opposite-gender clothing when they get to school and then change back to their parents-approved clothes before leaving the school. So their parents don’t know what’s going on in school.

Regarding the activists exploiting the children’s insecurity, they need to understand that many children go through phases in which the children express curiosity of or desire to be the opposite sex, but they grow out of it. It’s a normal phase in their development.
Narcissistic activists do not seem to respect the natural curiosity of the child, or understand that it is just a normal but temporary phase. Activists have an agenda they want to impose on the little ones, apparently.

And yes, the sex-pushing activists are narcissists, as they do not seem to have an awareness of the negative impact their invasiveness has on a vulnerable child.

Such disrespectful treatment by “adults” causes the little kids feelings of distrust, humiliation, shame, and can cause the kids to have a future of dysfunction, depression or other mental health problems.

Is it more than just intrusive and intimidating sex-related questions or discussions that the crusaders insist on having with little children? What else might be going on?
In my view, these “teachers” really sound like pedophiles and perverts. Now, I’m not saying they are pedophiles and perverts, just that this group sure sounds like pedophiles and perverts.

Is there any way to force the schools to just teach math and reading? Do the teachers know how to teach math and reading anymore? (Probably not, given that the tax-supported colleges most of them attended emphasize kooky sex-related social agendas and not math and reading.)

There have to be ways to reverse the corruption of our institutions and social decay of society. Abolishing income taxes would be a good start. A society, including its education system, based on the involuntary seizure of earnings and wealth by the government rulers is destined to become corrupt.

And in education, abolishing the government schools would be a good thing. No government funding of educational institutions, because such funding is received through coercive and immoral means (taxation). Educational institutions and their funding being made entirely voluntary, as with other services on a free market, would be the moral way to run education and would promote more moral behavior in the schools, in my view.

Activist Post – ALTERNATIVE INDEPENDENT NEWS – Creative Commons 2019

News and Commentary

Jordan Schachtel: The Death Throes of the “Public Health Expert”

Jacob Hornberger: My 50th Virginia Military Institute Reunion

Jonathan Turley: Destroying Democracy to Save it? Court Advances Effort to Block GOP Candidates from Ballots

Bryan Caplan: My Guidelines for Government

Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams: Travesty: U.K. Judge Green-Lights Julian Assange Extradition To U.S. (video)

Doug Bandow: Wimbledon Declares Cultural Revolution Against Russians: Will Rest of World Eventually Target the West’s Crimes?

Pepe Escobar: Big Tech’s “Cancel Culture” Love Affair

John Whitehead: Jackboots Policing: No-Knock Raids Rip a Hole in the Fourth Amendment

Veronique de Rugy: Biden’s Billionaire Tax Wouldn’t Just Hurt Billionaires

The Last Refuge: Special Prosecutor Filing Outlines Clearest, Most Detailed, Construct of Hillary Clinton Joint Venture Conspiracy to Fabricate Trump-Russia Narrative

Peter van Buren: The Russiagate Hoax Goes Deeper Than We Thought

David Stockman: In Praise of Partition

Military Times: Nine Respiratory Cancers Added to List of Illnesses Presumed Caused by Burn Pit Smoke

Nick Turse: The Civilian Deaths You Haven’t Heard About

Aden Tate: Georgia Declares a State of Emergency Over Supply Chain Shortages

Laurence Vance: There Is No Federal Solution

Richard Ebeling: Ludwig von Mises’s Idea on Self-Determination Might Have Saved Ukraine

Glenn Greenwald: Former Intelligence Officials, Citing Russia, Say Big Tech Monopoly Power is Vital to National Security

Alexandra Bruce: Government-Backed Hackers Behind Doxxing Libs of Tik Tok

And Donald Miller: America in the 2020s: Its Most Dangerous Decade

Contributors to the Immigration Problem: War on Drugs, Foreign Aid

For many years two main causes of the immigration problem have been foreign aid and the drug war. So, while ending U.S. government foreign aid to corrupt governments and ending the war on drugs might not resolve the problem completely, nevertheless doing those two things will help a great deal.

The conservatives don’t want to legalize drugs because they believe in the nanny state, and the police state that goes with the unwinnable war on drugs. They certainly don’t want to prohibit alcohol, God forbid. They need their booze.

But conservative statists believe in the nanny state as much as the “liberals.” Both sides believe that the government owns your body.

And it’s really the two choices: If you own your body, then you decide what you will or will not put into your own body, and obviously take responsibility for the consequences of your decisions. If the government owns your body, then of course the government will decide what you may or may not put into “your” body, and enforce its control at gunpoint.

As far as the consequences of statist government policies are concerned, drug prohibition causes a black market or underground market in the drugs, which raises the prices and thus incentivizes lowlifes to get into the business and exploit people’s weaknesses, etc. We don’t see alcohol pushers on the street trying to get people on booze, do we? Duh.

End drug prohibition and you will end the police state, the pushers and traffickers, the cartels, the drug lords and turf wars, and you will be on the way to greatly reduce the people fleeing those Central and South American countries run by corrupt governments that are infiltrated by the drug racketeers.

And no foreign aid to those governments. Government handouts are merely feeding the machine that causes those countries’ inhabitants to flee to the U.S.

In fact, there should be no forced redistribution of wealth schemes in a free society. There should be no forcible taking of one’s wealth or property or income by the government or by anyone. In a free society all transactions are voluntary. To be legitimate all transactions must be by way of voluntary contract. No income “tax,” i.e. government stealing your earnings.

If we didn’t have the income tax/involuntary service to gubmint/enslavement, there would be no FBI entrapment schemes as we saw in Michigan recently. And many of the government’s crimes against the people would not occur, because such crimes require such agencies and bureaus being funded to run them. Who in his right mind would voluntarily pay for these kinds of things? Who in his right mind would voluntarily donate to corrupt foreign governments?

And this applies to government schools as well. I’ll discuss that in my next post.

Invasion of Ukraine, NATO, and the Dangers of Centralization

Is all that stuff about Russia invading Ukraine still going on? I think the dementia sufferer in the White House may have mentioned it in his speech a few nights ago. By the way, Biden didn’t say “Iranians” when he meant to say “Ukrainians.” He said, “Uranians.” He’s very concerned about the inhabitants of Uranus. (And Neptune as well.)

But seriously, there really is a very good solution to these world conflicts, especially the one in Russia-Ukraine that the U.S. government and its neocon interventionists have provoked.

Ron Paul writes that NATO itself is a main contributor to the conflicts going on overseas right now with Russia and Ukraine. He says “NATO should be disbanded, not expanded.”

And Paul provides some good quotes form Sen. Robert Taft from the very early days when government collectivists were unnecessarily building and empowering NATO. Taft said that the new NATO alliance would be a military alliance against Russia, and that “such an alliance is more likely to produce war than peace.” Taft preferred peace, as do I.

See Daniel McAdams on the Ukraine propaganda wars. And Edward Curtin thinks that the globalist elites are itching to have a global war that would involve nuclear weapons. The globalists seem to love death and destruction.

So NATO and large centralized governments are the love of collectivists who have delusions of grandiosity, in my view. And I think the way to resolve many conflicts is to decentralize society.

U.S. gubmint and Russian bureaucrats, that is, the ruling political class, love centralization and expansion of their power. They don’t want a free society based on individualism and private property and free markets. They love control.

As Hans-Hermann Hoppe has stated, such as in this speech and this interview, “In general, the smaller a country and its internal markets the more likely it is that it will opt for free trade. I think that a world consisting of tens of thousands of distinct countries, regions and cantons, and hundreds of thousands of independent free cities…would be a world of unprecedented prosperity, economic growth, and cultural advancement…Switzerland and Albania are both small countries, while the U.S. and the former Soviet Union are large. However, there is a highly important indirect relationship. Smallness contributes to moderation. In principle, all governments are counterproductive in taxing and regulating private property owners and market income earners. A small government, however, has many close neighbours. If it taxes and regulates its own subjects visibly more than its neighbours it is bound to suffer because people will “vote with their feet”: they will leave to live and work elsewhere. And they need not go far to do so.”

And in addition to “taxing and regulating,” we can add violating the people’s civil liberties and property with thousands of bureaucratic laws, prohibitions and mandates that characterize oppressive police-state governments.

You might be interested in reading Hoppe’s great book, Democracy, the God That Failed. it’s very informative.

Are Libertarian Voters “Imbeciles”?

Last week on the “Clay and Buck Show” one of them said that people are “imbeciles” if they vote for Libertarian Party candidates this year. I think it was Thursday February 3rd during the 2nd or 3rd hour of their show.

And they’re saying the usual, “There’s so much at stake” with the November elections. You would have to vote for Republicans, especially this time around!

Riiiight. We should all vote for … the “Stupid Party.”

Like all those past times when the Republicans won victories and had majorities, 1994, 2000, 2010, 2014?

As Murray Rothbard observed,

…first, left-liberals, in power, make a Great Leap Forward toward collectivism; then, when, in the course of the political cycle, four or eight years later, conservatives come to power, they of course are horrified at the very idea of repealing anything; they simply slow down the rate of growth of statism, consolidating the previous gains of the Left, and providing a bit of R&R for the next liberal Great Leap Forward….

For instance, after the dreaded Jimmy Carter, in 1980 Reagan won the election by a landslide. And what did Reagan do?

Yes, in his first year as President, Reagan cut taxes. Sort of. And then in his second year he signed a very large tax increase bill that also added new regulations. The 1982 “Tax Equity” bill actually rescinded some of the tax cuts that would have occurred that were provided by the previous “tax cuts” bill.

As Sheldon Richman pointed out, regarding Reagan’s tax hikes and deceptions, the Reagan administration “imposed withholding on interest and dividends,” raised the gas tax, raised Social Security taxes, “shifted $120 billion over five years from visible personal income taxes to hidden business taxes. It lowered the rates, but it also repealed or reduced many deductions.”

Again, Mr. Libertarian, Murray Rothbard on Ronald Reagan’s “eight dreary, miserable, mind-numbing years” as President:

Reagan not only increased government spending by an enormous amount – so enormous that it would take a 40 percent cut to bring us back to Carter’s wild spending totals of 1980 – he even substantially increased the percentage of government spending to GNP. That’s a “revolution”?

Then when campaigning for President, Reagan’s VP George H.W. Bush promised, “No New Taxes,” and after Bush was elected in 1988 he raised taxes.

Then in 1991 warmonger Bush the elder started the first war in Iraq for no good reason, his U.S. military bombed and destroyed Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers, and he imposed sanctions and no-fly zones on the Iraqis which caused them to have to use untreated water which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians by the mid-1990s, and hundreds of thousands more by the year 2000. There wouldn’t have been a 9/11 had the U.S. government and military not started those aggressions abroad. 9/11 was blowback.

And what was Bush the younger’s response to 9/11? More wars, more interventions, more invasions overseas. Statists never learn, unfortunately.

And after 9/11 the Republicans (aided and abetted by Democrats of course) gave us the Patriot Act, which set the table for persecuting and imprisoning dissenters and critics of the regime in Washington.

In their hysterical response to 9/11, Republicans gave us the DHS, TSA, Gitmo, the NDAA power to indefinitely detain Americans for any reason without charges or any due process whatsoever. (Note the experiences of those January 6th participants being persecuted and detained, which I warned over ten years ago would happen.)

Thanks, Republicans. The alternative in 1988 was Libertarian Party candidate Ron Paul, who would have ended foreign interventionism and closed down the foreign U.S. military bases located where they don’t belong, and brought the U.S. troops back to the U.S.

Ron Paul wouldn’t have started a war against Iraq in 1991 as Bush the elder did, obviously.

Ron Paul ran for President as a Republican in 2008, suggesting we apply the Golden Rule to U.S. foreign policy, which received “Booos” from the neanderthals in that debate audience.

Paul ran again in 2012. That last campaign was one in which Herman Cain gave his “9-9-9” plan: a 9% flat tax on individuals, 9% flat tax on businesses, and 9% consumption tax. Ron Paul’s response? “0-0-0.” Why? Because it’s immoral to steal, and government taxation is stealing.

As Murray Rothbard would say, taxation is theft. Taxation is theft because it is involuntary, and not based on a voluntary contract.

Unlike Republicans, the libertarian view is to repeal all forms of involuntary, coerced and compelled taxation-thefts and let people keep and do whatever they want with everything they earn or honestly acquire. Is that imbecilic? I think that Republicans’ love of the evil IRS is imbecilic.

Laurence Vance has many terrific articles online on tax policy. As Vance says, there is not much difference between most Republicans in Congress and the Bernie Sanders socialists. Vance explains the Republicans’ cluelessness on taxes, their love of government control of healthcare, and their low ranking in the Freedom Index. In 2013 Vance detailed the Republicans’ bloated budgets and their lies.

In 2018 after Republicans lost their majority in the House, Vance discussed what the Republicans could have done when they had majorities. Vance also noted how the Republicans make America socialist again, and tells us who the efficiency experts for the welfare state are: Republicans and conservatives, of course.

Perhaps instead of calling Libertarian voters “imbeciles,” talk radio conservatives might want to take a realistic view of what Republicans are and what they actually do.

And then the shyster Donald Trump came along. Oy vey.

Donald Trump’s cutting taxes and deregulation were great for the economy in the short term. The corporate tax cuts were made permanent, but the individual tax cuts were made to be only temporary. They will all have expired by 2025. So that was a shell game, in my view, a total scam. in which “Trump tax cuts” are really tax INCREASES! And in his refusal to cut spending in any meaningful way, Trump made skyrocketing budget deficits and the national debt even worse.

And Trump’s response to Covid was horrible. Despite his promising to “Drain the Swamp,” Trump’s deference to the Swamp Creatures in Covid encouraged the lockdown-mask-house-arrest fascism that occurred throughout the country. He knew he should have fired the very Swampy Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx. And Trump himself knew early on that Covid was mainly a cold or flu with a very low fatality rate. In fact, Fauci knew early on that Covid-19 would have a flu-like fatality rate!

Then Trump pushes “Operation Warp Speed” to rush experimental deadly “vaccines” that are not vaccines but gene therapy drug treatments, in which the injected nevertheless get infected with Covid and continue spreading the virus onto others. More recently Trump boasted of getting “boosted” with that crap. He might as well say, “We are all shills for Big Pharma now.”

And Trump fraudulently presented himself as the one to “Drain the Swamp,” which was the main reason why the establishment, the leftists, academia, corporate media, and the national security statists hated him and tried to impeach him on made-up charges, why Covid was exploited to incite fear and panic toward imposing mail-in cheating to steal the 2020 election, and why the FBI Gestapo instigated the “insurrection” to frame him.

But Trump did not “drain the Swamp.” He had four years to drain the Swamp, and what did he do? His whole administration was a police lineup of Swamp Creatures, police statists, national security apparatchiks, neocons, interventionists, warmongers, crony corporatists…Jeff Sessions, Bill Barr, James Comey, Chris Wray, Steve Mnuchin, Rex Tillerson, James Mattis, John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rick Perry, Elaine Chao…and…Mike Pence! And more! The list goes on and on.

So for the 2020 election Trump ran for reelection after nearly a year of Covid lockdowns and suffocating mask mandates that he didn’t do anything to stop, but also running on a short-term economic boom.

And this is where I have criticism of the Libertarian Party, but not for the same reasons that “Clay and Buck” have in their viewing libertarian voters as “imbeciles.”

No, my criticism of the Libertarian Party in the 2020 elections are of their own idiocy and elitism. As I wrote in this post, in the states that allowed Libertarian Party primaries in 2020, Jacob Hornberger was the big winner, getting 9,035 votes and 7 state wins against Jo Jorgensen’s 5,034 votes and 2 state wins. Yet, the LP convention attendees decided to nevertheless give Jorgensen the nomination for President. Mainly based on gender identity and “woke” reasons, obviously, but also maybe based on Hornberger’s constant criticism of the CIA. Some people believe the LP is infiltrated by the CIA, just as are the Republican and Democrat parties.

So in that case, it is the Libertarian Party apparatchik conventioneers who are the “imbeciles,” not the actual LP voters in the primaries.

But when it comes to Libertarian vs. Republican parties in elections, the ones who actually walk the walk on “free markets,” “individual liberty,” and “private property” are the Libertarians (usually), not the Republicans. Note the articles I cited above by Laurence Vance on the welfare/warfare statist, tax-n-spend Republicans.

One example I like to mention is the 2002 gubernatorial election in Massachusetts. It was Libertarian Carla Howell who campaigned on a platform of small government and free markets. But it was statist Republican Willard Romney who was elected.

And what did statist Republican Gov. Romney do? He raised corporate taxes, and raised fees by a lot as well. And then…he imposed RomneyCare on the people of Massachusetts, which was a model for ObamaCare! Thanks, Republicans.

And thanks to the predictable failures of RomneyCare, health care costs went up, not down. And RomneyCare also adversely affected some hospitals’ care for the poor, and killed some 18,000 Massachusetts jobs. Ultimately Massachusetts bureaucrats imposed health care price controls.

Meanwhile, the 2002 LP candidate for governor Carla Howell was at the same time pushing an initiative petition to repeal the state’s income tax, a ballot question that received 45%. So we know where she’s coming from. And her health care policy would probably have gone in the opposite direction, away from government control and toward the direction of the people’s control over their own health care. But no, we can’t have that. Libertarians are “imbeciles,” according to Clay and Buck (and many other Republicans and conservatives who ultimately love government control, that’s for sure).

And currently, the LP candidate for governor of New Hampshire is Karlyn Borysenko, who happens to be more critical of woke-ism than most Republicans. She is the author of the new book, Actively Unwoke: The Ultimate Guide for Fighting Back Against the Woke Insanity in Your Life, and see her Substack, Actively Unwoke. For instance, here she writes how Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin did NOT ban “critical race theory” in the schools. Here is her Twitter.

Now, I don’t know Borysenko’s views on LGBT and transgender stuff, but the Republican incumbent governor she is running against, Chris Sununu signed a bill into law banning discrimination based on gender identity, and banning “conversion therapy” as well. Sununu also imposed Covid fascism stay-at-home orders, business closures and mask mandates.

So, Sununu doesn’t believe in freedom of movement, private property rights, freedom of thought and conscience and freedom of association. A typical Republican, in other words, just like Democrats.

Worse, while Sununu didn’t arrest people outside his house for protesting his fascist policies, the FBI did subsequently go after some of them for alleged Bitcoin-related “crimes.” (So much for New Hampshire being the “Live Free Or Die” state, oh well.)

But many people will nevertheless vote for Sununu again, because he has that “R” after his name. After all, only “imbeciles” would vote for libertarians. And it will probably be the same thing in the other states, more rearranging of deck chairs with Republicans.

2021 Election Roundup: Boston and New York Races for Mayor

I have been spending a lot of time here on the Covid/vaccine scam racket, so it’s time to return to politics. There are races for mayor in some cities and for governor in some states, you know. Let’s discuss.

I’ll address the races for mayor in Boston and New York here.

The race for mayor of Boston is down to two female candidates, both Democrats, with no third-party alternatives. Fascist city councilors Michelle Wu and Annissa Essaibi George. As usual, the people of Boston have a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Oh, well.

Like their Democrat President Joe Biden (D-Shady Pines), both Wu and George are Covid vaccine fascists, as both support government-imposed vaccine mandates. The mask crap is bad enough, you two. Wu wants to mandate vaccine “Your Papers Please” at all city restaurants, gyms and performance halls.

I can’t believe just how ignorant today’s politicians are now. There is no reason for any of these “vaccines” that are not vaccines, or lockdowns, mandates, or masks. Covid has a 99.9% survival rate, and asymptomatic carriers are not spreading the virus. So all those fascist policies have been based on a lie.

Anyway, both candidates, Michelle Wu and Annissa Essaibi George, are also climate crusader kooks. True believers in the climate stuff. Don’t they understand that the Earth’s climate has been changing ever since it began, like for hundreds of millions of years now. Climate change has been happening naturally, and not at all influenced by human industrial activity, or human-caused carbon emissions. And there’s nothing humans can do to “end climate change.” There is no actual science or evidence to back up the assertions that humans are causing “worse and more intense storms, worse hurricanes,” and so on. The True Believers only have computer models, that have been wrong. Oh, well.

Now, the “news”casters have been saying that with either fascist the people of Boston will be electing their first elected “person of color” as mayor. I don’t see why Asians or oriental Asian Americans are considered “people of color.” I guess because ethnically they are considered “non-white.” Michelle Wu is of Taiwanese heritage.

And Annissa Essaibi George says she identifies as a “woman of color,” even though when I search her name and click on images I see … a WHITE person! Shouldn’t you have some “color” if you are a “person of color”? I know, technically white is a color. But I think being “of color” supposedly means “non-white.”

But does it really matter what someone’s skin color or race is? A fascist is a fascist. Or communist, however you want to put it. They aren’t freedom advocates, that’s for sure.

Let’s get out of Boston, and move on to New York now. I mean that figuratively, of course. I would never actually move to New York. I am not a masochist.

In the current election for mayor of New York City, there are two major-party candidates, and several other candidates. The Democrat is former cop Eric Adams, who supports, you guessed it, Mayor Bill Duh Blasio’s government-imposed Covid vaccine mandates. The Republican is radio talk show personality and Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa, who is against the mandates.

I had the unfortunate circumstance to be listening to Bloomberg Radio later yesterday and heard Joe Mathieu (pause much?) interviewing Sliwa and Adams.

Unfortunately, even though he is against the vaccine mandates, Sliwa is ignorant about the Covid and “vaccine” situation. And he said that he has three kids in “public” schools, a.k.a. government indoctrination prisons, and he says he wants his kids “vaccinated” (against Covid) and that the school kids “need to be protected,” by “vaccinating” them (with experimental drug injections that are already causing young people heart inflammation and other adverse reactions and death?).

And Adams told the pausing Mathieu that we should “follow the science,” which, unfortunately, to him means following the anti-science “advice” of the CDC and “public health” agencies, all those rubber-stampers for Pfizer and Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Glaxo and all points between.

Oh, well. So much for these two clowns, Sliwa and Adams.

Anyway, Sliwa actually supports the unconstitutional “stop and frisk” policy of government police goons stopping mainly minority youths and searching them, without a reason to suspect them of an actual crime that may have been committed.

But like it or not, government goons have to obey the LAW, which is the Constitution they swore to obey, which includes the Fourth Amendment. So it sounds like Sliwa doesn’t want to do that.

If you want to reduce crime in the streets, then repeal all the drug laws. Drug prohibition causes a black market which raises the price of drugs which incentivizes low-lifes to want to be drug pushers in playgrounds to get youths addicted, and drug prohibition creates the drug traffickers, drug lords, cartels and so prohibition contributes to the increases in the actual crimes of robbery, assault and murder in society.

Additionally, repealing all minimum wage laws will bring back many entry-level jobs in the cities so that the youths can have that important first job and getting their foot in the door of opportunity that statists have taken away from them with their bad government-compelled minimum wage policies. When the youths have a part-time job (or full time), that keeps them busy and more responsible, so they won’t get involved in drugs or criminal activity. There would be much less of an opportunity for Curtis Sliwa and other police-state fascists to stop and harass youths just standing around being black or Latino.

But sadly, the two statist party candidates, TweedleRepublican and TweedleDemocrat Sliwa and Adams don’t mention those necessary things.

Adams was endorsed by the conservative New York Post, and Sliwa was endorsed by talk radio personalities Sean Hannity and Frank Morano.

But unlike in Boston, there actually are more candidates from which to choose for mayor of New York. According to Ballotpedia, those candidates are: William Pepitone (Conservative Party), Quanda Francis (Empowerment Party), Raja Flores (Humanity United Party), Stacey Prussman (Libertarian Party), Skiboky Stora (Out Lawbreaker Party), Catherine Rojas (Party for Socialism and Liberation [self-contradictory much?]), and Fernando Mateo (Save Our City Party).

Sadly, Ballotpedia is showing how statist it is by giving only the initial “L” in parentheses after Stacey Prussman’s name, but it spells out all the other candidates’ parties in parentheses. I put the full word “Libertarian” in there.

According to the Forward, Libertarian candidate for mayor of New York Stacey Prussman is the “art, culture and food” candidate, the one who wants to be “the Jewish mother of New York City.”

Prussman is a recovering eating disorder sufferer and a vegetarian who wants to open more vegan kosher delis in New York. She wants to fight hate among the youth by teaching young students to cook. Quoted in the article, she says, “And then when they get older, they know how to make their own food and be healthy and to enjoy a meal together with someone from a different culture and background.”

So let’s fight all those anti-carrot juice bigots out there.

Anyway, Prussman’s platform is not particularly “libertarian,” such as promoting a “Universal Tax Equity” and “Equitable Basic Income” plan, to “provide 2,000 full time New York City residents who filed taxes from 2014 to 2019 with $2,000 a month for 2 years….”

No, you see as Murray Rothbard would say, taxation is theft. Taxation is theft because it is involuntary, and not based on a voluntary contract which any legitimate transaction would be based on.

So, because taxation is theft, the real libertarian plan is to repeal all forms of involuntary, coerced and compelled taxation-thefts and let people keep and do whatever they want with everything they earn or honestly acquire, and tell government thugs to stop stealing from the people!

And people have a right to their privacy and security, so no reporting anything to the government. If it is invasive to have to report your personal life matters to your neighbors then it is invasive (and thus criminal to coerce or compel) to have to report anything to the government.

However, Stacey Prussman does promote legalizing cannabis and decriminalizing sex work. Those are libertarian positions.

At least there are alternatives to the two statist party candidates, Tweedledum and Tweedledee. But at the end of the day, the city of New York needs to decentralize, as do all cities and towns, and the states of course, and especially, good ol’ United State of Amerika, USSA.

A “Coup” in the New Hampshire “Libertarian” Party?

Another controversy with the “Libertarian” Party to write about. How fun.

Now, I am not a member of the Libertarian (sic) Party, but I have had plenty to say about the Party and some of its political candidates in the past. And I have some comments to make now about the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire (LPNH).

Apparently, the LPNH chair Jilletta Jarvis has allegedly staged a “hostile takeover” of the Party by dismissing several of the duly-elected Party leaders or officers and installing her own people in a way that is not allowed by their Party by-laws. She is reacting to what she has determined to be an alleged undermining of the Party mainly by the Mises Caucus. Here is Jarvis’s letter explaining her moves.

And even Justin Amash opposed the “coup” and endorsed the executive committee elected in March as the legitimate leaders, and Tom Knapp expresses his view that Jilletta Jarvis’s changes are illegitimate.

For a discussion on this controversy, see the Wendy McElroy forum, and here is a lengthy post with many comments on Richard Winger’s Ballot Access News forum. Among the comments there are a formal letter of complaint to the National Libertarian Party regarding Jarvis’s actions. And LPNH executive committee member Sean Dempsey provides a timeline with links on the LP “takeover” or “coup” in New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die State.”

But first, I wanted to mention LPNH Chair Jilletta Jarvis’s 2018 LP campaign for governor of New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die” state. As I wrote here, while she’s good on some issues, on education she seems to support the continuation of government schools, when the libertarian answer is abolishing the government schools. The real answers are privatization and decentralization in education. And Jarvis wants to “reform” occupational licensing for “fair and equal opportunity for entrepreneurship to all people.” Huh? What are you, a Democrat? Actually, the libertarian answer to that is not “reforming” but abolishing licensure. Duh, Jilletta.

I just wanted to get that out of the way first. I hope you don’t mind that. Is she perhaps like Gary Johnson (a “sort-of” libertarian)?

So apparently, among other issues with the Mises Caucus, the Mises Caucus supposedly viewed the January 6th Capitol trespass and riot either favorably or without criticism. I think that was one of the issues.

LPNH Mises Caucus critics are suggesting that the Caucus supported the January 6th trespass and riot. The only thing I could find was a tweet in which the Mises Caucus merely expressed frustration at the LP for condemning “right-wing violence” (against the State, i.e. the Capitol) but not condemning left-wing violence (e.g. antifa/BLM destruction of businesses, etc.).

I agree with the Mises Caucus in its frustration with the LP. Gary Johnson was the “lifestyle libertarian” nominee for President, but not the principled candidate. The late Wenzel grilled Johnson in 2012 and then we discovered that Johnson had no clue of the LP’s principles or the basic philosophy of libertarianism. But now the Party has gone way off the deep end for “social justice” and identity politics as indistinguishable from the Democrat party, and their “lifestyle libertarianism” beliefs, which is why the apparatchiks of the Party picked Jo Jorgensen over Jacob Hornberger for President in 2020 despite Hornberger’s getting many more votes in the primaries.

I think that most in the Mises Caucus understand the basic principles of libertarianism than perhaps many of those in the Libertarian Party in general. It’s not about drugs, bitcoin, LGBT rights and fighting racism. It’s about the non-aggression principle, self-ownership, private property rights, freedom of association and freedom of non-association, and freedom of contract, in my view.

Some LP candidates, for instance, have been afraid to say out loud that the income tax is institutionalized theft and the IRS is a just another criminal racket. If you can’t acknowledge that first and foremost the IRS must be dismantled and abolished and all income taxes (and any form of involuntary confiscation of private property) be ended then you really aren’t a libertarian.

The reason that taxes imposed by government agencies are acts of theft is that they are involuntary and are in the absence of a voluntary contract.

The only kinds of transactions and trades that are legitimate are voluntary transactions and trades. If it’s involuntary then it’s illegitimate. It’s an act of theft no different from a street mugger demanding money from someone at gunpoint.

And that includes sales taxes as well. I enter into a contract voluntarily with a store or retail outlet or a customer or client, but I did not voluntarily agree that third parties i.e. government bureaucrats take a percentage of that trade away from me or from the trader. Such a transaction is none of the business of any third party no matter who that is.

Additionally, government criminal scum ordering us to report such trades is also a criminal act of invasion of privacy. The same goes for having to report income. (And by the way, currently I do everything I’m supposed to do by law, because I don’t want to be harassed or imprisoned by the terrorists who rule over us. Duh.)

And I wish that conservatives could see the light. They never declare that the income tax or otherwise involuntary, contract-less government confiscations are criminal and should be abolished. Conservatives ultimately love the IRS and the idea of government ordering the people to report their private financial matters to bureaucrat parasites, and conservatives ultimately approve of redistribution of wealth schemes imposed on them which force them to have to involuntarily forfeit their own earnings and wealth to fund “forever wars,” sanctuary cities, other people’s birth control, the very many 6-figure-salaried “Diversity and Inclusion Officers” and “LGBT Community Liaisons” in the colleges and universities, and trillions of dollars more of crap every year.

Conservatives are hopelessly glued to the Republican Party, despite its own enmeshment with the State as much as the Democrats. (I want to say “Republitards,” but I will refrain from doing that here.) And sadly, the conservatives are still hopelessly glued to Donald Trump, the former Clown-in-Chief, whose understanding of liberty is nil.

But I way digress. I’m supposed to be criticizing libertarians here, specifically the Libertarian (sic) Party. The Mises Caucus actually does for the most part demonstrate what the Libertarian Party was founded on: an advocacy of self-ownership and the non-aggression principle. The rest of the Party now are mainly concerned with racial and gender identity politics along with the wackos on the left, as well as this fetish with bitcoin and cryptocurrency and marijuana legalization. I suspect that the modern LP is widely infiltrated by the CIA as well. Jacob Hornberger was extremely critical of the CIA throughout his 2020 Presidential campaign, and that was another reason why the apparatchiks snubbed him at the convention.

So, the Libertarian Party sucks, as well as the two Soviet parties Demopublican and Republicrat. Those two “major” parties make up a criminal racket, crooks who make laws to intentionally obstruct third parties or independent candidates’ right to get their names on ballots. D and R are a racket, and they will not change.

Now, if it’s true that the LPNH Mises Caucus asserted that the 2020 Presidential election really was stolen, and that is another reason why they were kicked out, then that would be another example of people believing mainstream news media who repeat just about everything that bureaucrats tell them. No, not the Mises Caucus but the LPNH chair and others who should know better.

I have detailed all that stolen election stuff in this post. And more is coming out now that January 6th was a false flag op to further censor and criminalize the exposing and publicizing of 2020 election-steal claims and evidence.

So, with the “coup” in New Hampshire, it looks like LP apparatchiks are really apologists for the State and its crimes. One important thing that should be very much associated with being a libertarian, in my view, is “hating the State,” as Murray Rothbard would say, and recognizing that the State or the gubmint is a criminal racket, a regime that steals, defrauds, extorts, threatens, coerces, assaults, tortures and murders innocent people and gets away with the crimes. There are people who will do anything including organized vote fraud to get themselves into the powers of the armed State apparatus.

When the government wants to do something that erodes or limits the freedom of the people, the right thing to do is to assume that the government is lying to you. Whether it’s about Vietnam or Iraq, or… “election fraud? nothing to see here, move along…” or Covid. They are lying.

And speaking of Covid, I think that when the LP’s 2020 nominees for President and VP Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen photo-opped themselves wearing the self-censorship/self-suffocation gags, I found that quite disturbing. They seemed to be making light of the government’s totalitarian orders to display one’s slave status and submission to the supreme State, or they were endorsing it.

They can say, “Oh, we were just kidding around,” yeah sure. But I am NOT laughing! That whole bunch of CRAP is NOT funny!! The government orders people to have to wear those goddamn things for no good reason, which probably in many cases makes people sick, with their breathing in the bacteria buildup and re-breathing the exhaled CO2 while being deprived of oxygen!

Real libertarians have to recognize that the State, especially the more centralized the government, needs to be dismantled and its “workers” sent back into the private sector. (I know, “kicking and screaming,” but it’s the only way!) Centralized government cannot be “reformed” and made to “work for the people.” Even in recent times, the 1994 “Republican Revolution,” the 2000-2006 Republican majority with a Republican President, 2010 “Tea Party” successes and 2014, “reform” did not happen, and it will not.

Here is a Ron Paul 2012 Presidential campaign ad (when he was a Republican, but he sure out-libertarianized the Libertarian Party candidate, that’s for sure).

But now, in the “Live Free or Die” state of New Hampshire, the LP is divided between the radical freedom wing and the faux freedom Big Cheesette who kicks out the ones who are not afraid to tell the truth.

More News and Commentary

James Bovard: The Coming IRS Reign Of Terror.

Patricia McCarthy: Aldous Huxley Foresaw Our Despots — Fauci, Gates, and Their Vaccine Crusaders.

Robert Wenzel: Warning: New World Health Organization Group to Plan Health and the Economy of the Entire World

Paul Alexander: Lockdowns are No Substitute for Focused Protection.

Jennifer Margulis: Halt Covid Vaccine, Prominent Scientist Tells CDC

Brett Wilkins: Peace Activist Interrupts General Dynamics Shareholder Meeting To Blast the Business of War.

Alfred McCoy: The True Meaning of the Afghan “Withdrawal”

David Stockman: Re The Lefty Twit Called Zuck

Richard Ebeling: Building Up the State Means Pulling People Down.

Whitney Webb: This Biden Proposal Could Make the US a “Digital Dictatorship”

Jonathan Cook: Jerusalem Protests: The Mob ‘Breaking Faces’ Learned From Israel’s Establishment.

Revolver: Meet Bishop Garrison: The Pentagon’s Hatchet Man in Charge of Purging MAGA Patriots and Installing Race Theory in The Military.

The Last Refuge: Washington State Will Allow Increased Capacity Section in Churches and Venues, But Only for Vaccinated People – Proof of Vaccine Required.

And Daily Beast: Melinda Gates Warned Bill About Jeffrey Epstein.

More News and Commentary

Thomas Knapp: The Biden Administration Wants to Partner with Criminals to Spy on You.

Zero Hedge: Niall Ferguson: How Ike’s 1950s America Beat The ‘Asian Flu’ With Science & Common Sense.

Richard Ebeling: Biden’s Agenda of “Democratic” Paternalism and Planning.

Glenn Greenwald: The Left Continues to Destroy Itself and Others with Evidence-Free Destruction of Reputations.

Joseph Mercola: Food as Medicine — The Answer to Mounting Health Crises

James Bovard: A Grim Reaper Speaks.

Jenna McGuire: Anti-War Group Releases Activist Guide to End Militarized Policing in U.S.

Ron Paul: No, Conservatives Should Not Embrace MMT.

Alan MacLeod: It’s Aggression When ‘They’ Do It, but Defense When ‘We’ Do Worse.

Bill Sardi with Matthew Sardi: The Missing Piece of the Covid-19 Death Puzzle: Co-Infection

And Life Site: Biden Campaign and California Government Colluded to Censor Election Speech, Docs Reveal.

News and Commentary

Bill Sardi: The True Effectiveness of Covid Vaccines, and, Could the Vaccines Be Exacerbating Covid Cases?

Ron Paul: Want a Job? Get a Shot!

Wendy McElroy: Victim-Centered Justice Throws Black Men under the Bus.

M.K. Bhadrakumar: Ten Years On, Syria Is Almost Destroyed. Who’s to Blame?

Jacob Hornberger: Terminate NATO.

Gareth Porter: Trump Administration Insider Reveals How the US Military Sabotaged a Peace Agreement To Prolong War in Afghanistan.

Zero Hedge: Defiant US Soldiers Openly Questioning Why BLM Riots Weren’t Treated Like Capitol ‘Insurrection’

James Bovard: H.R. 1 and Herd Count Democracy

And Antony Davies: The Right of Exit Is What Keeps Society Prosperous and Peaceful.

More News and Commentary

Jacob Hornberger: Immigration Pipe Dream at the Los Angeles Times.

Wendy McElroy: “Victim-Centered” Justice Is a Threat to Due Process.

Tho Bishop: Trump’s Potential Legacy: 50 Million+ Enemies of the State

Charles Burris: ‘Government Becomes God’: Jacobin’s Satirical Cover Literally Idolizing Biden Strikes Nerve

Ryan McMaken: No, the Chinese Won’t Invade America If Secessionists Succeed.

And Veronique De Rugy: Joe Biden’s Plan for Big Government.

Carl Watner Has Died

One prominent member of the libertarian movement was Carl Watner, who died of cancer last week. He was born in 1948.

Murray Rothbard may have been “Mr. Libertarian,” but Carl Watner was “Mr. Voluntaryist,” in my opinion. All things voluntary, and views guided by the non-aggression principle.

Wendy McElroy writes:

It is with deep sorrow that I announce the death of Carl Watner, who was the primary hand in founding the modern Voluntaryist movement in the early 1980s. He worked tirelessly and without complaint, day in and day out for decades, expressing his principles through his prolific writing, his character, and his actions. I will never meet his like again. I was lucky to have known him at all.

Carl died at home on Tuesday after a long and brave fight against cancer. He was surrounded by a loving family, including his remarkable wife Julie, and he was in no pain. I asked. Carl will be cremated and laid to rest in a Baltimore cemetery that his family owned for many years and where he will be joining three generations of the Watner family.

I cannot imagine the world or the movement without Carl. He was an irreplaceable friend and colleague. Good journey, Carl.

Carl Watner’s ideas and writing had an influence on me in my own libertarian thinking, such as in my views on the immigration issue.

Carl Watner started the Voluntaryist Newsletter with Wendy McElroy and George H. Smith in 1982. Here is the Voluntaryist website, and here is the Table of Contents for the Voluntaryist Newsletter. He wrote an essay in 2014 on what Voluntaryism means to him.

And here are some of my favorite articles by Carl that I have posted links to here on this blog. I’m sure you will find them as enlightening and interesting as I did.

Every State a Police State.

Am I An American Citizen and What Might It Mean?

Voluntaryist Resistance

Poisoning the Public Mind: Why Real Dissent Must Be Silenced

Life, Liberty, and Quackery From A Voluntaryist Perspective

Why I Oppose Government Enumeration

Without Firing A Single Shot: Voluntaryist Resistance and Societal Defense

“The Illusion Is Liberty – The Reality Is Leviathan”: A Voluntaryist Perspective on the Bill of Rights

Non-Voting

Is Voting an Act of Violence?

Ropes of Sand: Voluntaryism and Secessionism

The Tragedy of Political Government

Besides his articles at the Voluntaryist Newsletter, here are some of his other articles and papers at the Mises Institute, and Reason magazine. And voluntaryist books are available at the Voluntaryist website, including his own book on Homeschooling (also available at Amazon).

RIP, Carl.

More USSA News and Commentary

Jacob Hornberger: Who Should Run the Country?

Becky Akers: An Entrepreneur Advises His Fellows, “Free Your Staff To Meet The Customer’s Needs And Not The Dictates of Some Pinhead Bureaucrat or Politician”

Jonathan Turley: New York Times Publishes Column By “Beijing’s Enforcer” In Hong Kong Despite Apologizing For Sen. Tom Cotton’s Column.

Laurence Vance: The Strange Thing about Biden’s Economic Agenda.

José Niño: Trump Can Break the Bipartisan Consensus by Pardoning Assange.

Charles Glass: The Unprecedented and Illegal Campaign to Eliminate Julian Assange.

Ray McGovern: James Comey’s Amnesia Makes Senate Session an Unforgettable Hop, Skip & Jump to Fraud.

Ron Paul: Trump and Biden Squabble While America Burns

Donald Boudreaux: A Curveball Isn’t an Existential Threat.

Michael Rozeff: Capital Destruction by Enemies of Our Civilization

MassPrivateI: Law Enforcement’s “Starlight” Program Is Really a Fusion Center Public Surveillance Program.

Laurence Vance: Trump, Taxes, and the Rich

And Dave DeCamp: Bipartisan Bill Would Give Israel Veto Powers Over US Arms Sales.

What Motivates the Bureaucrats to Act Like Psychopaths?

I don’t know whether the governors and mayors ordering businesspeople to close their businesses and ordering the people to have to stay in and not go out was intentional, like the governors knew ahead of time all the extra stress they would be inflicting on people, the further illnesses and even deaths they would be causing. I just don’t know.

It’s possible that some of them are insane psychopaths and love inflicting pain and suffering on innocent people.

Oh, goodie, look how the masses so easily obey orders and close everything down and wear ineffective masks just because we ordered them to do so, and based on our fear-mongering and making them panic…Heh, look how they’re hoarding all the toilet paper and disinfectant spray…

So power grabbing and usurping is an important factor.

And I really believe that some (or possibly a lot) of the Wall Street “panic selling” was not entirely panic selling but intentional, to cause the markets to crash as they did. Based on what I have heard or read, many of the Wall Street traders and brokers are “woke” SJWs, who share in the blind hatred of Donald Trump we see in the media and by politicians.

I can see the resentment and really the anger that a lot of Trump-hating people were feeling when seeing that some of his policies had spurred the economy, with the Dow shooting up 10,000 points since Trump became President, and the lowest unemployment rates especially for black and Hispanic Americans. It appears to me that the “woke” ones on Wall Street wanted to take all that away, at all cost.

That’s just my theory on that, that the selling off was in part intentional.

And then, besides the loony-tunes wanting to destroy society toward their socialist paradise, there are the idiots in politics who also hate Trump, like governors and mayors.

The orders by governors to close down businesses and put people out of work. You think that was all about some virus? Political hacks all across America could see their hated Trump getting reelected in November especially on his economy achievements, and they wouldn’t allow that.

Most political office holders have never actually owned their own business and have no idea what it’s like.

And the fact that millions of people would be put out of work, factories shut down, etc., whatever. “We have to defeat Trump.” There is also this desire among the brainwashed to bring on a totally government-controlled society, by destroying what we have now.

But the political hacks probably didn’t think about future food shortages in America. Like, it could never happen here. There’s always food. But we’re talking about very short-sighted thugs, frankly, who are attracted to government power and control, right?

The idiot governors and mayors are not considering the longer term consequences of their fascist and draconian policies of business shut-downs and stay-at-home orders.

Bureaucrats are narcissistic and short-sighted and only think in the short term.

Their intention is to “save lives,” by ordering businesses shut down. The short-term, immediate gratification aspect of these fascist orders is that they satisfy the bureaucrats’ lust for power and control, their Hitlerian dictator impulses. They LOVE ordering others around.

For instance, with what the bureaucrats are doing now, people do not have freedom of choice, to decide whether or not to go into a business in which they understand there may be a possible health risk doing so.

But there is always some risk in going out and about in public. There are always bacteria, germs and viruses. You just have to keep yourself well-nourished to keep your immune system strong.

The fascists do not believe the people should have that freedom of choice to take the risk. Fascists believe they know what’s best for you, and that their imprisonment orders are for your own good.

(Here is Larken Rose in a video on how the bureaucrats and government office holders actually see you, the people.)

But in the longer term the bureaucrats will cause deaths. All the heart attacks, strokes and other illnesses associated with people not having life-saving treatments and surgeries (that ironically the fascists call “elective” and “non-essential” surgeries!), and the extra STRESS these criminal bureaucrats are causing, of business owners and workers being thrown out of a job! And your f***ing little “stimulus” checks will not compensate for what is lost, for what has been stolen from them, you bureaucrat scum!

And I have heard that one motive behind the governors’ authoritarian decrees is just that: to get those $billion “stimulus” checks for their states. Many states are in near bankruptcy, and one reason is because they have so many “jobs,” and some “no-show” jobs with 6-figure salaries, that are “HACK jobs,” and those public pensions that private sector workers can only dream of.

And speaking of high unemployment levels now, are any of these government bureaucrats going to be laid off? Will any bureaucracies be cut or eliminated? Yeah, FAT CHANCE!

Especially in Massachusetts. Gov. Charlie Half-Baker protects those hack jobs and his cronies. Half-Baker is pleading to CONgress for those federal stimulus checks, even though the state had a $1 billion budget surplus in December, and has a “Rainy Day Fund” of $3.5 billion!

So the hacks in Boston want MORE from the taxpayers of Utah, Mississippi, and South Dakota! (Massachusetts state government is a “Hackarama,” as Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr calls it.)

So these politicians don’t care about “saving lives,” and if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. They just care about power and control. And being life-long parasites.

There is one very good explanation in political economic terms by Hans-Hermann Hoppe of why government bureaucrats are so short-sighted and exploitative of public funds and feeding at the public trough as they always do, without even using a napkin.

Hoppe’s comparison is when a government is owned by the public but under the control of bureaucrats (like we have now) and when it is owned by a monarchy, in which the King or Queen is the owner of the whole territory.

Hoppe writes:

As the owner of the capital stock on “his” territory, the king will be comparatively future-oriented. In order to preserve or enhance the value of his property, he will exploit only moderately and calculatingly. In contrast, a temporary and interchangeable democratic caretaker does not own the country, but as long as he is in office he is permitted to use it to his advantage. He owns its current use but not its capital stock. This does not eliminate exploitation. Instead, it makes exploitation shortsighted (present-oriented) and uncalculated, i.e., carried out without regard for the value of the capital stock.

And:

a private government owner (a monarch) will want to avoid exploiting his subjects so heavily, for instance, as to reduce his future earnings potential to such an extent that the present value of his estate actually falls. Instead, in order to preserve or possibly even enhance the value of his personal property, he will systematically restrain himself in his exploitation policies…. In distinct contrast… public government ownership will result in continual capital consumption. Instead of maintaining or even enhancing the value of the government estate, as a private owner would tend to do, a government’s temporary caretaker will quickly use up as much of the government resources as possible….

Temporary government caretakers like Gov. Charlie Half-Baker, in other words.

So the Rulers are real psychopaths who are drawn to such positions of power over others, and spewing their fear-mongering propaganda and are literally terrorizing the people.

And because of the terrorist fear-mongering, now instead of understanding that the COVID-19 is only as serious as a flu or bad cold and while .1% to .2% of those who have it actually die, many propagandized people instead really believe that if they have it they WILL die from it! That is what fear-mongering and propaganda will do, getting people to panic in fear and submission.

And it appears that this Trump hatred combined with the fanatical followers of the dream to create a socialist paradise has hypnotized many people to act like crazed lunatics, willing to destroy the entire country.