Credit Report Repair NewsUnited States Credit Report Repair News. Top Stories to help consumers fix bad credit, gain higher credit score, remove bankruptcy, free annual Equifax, TransUnion, Experian credit report. Free Credit Repair Counseling | (888) 502-1260
|
Table of Contents
|
The Next Pandemic: Chikungunya VirusSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
A major public health announcement issued today at alternative websites across the worldwide web about a natural remedy for Chikungunya virus, a mosquito-borne infectious disease that plagues millions of people living in equatorial countries, is not being issued by major public health agencies. Instead, a groundbreaking study (see press release below) was privately funded by a small research team of dedicated researchers in Reno, Nevada. In the aforementioned study, albeit a small pilot human clinical trial, 97% of study subjects experienced a profound and rapid clinical effect, not just a statistical improvement, that would be anticipated to make a demonstrable impact on public health globally. As such, news of it would normally be issued by The World Health Organization (WHO), its emergency licensure by the Food & Drug Administration, with funding by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). But news outlets throughout the world are not expected to distribute news of this breakthrough because it doesn’t come with the imprimatur of the WHO or NIH. Embarrassingly the $5.885 billion National Institutes of Infectious Disease that is solely committed to vaccines while overlooking targeted medicines for control of infectious diseases, was not at the forefront of this breakthrough. The remedy for Chikungunya virus is but a simple inexpensive amino acid – lysine. No boost to the stock price of any pharmaceutical company will be announced on Wall Street either. Sadly, we don’t live in a world where such natural and inexpensive remedies are embraced by public health authorities nor by industry-controlled news media. A businessman who will remain anonymous whispers to me: “There is no money in lysine therapy.” But there is plenty of money and no cure in vaccines. A high rate of mutations combined with the lack of long-term immunity is making modern synthetic vaccines against viruses less effective than their predecessors. This announcement comes on the heels of a news release from GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance, that the next pandemic will be Chikungunya virus! The GAVI press release says Chikungunya could become a “global health threat.” Well, that could only happen if swarms of mosquitoes choose to proliferate outside of equatorial zones. The same mosquitoes that are a vector for CHIKG in equatorial countries are prevalent in southern areas of the US (Florida, Texas) but do not carry the virus. Only 26 Chikungunya cases were reported in the US in 2020. None of these cases were from mosquito-borne transmission. All cases involved travelers returning to the US who were exposed overseas. But some imagined rationale will likely be conjured up to immunize the entire US population for Chikungunya. Patients with Zika virus were actually flown into the US to pose a contrived health threat that required US research funds to be used to develop a vaccine. Then public funds are tapped to develop vaccines rather than pharmaceutical R&D funds. So, pharma companies have incentive to spread infectious disease into the US to tap into the public pools of research funds. Lysine for COVID-19 coronavirus Just last month this same research team announced lysine is also a remedy for COVID-19 coronavirus. The current COVID-19 pandemic was called and the masses coerced to be immunized with experimental vaccines over a virus that kills just one quarter of one-percent of adults residing outside of nursing homes (source: Annals Internal Medicine, Vol. 174, Jan 2021). Mass vaccination is an overkill. Targeted drug therapy such as lysine would have averted onerous lockdowns that did not correlate with mortality rates anyway. These so-called “health institutes” are beholden to commercial interests and embrace a narrow vaccination approach to infectious disease rather than improving natural immunity. Once the public hears of these natural remedies, given that no proven vaccines exist for Chikungunya virus or COVID-19 coronavirus, and given that these natural remedies pose little or no harm and are inexpensive, they may by word-of-mouth gain wide acceptance without the approval of health overlords. Such wide public acceptance would reveal the incompetence and outright failure of health agencies to live up to their charters. Throwing money at infectious diseases has not been productive either. The Center for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) recently issued $14.1 million to support the development of a vaccine against Chikungunya virus. CEPI (Coalition For Epidemic Preparedness) issued an earlier grant for $21 million for the same purpose. When will this vaccination insanity end? (See press release below) KNOWLEDGE OF HEALTH, INC. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 10, 2021 CONTACT: Bill Sardi, Knowledge of Health, bsardi@aol.com Alex Chaihorsky, Bio-Virus Research, Reno, NV W O R L D W I T H O U T V A C C I N E S MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH: WITH NO VACCINE AVAILABLE, La Verne, CA (May 10, 2021): Using L-lysine, an inexpensive amino acid, an independent, privately-funded team of researchers reports for the first time the rapid resolution of symptoms from a mosquito-borne viral disease (Chikungunya) that plagues human populations in many equatorial countries Heretofore there have been no licensed vaccine or medicine for this incapacitating viral infection that affects millions of people worldwide. 1000 milligrams of L-lysine, a widely available dietary supplement, was administered to CHIKG-infected individuals with rapid disappearance of symptoms, usually within hours. Lysine therapy was considered remarkable. Among 40 acute GHIKG-infected patients:
The consumption of coffee was considered a complicating factor and study subjects were advised to cease coffee drinking until symptoms cleared. Common symptoms of chikungunya (CHIKG) disease, which typically occur 3-12 days after a mosquito bite, are fever and joint pain, with headache, muscle pain, joint swelling or rash also often seen. Another feature of CHIKG virus is a marked drop in blood platelets that facilitates blood clotting needed for wound healing. These symptoms may be chronic and/or recurring. Scientific corroboration There is corroborative science. Two-years ago US-based researchers reported that the substitution of lysine for arginine in the CHIKG virus “makes the virus more susceptible to clearance” by white blood cells known as phagocytes (fag-oh-sites) that literally digest pathogens in the blood circulation. In 2012 screening for molecules that inhibit the growth of CHIKG virus found lysine and vitamin C to be potent inhibitors of the virus. Diseases without vaccines Chikungunya virus and COVID-19 coronavirus are two infectious diseases with no licensed vaccine. Others without a vaccine are malaria, dengue, Zika, Ebola, hepatitis C, varicella-zoster virus, human immunodeficiency virus, and respiratory syncytial virus. Attempts to curb mosquito populations and to shield humans from mosquito bites appear to be futile given widespread insect proliferation in equatorial zones. The availability of a simple inexpensive remedy to quell symptoms is more amenable to disease control. L-lysine is a widely-used dietary component produced in tons for animal feed. Lysine/arginine balance A further understanding of dietary factors, more precisely the arginine/lysine balance, needs to be explored. Theoretically individuals who consume arginine-rich foods like nuts and cocoa/chocolate would experience more acute symptoms. Consumption of lysine-rich foods such as cheese would re-balance these two amino acids that appear to control susceptibility to the disease. Lysine for coronavirus too This same research group earlier reported that L-lysine rapidly resolves symptoms caused by COVID-19 viral infection (ResearchGate). It has long-been documented that L-lysine is a safe and effective remedy for herpes simplex infections that often emanate as a cold sore on the lips. While the demand for a larger placebo comparison trial will be anticipated, the overwhelming statistical effectiveness suggests a symptomatic cure is at hand. No emergency use of an experimental vaccine will be needed for Chikungunya. The research team at Bio-Virus Research, Inc., Reno, Nevada, founded by Alexander Chaihorsky PhD and Dr. Chris Kagan, with virologist Rony Tal, and human clinical field chief Bo Karlicki in the Dominican Republic, continues to conduct research to address challenging infectious diseases with inexpensive, affordable remedies. #### – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ResearchGate L-Lysine Treatment of Acute and Chronic Chikungunya Viral Infection (CHIKV)
DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.27985.25440LINK: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351428770_L-Lysine_Treatment_of_Acute_and_Chronic_Chikungunya_Viral_Infection_CHIKV For questions and info, please, contact: The post The Next Pandemic: Chikungunya Virus appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Indication Ivermectin Drastically Reduces Deaths Keeps Trickling in From the Third World. Too Bad It’s a Cheap GenericSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Back in January I wrote an article about four randomized controlled trials of ivermectin as a treatment for covid-19 that had at that time released their results to the public. Each of those four trials had promising results, but each was also too small individually to show any meaningful impact on the hard outcomes we really care about, like death. When I meta-analyzed them together however, the results suddenly appeared very impressive. Here’s what that meta-analysis looked like:
It showed a massive 78% reduction in mortality in patients treated with covid-19. Mortality is the hardest of hard end points, which means it’s the hardest for researchers to manipulate and therefore the least open to bias. Either someone’s dead, or they’re alive. End of story. You would have thought that this strong overall signal of benefit in the midst of a pandemic would have mobilized the powers that be to arrange multiple large randomized trials to confirm these results as quickly as possible, and that the major medical journals would be falling over each other to be the first to publish these studies. That hasn’t happened. Rather the opposite, in fact. South Africa has even gone so far as to ban doctors from using ivermectin on covid-19 patients. And as far as I can tell, most of the discussion about ivermectin in mainstream media (and in the medical press) has centred not around its relative merits, but more around how its proponents are clearly deluded tin foil hat wearing crazies who are using social media to manipulate the masses. In spite of this, trial results have continued to appear. That means we should now be able to conclude with even greater certainty whether or not ivermectin is effective against covid-19. Since there are so many of these trials popping up now, I’ve decided to limit the discussion here only to the ones I’ve been able to find that had at least 150 participants, and that compared ivermectin to placebo (although I’ll add even the smaller trials I’ve found in to the updated meta-analysis at the end). As before, it appears that rich western countries have very little interest in studying ivermectin as a treatment for covid. The three new trials that had at least 150 participants and compared ivermectin with placebo were conducted in Colombia, Iran, and Argentina. We’ll go through each in turn. The Colombian trial (Lopez-Medina et al.) was published in JAMA (the Journal of the American Medical Association) in March. There is one thing that is rather odd with this study, and that is that the study authors were receiving payments from Sanofi-Pasteur, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, and Gilead while conducting the study. Gilead makes remdesivir. Merck is developing two expensive new drugs to treat covid-19. Janssen, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, and Sanofi-Pasteur are all developers of covid vaccines. In other words, the authors of the study were receiving funding from companies that own drugs that are direct competitors to ivermectin. One might call this a conflict of interest, and wonder whether the goal of the study was to show a lack of benefit. It’s definitely a little bit suspicious. Anyway, let’s get to what the researchers actually did. This was a double-blind randomized controlled trial that recruited patients with mildly symptomatic covid-19 who had experienced symptom onset less than 7 days earlier. Potential participants were identified through a statewide database of people with positive PCR-tests. By “mildly symptomatic” the researchers meant people who had at least one symptom but who did not require high-flow oxygen at the time of recruitment in to the trial. Participants in the treatment group received 300 ug/kg body weight of ivermectin every day for five days, while participants in the placebo group received an identical placebo. 300 ug/kg works out to 21 mg for an average 70 kg adult, which is quite high, especially when you consider that the dose was given daily for five days. For an average person, this would work out to a total dose of 105 mg. The other ivermectin trials have mostly given around 12 mg per day for one or two days, for a total dose of 12 to 24 mg (which has been considered enough because ivermectin has a long half-life in the body). Why this study gave such a high dose is unclear. However, it shouldn’t be a problem. Ivermectin is a very safe drug, and studies have been done where people have been given ten times the recommended dose without any noticeable increase in adverse events. The stated goal of the study was to see if ivermectin resulted in more rapid symptom resolution than placebo. So participants were contacted by telephone every three days after inclusion in the study, up to day 21, and asked about what symptoms they were experiencing. 398 patients were included in the study. The median age of the participants was 37 years, and they were overall very healthy. 79% had no known co-morbidities. This is a shame. It means that this study is yet another one of those many studies that will not be able to show a meaningful effect on hard end points like hospitalization and death. It is a bit strange that studies keep being done on young healthy people who are at virtually zero risk from covid-19, rather than on the multi-morbid elderly, who are the ones we actually need an effective treatment for. Anyway, let’s get to the results. The post Indication Ivermectin Drastically Reduces Deaths Keeps Trickling in From the Third World. Too Bad It’s a Cheap Generic appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Covid Vaccine Is a Product of Systemic RacismSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
(This op-ed is written by a politically correct analyst, who will remain anonymous, but brought to you by Walter E. Block.) I cannot in good conscience take the COVID vaccine. Why not? Because its producers are mainly toxic white males. We wokesters want a COVID vaccine created in a more inclusive manner. Yes, yes, we will include a few token toxic white male supremacists, evil though they be, but we want laboratories that “Look Like America.” That means proportional representation by blacks, Hispanics, women, the transgendered, the queer, the bisexuals, the handicapped (both mentally and physically), young people, old people, people of color, Indigenous Americans, Asian Americans, and the vertically challenged. But the COVID vaccines have not been created in anything approaching an inclusive manner. Unless and until this occurs, we pledge not to avail ourselves of these vaccines. Why is this important? We the downtrodden will not feel safe until and unless the laboratories of the nation are emptied of most (not all—we are moderates, not radicals) cisgender white males. They are exploitive wherever they go; they have colonized; they have enslaved; they have exploited workers. These capitalists have ruined the economy and the environment. The reason minorities are not proportionately represented among chemists, biologists, epidemiologists, and medical scientists is that they have all too few role models to emulate. Given our boycott, this will soon change. On that happy day, future consumers will not have to be bitterly disappointed that these occupations are non-inclusive. Here are the details. After a pause in the distribution of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, there are two COVID vaccines currently making the rounds. They are produced by Pfizer and Moderna, respectively. Who are the people associated with the creation of these COVID vaccines? Pfizer lists the following individuals as being involved with vaccines: Nanette Cocero, William C. Gruber, Kathrin U. Jansen, Luis Jodar, and Nicholas Kitchin. Pfizer’s immunologists are Jean Beebe, Jeremy D. Gale, and Thomas A. Wynn. Those who study and cure rare diseases include Seng H. Cheng, Katherine L. Beaverson, Michael Binks, Christian Czech, Sarah Grimwood, Greg Larosa, John Murphy, and Clark Pan. Pfizer’s medical experts are Aida Habtezion and Mace L. Rothenberg. The team studying cardiovascular and metabolic diseases is comprised of Kendra K. Bence, Morris J. Birnbaum, Albert Kim, and Bei B. Zhang. Of these people, only Habtezion, who is from Eritrea, is African-American. The post The Covid Vaccine Is a Product of Systemic Racism appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Culture, Self, and LawSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
This is an extract from Self and Unself, Darren Allen’s new ‘philosophy of all and everything’. Some of the terms herein — consciousness, self, ego, etc — may appear somewhat mysterious or abstract as they are explained in earlier sections of the book. Self produces manifest culture, and then that culture shapes self. First, self is externalised as an expression — some kind of act or presentation. The expression appears as an object, a thing in the world, which is related to other objects, which are then reappropriated by man back into the self. A band releases an album, a building company constructs a block of flats, an advertising agency puts up hoardings around town, an individual recounts a few anecdotes. The songs, the dwellings, the signs and the stories become part of a world which then shapes those within that world. If self is unselfish this process ultimately begins “beyond” culture, with consciousness, to which the reappropriated modifications are subject to some kind of evaluation — I can reject the bullshit music, the ugly council estate, the advertising lies and the witless jibber-jabber. If, however, self is fundamentally egoic, consciousness is given no freedom to operate, and the caddis case is formed almost entirely from without, walling up inner quality, and with it, genuine individuality. First self speaks, then the words get set in stone, then the stone speaks to the self, writing its words back into the human heart, which speaks again.[1] If there is freedom to speak, and to be heard, and to walk away, this dialogue (or dialectic) is fruitful and serves man. But, just as if one person screws another down and forces words into her head it is no longer a conversation, so if society (culture plus self, or selves) fills its schools and lines its streets with messages that all say the same thing, with no way of escape, then we are no longer individuals participating in a society, but stackable storage units for whomever or whatever is filling us with the things we are forced to feel, eat, look at, think about and energetically engage with; in short, build our selves with. Culture was once built from nature, and, more intimately, from the unselfish origin of that which nature and culture have in common. This is why pre-civilised man considered nature and culture to be identical. The more culture came to be built from itself, the less it served the essence of man, until it came to compel man to accept its objective validity or suffer the consequences. Not in an overt tyrannical sense, but in the unalterable fact of its existence. You can think away culture or pretend it doesn’t matter — ignore, say, the rules of language or pretend that they are dispensable, but you will be punished, mocked, excluded, brought back into line or killed. Likewise, if your social self is at odds with your individual self, then all kinds of problems are on their way. This does not mean that I must be something other than my social self, but that I am continually compelled to harmonise the two, and if I can’t — if I cannot be in the world who I feel I really am—then I will suffer in the world, as everyone who is honest does. Ego keeps this suffering at bay by endlessly affirming its social self. As that most unreal and egoic of sources, the average Teevee-American has it, ‘I am a cop, it’s what I do…’ ‘I am a mother, it’s what I do…’ Or, alternatively, ‘This is my town, these are my people’. Such a ‘self’ is not something which is invented, it is there, ‘inside me’. I look inside and see that I am the cop or mother that society takes me to be (or, for the fake outsider, that I wish society to take me to be). And I have no desire to be anything else. Not that there is anything wrong with inhabiting a role, nor with identifying with a community, nor that there aren’t always elements of self that do not fit into what is required by the social world; rather that ego hides from itself in its social representation. Man may be psychologically and spiritually deformed by his activity within the egoic group or institution, he may work in a mechanical manner, in mediated environments, in order to produce or manage things which have no recognisable human meaning, and he may be forced to conceal his horror and disgust behind an upbeat mask of emotional management, but if there is no truth beyond a self-constructed from the group, he will defend his deformity, and consequent duplicity and misery, as truth. All criticisms of the group are taken to be criticisms of the self — ‘I am mortally offended by your prejudice’ — and all criticisms of the self are taken to be prejudice against the group — ‘It’s not because you are repulsed by my moral deformity, it’s because you are racist/homophobic/anti-white/anti-American etc’. The seamless unity of self and society in the egoic mind explains man’s total blindness to systemic constraints, and to the fundamental paradigms of the system. They are one with his ego, which is why, today for example, man spends so much time thinking and talking about voting, about reforming teaching, about having fairer laws, about creating cleaner motorways and so on and so forth; but not a word on how disabling democracy is, or education, or law, or transport, or the encompassing system, which is as invisible to him as water is to a fish, or anger is to a van driver. The post Culture, Self, and Law appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Fantastic Finding: German Study Shows Added CO2 Has Led to 14% More Vegetation Over Past 100 Years!Sunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Almost everyone with even just a fraction of a science education knows Co2 is fertilizer to vegetation and that the added 100 or so ppm in our atmosphere over the past decades have been beneficial to plant growth and thus led to more greening of the continents. Yet, some alarmists still sniff at this fact, or deny it. More trees (+7%) and vegetation (+14%) In the 34th climate video, Die kalte Sonne here reports on a recent German study by Merbach et al that looks at the question of just how beneficial the added CO2 has been to plant growth globally.
The authors’ findings: Over the past 100 years, there has been increased global vegetation growth. “The global vegetation cover increased approximately 11- 14%, of which 70% can be attributed to the increased CO2 in the atmosphere,” reports Die kalte Sonne on the findings. Another result: “Since 1982, the inventory of trees has increased more than 7%”. Crop yields will rise by up to 15% by 2050 The news gets even better, the scientists show. Food production is expected to surge due to the increased amounts of CO2:
Chart source: Cropped here. As the diagram above shows, crops such as soy bean (Soja), wheat (Weizen), rice (Reis) and corn (Mais) will surge as CO2 concentration rises to 550 ppm by 2050, thus lending a huge hand in feeding the planet’s growing population, which could reach 10 billion by mid century. Germany: more than 30% higher crop yields since 1990 Another example cited is Germany: “From 1990 to 2015 in Germany, crop yields for wheat, barley, corn and potatoes rose more than 30%, which the researchers attribute in part to the higher CO2 concentrations,” Die kalte Sonne reports. “The authors hope that the CO2-related crop yield increase will secure the food and feedstuffs production and contribute to feeding the world’s growing population.” The study appeared in the Journal of Land Management, Food and Environment at the end of 2020. This originally appeared on NoTricksZone. The post Fantastic Finding: German Study Shows Added CO2 Has Led to 14% More Vegetation Over Past 100 Years! appeared first on LewRockwell. |
‘Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home’: VE Day and the End of the American CenturySunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Seventy-six years ago, on May 8, 1945, at 2301 hours, Central European Time, World War II in Europe officially ended. Although the war would continue in the Pacific Theatre for several more months, May 8 marked the dramatic end of what was certainly the most horrific and disastrous land war in history. European culture was changed irrevocably. A civilization which had survived the devastation and depopulation of the Thirty Years War, the horrors of the French Revolution and Napoleon, and then the calamity of the Great War of 1914-1918, now witnessed a kind of final collapse, a coup de grace by which its politics, its history, its traditions, its very mode of viewing the world were undone. Those millennial traditions and inherited beliefs, that time-honored culture, that understanding of how societies function and properly exist so identified with Europe—what remained of that, after the catastrophe of the First World War—was now overwhelmed, subsumed into a new reality dominated by competing blocs: the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its Communist satraps. Both spoke often and loudly of democracy and equality; both projected global visions for the world. Their definitions were, of course, different. But both had the cumulative effect of exiling older terminologies and language, and, in practice how Europe and the rest of the world should be organized and governed, and what principles and beliefs should be held dear. In their conquered zones the Soviets, of course, did their best for the next forty-plus years to extinguish long-standing religious belief and a Western and Christian culture that dated back at least to Charlemagne’s coronation in Rome on Christmas Day, 800 A.D. But in an ironic way, Communist oppression only covered over that legacy and those inherited traditions and faith. The persecution did not extinguish that heritage; it survived intact, often just below the surface, to emerge fully vibrant in such countries as Hungary, Poland, and Russia after the fall of Communism in 1989-1991. And in some fascinating ways what the break-up and disappearance of the Soviet system revealed was that its totalitarian rule had served as kind of prophylaxis which not only kept its “captive nations” superficially docile, but also protected them against the more radical and life-altering vision of a Pax Americana from the West. This last statement deserves explanation. The Marshall Plan and American insistence on disauthorizing older more conservative and traditional elements in Western Europe—during the same period as the Soviet domination of Eastern Europe—had profound cultural and educational effects. Whereas Soviet domination was unable to uproot an older religious faith and culture in its areas of hegemony—and, in reality, those forces were to play a significant role in its eventual overthrow—in countries like Germany, France, and Italy the transformation imposed by the United States was more profound and pervasive, and the resistance to change far less resilient. Essentially, American global policy placed nebulous values of equality and liberal democracy ahead of allegiance to country, or, rather, insisted that allegiance to country was coterminous with acceptance of American style democracy and equality as absolutes. Of course, the rationale for this was an initially legitimate and real opposition to world Communism—our American “ideology” against theirs, our ideals against the Red menace. But in its post-war role America became the “exceptional nation,” and soon assumed the duty to go round the world and impose those ideas and that vision of democracy and equality on other, unenlightened or recalcitrant countries. To use the words of Neoconservative author Allan Bloom (in his The Closing of the American Mind): “And when we Americans speak seriously about politics we mean that our principles of freedom and equality and the rights based on them are rational and everywhere applicable.” Americans thus engaged in “an educational experiment undertaken to force those who do not accept these principles to do so.” (Quoted in Paul Gottfried, War and Democracy, 2012, p. 110) In so doing our policy-makers, given free run for decades, not only attempted to impose a kind of global “world faith” which would subvert regional identities and national traditions abroad, but also strengthened and cemented the growth of what James Burnham and Sam Francis would call “the managerial state” at home. It was the fulfillment of the prophetic words of General Robert E. Lee after the War for Southern Independence and the resultant radical bowdlerization of the United States Constitution: the America cobbled together in 1787 would henceforth be set upon a path “aggressive abroad and despotic at home.” If World War II signaled the final eclipse of the British Empire—a decline actually begun through the exhaustion and destruction of the Great War—it also signaled the advent of the American colossus. And despite a spirited challenge from world Communism, it was the American side which would finally emerge triumphant. But the seeds of our decline were already present and germinating; indeed, they had been there since those fateful days in 1865. There is little said by Abraham Lincoln with which I can agree. But I do concur with the words he spoke in Springfield, June 16, 1858: “A nation divided against itself, cannot stand.” And so, just as the unsuspected election of Donald Trump in 2016 indicated rising and serious doubts about American universalism in the world, if ever so slightly, it also uncovered giant fissures and raw divisions between populations not only incapable of speaking to or understanding each other, but in fact, incapable of finding agreement over basic definitions of what is good and true. Expressions such as “systemic racism,” “sexism,” “white supremacy,” and “police brutality” have been deployed as verbal cluster bombs used to disable, cancel, and ultimately vanquish all opposition to the rapidly advancing liquidation of those remnants of Western civilization and culture which somehow escaped the post-war dissolution. May 8, 1945, and the Potsdam Agreement later that August, while representing the end of mankind’s worst land war and the (brief) triumph of a Pax Americana, foretold the eventual triumph of progressivist neo-Marxism and the demise of the “American Century.” The Framers of the American Constitution in 1787 were not granted a divine guarantee that the confederation they cobbled together would last forever. It was, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, “a republic if you can keep it.” That republic has not been maintained. The time for dissolution and separation is at hand. Reprinted with the author’s permission. The post ‘Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home’: VE Day and the End of the American Century appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Coming IRS Reign of TerrorSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
The power to tax has long conferred the power to destroy political opponents. But in the glorious era of President Joe Biden, all previous cases of government abuse of power are being expunged, at least by the media and Biden supporters. That is why it is supposedly safe to vastly increase the power of perhaps the most feared federal agency, the Internal Revenue Service. After announcing his endless wish list for new federal spending, Biden told Congress last week: “I’ve made clear that we can do it without increasing deficits.” Biden believes he has found a goose that will lay golden eggs for federal revenue — a new army of IRS agents to hound Americans and corporations to pay far more taxes. The Washington Post reported that “the single biggest source of new revenue in the plan comes from dramatically expanding the clout of the nation’s tax agency.” Slate reported, “Biden wants to fund a massive upgrade to the American welfare state by making the IRS great at audits again.” But the agency Biden seeks to expand and unleash has an appalling record. As author David Burnham noted in “A Law Unto Itself: The IRS and the Abuse of Power” (1990), “In almost every administration since the IRS’s inception the information and power of the tax agency have been mobilized for explicitly political purposes.” President Franklin Roosevelt used the IRS to harass newspaper publishers who were opposed to the New Deal, including William Randolph Hearst. FDR also dropped the IRS hammer on political rivals such as the populist firebrand Huey Long and radio agitator Father Coughlin, and prominent Republicans such as former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. President John F. Kennedy spurred the IRS to launch the Ideological Organizations Audit Project, which targeted right-leaning groups, including the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade, the American Enterprise Institute and the Foundation for Economic Education. Nixon Administration officials gave the IRS a list of official enemies to, in the words of presidential assistant John Dean, “use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” Congress enacted legislation to severely restrict political contacts between the White House and the IRS. But the power of IRS agents continued to increase decade by decade. In 1988, then-Sen. David Pryor, a moderate Democrat from Arkansas, warned that the IRS “operates a near totalitarian system.” Pryor complained that the IRS had encouraged a “bounty-hunter mentality among revenue officers” and called for reforms to assure that the IRS “operates on the basis of public respect rather than fear.” Congress enacted a so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights but it failed to curb the revenuers. The Clinton administration, like many of its predecessors, exploited the IRS to punish its political enemies. In 1995, the White House and the Democratic National Committee produced a 331-page report entitled “Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce” that attacked magazines, think tanks, and other entities and individuals who had criticized President Bill Clinton. In the subsequent years, many organizations mentioned in the White House report were hit by IRS audits. More than 20 conservative organizations — including the Heritage Foundation and the American Spectator magazine — and almost a dozen individual high-profile Clinton accusers, such as Paula Jones and Gennifer Flowers, were audited. Members of Congress also routinely exploited their power to send the secret financial police against their enemies. The Associated Press reported in 1999 that “members of both parties in Congress have prompted hundreds of audits of political opponents in the 1990s,” including “personal demands for audits from members of Congress.” Audit requests from congressmen were marked “expedite” or “hot politically” and IRS officials were obliged to respond within 15 days. Because the abuse was bipartisan, there was little enthusiasm on Capitol Hill for an investigation. In the Obama era, the IRS again became a political hit squad. The IRS demanded donor lists from 24 conservative nonprofits and proceeded to audit 10% of their donors — an audit rate ten times higher than average for the country. A 2013 Inspector General report confirmed that IRS employees had devoted far more scrutiny to nonprofit applications that used the terms “tea party” or “patriot” or that criticized government spending or federal deficits. In 2017, the IRS formally apologized to scores of conservative groups that it had wrongfully targeted in tax audits. The post The Coming IRS Reign of Terror appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Boosting Your Mood and Improving Your Health With Vitamin DSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Are you or someone you love suffering from depression or an autoimmune disorder? It appears vitamin D deficiency may be to blame. Vitamin D is essential for proper immune functioning and alleviation of inflammation. The beneficial effects of vitamin D on protective immunity are due in part to its impact on the innate immune system and has numerous effects on cells within the immune system. Vitamin D is also involved in maintaining the proper balance of several minerals in the body. And, it helps to ward off the flu and many viruses and treat them. The latest research links vitamin D deficiency to many disease states. These disease states include cancer, osteoporosis, heart disease, depression, arthritis, and just about every other degenerative disease. “Vitamin D reduces depression. In a randomized, double-blind study, People with depression who received vitamin D supplements noticed a marked improvement in their symptoms.” – Journal of Internal Medicine According to the Nutrition Research Journal, as many as 80% of people are deficient in vitamin D. Inadequate exposure to sunshine, poor eating habits, malabsorption, the VDR genetic mutation, and accelerated catabolism due to certain medications, dark skin pigment color, and too much sunscreen can be to blame. A doctor can check vitamin D levels with a simple blood test. Many mainstream doctors will suggest that you are within normal limits if your levels are 20-30ng/mL. However, for optimal health, the Endocrine Society and many functional medicine M.D.s and naturopaths will recommend levels of between 40-70 ng/mL for both children and adults. These doctors will also recommend a more aggressive replenishment program. For example, at age five, my son’s level was 24. The pediatrician recommended 500iu daily of supplementation, while our naturopath recommended 5,000iu daily for six months before retesting. Six months later, his levels were almost normal. “Through several mechanisms, vitamin D can reduce risk of infections. Those mechanisms include inducing cathelicidins and defensins that can lower viral replication rates and reducing concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines that produce the inflammation that injures the lining of the lungs, leading to pneumonia, as well as increasing concentrations of anti-inflammatory cytokines” – PubMed How to Increase Your Vitamin D Levels Get enough sun. Vitamin D3, “the sunshine vitamin,” is the only vitamin your body that is made, with the help of the sun. So be sure to get enough sun exposure to help the body make this essential nutrient. Hold off trying to protect ourselves from the rays of the sun at every turn by slathering sunscreen. Allow yourself to play outside, garden, and enjoy the rays in moderation. If you must use some sunscreen, avoid chemical sunscreens made with toxic chemicals that cause thyroid dysfunction, endocrine disruption, allergies, organ toxicity, reproductive toxicity, skin cancer, development, brain, and metabolism problems. Shop for natural mineral-zinc-based certified products instead. When exposed to scorching climates or in the sun for extended periods, we use sunscreens by Babyganics, Badger, Babo Botanicals, and Goddess Garden products. Eat a well-balanced diet, with foods higher in vitamin D. Although it is believed that we only get twenty percent from the foods we eat. Some foods higher in D include cod liver oil, fish, oysters, eggs, and mushrooms. Get checked for the VDR mutation. A blood test will determine if you have mutations in the vitamin D receptor. The consequence can be lower vitamin D levels and the inability to absorb vitamin calcium and many other minerals properly. According to a 2020 scientific report, supplementation of vitamin D can help improve VDR gene expression, so more supplementation may be necessary if you have this mutation. “Something so simple. Vitamin D supplementation could improve the health status of millions and so becomes an elegant solution to many of our health problems today.” – Carol L. Wagner, MD – Medical University of South Carolina Supplementation 101. Supplementation is often critical if you cannot properly metabolize or absorb enough vitamin D or not get enough sunshine. In areas with long winters and specific populations of people with darker skin color, supplementation may be even more critical. There are many supplements on the market. However, many tablet forms are not as bioavailable and harder to absorb. Therefore, it has been recommended that liquid forms are better. In addition, liquid D is often suspended in olive oil, which helps the vitamins to absorb more easily since it is fat soluble. One of my favorite brands is by Seeking Health. It does not contain any impurities or allergy-inducing ingredients. Reprinted with permission from Collective Evolution. The post Boosting Your Mood and Improving Your Health With Vitamin D appeared first on LewRockwell. |
I’m One of Millions Who Have Chosen Not To Receive a Covid ShotSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
The mainstream media and the medical orthodoxy is adamant that everyone needs to get the jab – or face exclusion from everyday freedoms and be shunned from society. Don’t they realise how fascistic this view is? This is not an anti-vaccine rant. It is a sober discussion of the matter of civil liberties. Since March 2020, we have been forced to wear masks. The mask is a crucifix. It signals to society that you are a believer. (In Covid-19.) It tells society that you are compliant and have submitted. Like taking the knee, it is virtue signalling. It says you are happy with the lockdowns because, hey, you don’t have to go to work and you still get a ‘stimmy’ cheque. The single most effective way of breaking down a human being is social isolation and distancing. Irreparable harm is being done to children, especially, by enforced mask wearing. In any free society, we should be able to ask questions and make our own choices about receiving medical treatment, or not. But anyone who asks questions is automatically branded “anti-science”. The notion that there is just one scientific doctrine to follow is actually anti-scientific in itself. And that’s not just my view, but that of scientists. The notion that freedom of speech still exists in America today is a nonsense. Those that dare question the efficacy of the smorgasbord of vaccinations are cancelled and shamed. They are dehumanized and ‘othered.’ The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights. The premise of the First Amendment is unique. Allowing freedom of speech means allowing someone who disagrees with you the right to voice their opinion, however offensive it might be. It is precisely this freedom of speech that made America great. Be prepared to be offended. How tragic that the press are now the government lapdogs. “The View”, a daily talk show on ABC, is just one of many outlets that seek to humiliate and shame those who are not following the approved Covid narrative. For the last couple of weeks, I have watched its presenter, Sunny Hostin, insult Americans whom she brands the ‘vaccine hesitant.’ Here’s her take on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in 2021 America: “When you look at the folks that are not getting vaccinated because it’s a quarter of Americans that are not getting vaccinated, white evangelicals, 45% said they won’t get vaccinated… Republicans, almost 50% are refusing to get the vaccine. We won’t reach herd immunity because of those particular groups. “I say we need to shun those that refuse to get vaccinated. Just like now in certain states… there are signs on storefronts on businesses.. [stating] no mask, no entry. I think if you have not been vaccinated, no entry. You want to get on a plane? You have to be vaccinated. … You don’t get the liberties that come with immunity. Something has to break. If that’s your personal choice not to get vaccinated, you don’t then get to infringe on the rights of those who have chosen to protect their fellow citizens.” And, of course, all these glossy women in the mainstream media, with their big, strong teeth, concur that Donald Trump must be banned from every platform and be punished for his alleged mishandling of the virus. “So many people hang on his every word. He is still a public safety threat,” Hostin explains. “He can harm public safety and harm this country. He is too much of a danger. He doesn’t need to contaminate the airwaves.” This subjectivity of censorship is why the cure is worse than the illness. We live in a post-truth world whose emblem is stupefying hypocrisy. The leftists view on abortion is: “My body, my choice.” However, the leftists’ view on vaccines is: “Your body, my choice.” The consensus of these people – and they are to be found on every other mainstream channel and newspaper, not just ABC – is that they don’t want unvaccinated people around them. Unvaccinated people are the unclean and should be punished. They shouldn’t be allowed to take their children to schools, go to restaurants, take cruises or even walk in the park. Don’t you dare come near me without a vaccine. Does that mean I am to be banned from planes, shops and offices, as Hostin advocates? Can the state compel you to take a vaccine with the reward of everyday freedoms? Technically, no. Roe v. Wade decided that no one can be discriminated against based on an aspect of their medical history, so unless the US Supreme Court overrules that case, vaccine and vaccine passports are in fact unconstitutional and illegal. The Texas pediatrician Peter Hotez, backed by Bill Gates, wrote in Nature magazine recently. Hotez claims there is “anti-vax aggression” and he equates anti-vaxxers with cybercriminals and nuclear terrorists. He wants the United Nations to establish shock troops to hunt down and eliminate them. Last time I looked, the groups that are actually committing violence are BLM and Antifa. But they are never called to account. The mainstream media now effectively designates anti-vaxxers as terrorists. Vaccine sceptics are the dangers and risks to society, while BLM and Antifa are the good guys. The latest attack on the bone-headed populace – aka, those that haven’t been vaccinated – by Hostin and her fellow travellers is chilling. Even her co-presenter Whoopi Goldberg was a little taken back: “Requiring proof that one has been vaccinated in order to travel – is this crazy?” Hostin was unmoved: “It’s not a radical idea, the vaccine is solid.” “At what time do we give up on these boneheads?” another host, Joy Behar, demanded. “You have to have proof of vaccination. Everyone must be inconvenienced. You don’t get to certain events. This is not a political issue.” Behar, Hostin et al. obviously concur with the Michigan Governor, Gretchen Witmer, who has made her entire state hostage to being vaccinated. Get the jab or suffer gunpoint-enforced lockdowns: they won’t end until 70% of the state’s adults surrender to being injected. This is fascistic coercion that violates restrictions against medical experiments, violates fundamental human rights and the requirement for informed consent. Surely such tactics should never be deployed or tolerated in a free society? Are we who choose to stay vaccine-free, who declare we have sovereign rights over our own bodies, to be publicly singled out, excluded and punished? After the Nuremberg Race Laws were passed in Germany in 1935, Jews were ostracised, discriminated against, and later had to wear a yellow badge so as to make ‘the enemy within visible.’ Are those of us in the 21st century unable to provide proof of being vaccinated against Covid, going to suffer a similar fate? (And, just to be clear, I am not making any comparisons to the later, heinous genocide that occured, but simply to how a majority can go down the road of singling out and discriminating against a minority). Today’s mainstream media seems intent on creating a two-tier society: the virtuous vaccinated and the unclean unvaccinated. Covid apartheid, anyone? The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT. The post I’m One of Millions Who Have Chosen Not To Receive a Covid Shot appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Disney Corp. Has Taken a Deep Dive Into Race HatredSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Going back to the late 1920s, every single child raised in America has intersected in some way with products from Walt Disney: We’ve watched the movies and TV shows, sung the songs, worn the clothes, and visited the theme parks. Through it all, Disney stood for wholesome family entertainment. That is no longer the case. Disney is a hardcore leftists corporation that is pushing its politics on children and training its employees to be white-hating racists or self-loathing white people. It’s time to give up Disney. During Walt Disney’s tenure, his company also generated propaganda. Behind all the wonderful entertainment the company was pushing several themes: Heterosexual love is real, the nuclear family matters, American patriotism is important, and God is a beneficent presence in our lives. Many parents and grandparents buying Disney videos for their children or taking family trips to the theme parks operate under the mistaken impression that this is still the case. They’re half right. Disney is still generating propaganda, but it’s about race and gender in ways many parents may not support. Just the other day, we learned that Disney’s Pixar is planning to introduce a so-called “transgender” girl character for its next Toy Story movie. That means it is going to have a boy who thinks he’s a girl as a character in a movie aimed at little children. Disney’s also focused on gay characters in Onward and Out. It turns out that these forays into pushing the cultural window further and further left are mere bagatelles compared to what’s going on behind the scenes. Journalist Christopher Rufo has become the go-to person for whistleblowers who want to expose their employers’ deep dives into Critical Race Theory. He received a doozy of a blown whistle about what’s happening in the Disney corporate offices, which are forcing employees to embrace CRT and gender madness. There is no real difference between CRT and old-time eugenics. While the latter came up with stupid, scientific-sounding, race-hating palaver about Blacks being racially inferior, CRT does the same, only it claims that Whites are racially inferior. Both are evil doctrines. Eugenics paved the way for Hitler, who was inspired by the racial laws Democrats passed in the South. It’s worrisome to contemplate what CRT will inspire. At Disney, employees are being bullied into believing that race, an immutable part of every person, is the ultimate determining factor about that person. At the same time, they’re being taught that a person’s sex, which is another immutable factor, is infinitely malleable based on feelings. The post The Disney Corp. Has Taken a Deep Dive Into Race Hatred appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Reported Vaccine Injuries Continue To Climb. Pfizer Seeks Full Approval for Covid VaccineSunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
The number of reports of injuries and deaths following COVID vaccines continues to rise, according to data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The data comes directly from reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date. Today’s data show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 30, a total of 157,277 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 3,837 deaths — an increase of 293 over the previous week — and 16,014 serious injuries, up 2,467 since last week.
In the U.S., 240.2 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of April 30. This includes 105 million doses of Moderna’s vaccine, 127 million doses of Pfizer and 8 million doses of the Johnson &Johnson (J&J) COVID vaccine. Of the 3,837 deaths reported as of April 30, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 16% occurred within 24 hours and 39% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated. This week’s VAERS data show:
FDA set to authorize Pfizer vaccine for young teens On May 4, The Defender reported the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is preparing to authorize use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine in adolescents 12 to 15 years old by early next week. The company said it also plans to ask the FDA to expand Emergency Use Authorization for its vaccine for children ages 2 to 11 in September. According to CDC data, the death rate among adolescents ages 0 to 17 who get COVID and are subsequently hospitalized is 0.7%, with many experiencing either mild or no symptoms at all. The COVID death rate in all adolescent age categories is less than 0.1%, leading some experts to question whether vaccines should be targeted to an age group that so far appears to be mostly spared from severe COVID. As CNN reported Friday, Pfizer filed for full FDA approval for its COVID vaccine for people ages 16 and up. The FDA requires vaccine manufacturers submit data on manufacturing processes, facilities and additional information that demonstrates the vaccine can be produced reliably and consistently. Once all the required information is submitted, a goal date will be set for a decision by the FDA. Pfizer requested priority review, which asks the FDA to take action within six months, compared to 10 months designated under standard review. Third U.S. male diagnosed with vaccine-induced blood clots, woman dies from brain hemorrhage after J&J vaccine On May 6, The Defender reported doctors at University of Utah Health treated the third male to develop vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia in the U.S. The man, under age 50, received J&J’s vaccine in early April. Ten days later he experienced pain in his toes, which then progressed to his thighs. He later began experiencing chest pain. A CT scan revealed a bilateral pulmonary embolism. Physicians discovered low platelets and blood clots in his legs and lungs, leading them to suspect VITT was the cause. On May 4, The Defender reported a 35-year-old Michigan woman died from complications 11 days after receiving J&J’s vaccine. The woman’s family said her headache started on April 16 — eight days after being vaccinated. She died three days later. Her death certificate notes a natural death, specifically from an acute subarachnoid hemorrhage, or bleeding between the brain and tissue around the brain. The attending physician filed a report to VAERS. In an email to the family, the CDC confirmed her death had been reported to VAERS, but said the system is not designed to determine whether a reported adverse event was caused by the vaccine. Children’s Health Defense queried the VAERS data for adverse events associated with the formation of clotting disorders and other related conditions and found 2,808 reports for all three vaccines from Dec. 14, 2020, through April 30. Of the 2,808 cases reported, there were 1043 reports attributed to Pfizer, 893 reports to Moderna and 860 reports to J&J — 847 cases more than U.S. health officials acknowledged during the April 23 meeting where it was recommended the pause be lifted on J&J’s vaccine. Denmark ditches J&J vaccine On May 3, The Defender reported Denmark became the first country to exclude J&J’s COVID vaccine from its vaccination program over a potential link to blood clotting disorders. The Danish Health Authority said in a statement it had concluded “the benefits of using the COVID-19 vaccine from J&J do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect in those who receive the vaccine.” “Taking the present situation in Denmark into account, what we are currently losing in our effort to prevent severe illness from COVID-19 cannot outweigh the risk of causing possible side effects in the form of severe blood clots in those we vaccinate,” the health authority said. Denmark stopped using AstraZeneca’s vaccine last month after European regulators found a possible link between the vaccine and “very rare” blood clots. CDC ignores The Defender, no response after two months According to the CDC website, “the CDC follows up on any report of death to request additional information and learn more about what occurred and to determine whether the death was a result of the vaccine or unrelated.” The Defender reached out to the CDC on March 8 with a written list of questions about reported deaths and injuries related to COVID vaccines, the status of ongoing investigations reported in the media, if autopsies are being done, the standard for determining whether an injury is causally connected to a vaccine, and education initiatives to encourage and facilitate proper and accurate reporting. We have made numerous attempts to contact the CDC via phone and email. As of May 7, 60 days after our initial inquiry, we still have yet to receive answers to our questions. Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps. Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission. The post Reported Vaccine Injuries Continue To Climb. Pfizer Seeks Full Approval for Covid Vaccine appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The ‘Fascist Left’: Myth or Reality?Sunday 09 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
In the last few years, many conservative commentators and political figures, including President Trump, have lashed out against extreme left-wing politicians and radical agitators as the “Fascist Left.” Many news media pundits scoffed at this phrase, incredulous at the thought that authoritarian and nationalistic socialists could ever exhibit leftist tendencies. However, many well-known historians would differ. These academicians have identified German National Socialists and Italian Fascists as close relatives to the revolutionary socialist Left. Why? Because Nazi and Fascist authority figures often proclaimed to be on the “Left” side of the political spectrum, embracing a slew of “revolutionary socialist policies.” For instance, Joseph Goebbels and the Strasser brothers promoted worker-based class struggle, socialism, wealth redistribution, social justice, social welfare, anti-capitalism, the breakup of large estates, nationalization, and an alliance with Stalin’s Soviet Union. These National Socialist leaders were almost in complete alignment with the ideological thrust of Lenin and Stalin. Some historians refer to them as the comrade vanguard of the Nazi party’s left-wing faction. Others viewed Goebbels and the Strasser brothers as “National Bolsheviks.” In stark comparison, right-wing elements of Europe instead gravitated towards the monarchy, church, and traditional values, which was an outright anathema to socialist left-wing elements. Hitler regarded right-wing elements as reactionary and bourgeois. According to the American historian David Schoenbaum, Hitler in 1935 proclaimed that “The enemies of National Socialism,” were not only the “Jewish Marxists” and “certain elements of an incorrigible, stupid reactionary bourgeoisie,” but also Catholics. Goebbels held similar views. So, when did Goebbels come out of the left-wing closet? It was almost from day one. But his most famous quote, where he proudly acknowledged his support for the “German left” and his hated for the “right-wing” business class, occurred on Dec. 6, 1931. In that edition of his Der Angriff publication, Goebbels wrote, “According to the idea of the NSDAP [Nazi party], we are the German left. Nothing is more hateful to us than the right-wing national ownership block.” Here, Goebbels explicitly spelled out his true revolutionary red colors, confessing that the German National Socialist party belonged on the socialist “left” side of the political spectrum, comrades in arms who despised the capitalist right wing. Goebbels’ left-wing identification was no secret to many German historians. They had already uncovered the Nazi’s left-wing and socialist orientation. And they, unlike other historians, were willing to reveal their dark secrets. Some, like German historian Wolfgang Venohr, made it a point to reveal Goebbels’ pro-left quote in his book Documents of German Existence: 500 Years of German National History 1445-1945. Other German historians echoed the same evidence about the socialist leftist movement of the Hitler’s National Socialist party. In 2011, Prof. Arnulf Baring reminded listeners during a TV broadcast, “The Nazis were not right-wing, the Nazis were a left-wing party! National-socialist!” The German historian Götz Aly concurred, writing, “Another source of the Nazi Party’s popularity was its liberal borrowing from the intellectual tradition of the socialist left. Many of the men who would become the movement’s leaders had been involved in communist and socialist circles.” This included Hitler, who fervently declared himself a “fanatical socialist” in 1941. Some non-German historians were also privy to the Nazis socialist, left-wing history and ideology. UC Berkeley political scientist,A. James Gregor, a leading expert on Fascism, claimed that”Fascists were almost all Marxists—serious theorists who had long been identified with Italy’s intelligentsia of the Left.” The French historian, François Furet, a former communist intellectual himself, argued, “It was in Nazi Germany that Bolshevism was perfected.”American historian Stanley G. Payne weighed in with “Hitlerian socialism more nearly paralleled Russian Communism than any other non-communist system.” The American leader of the Socialist Party of America, Norman Thomas, who ran for U.S. president many times, condemned the Soviet Union in the 1940s as exhibiting “Red fascism.” His exact words were, “communism, whatever it was originally, is today Red fascism.” And we cannot leave out the national ‘newspaper of record”, The New York Times, which in its 1939 editorial stated: “Hitlerism is brown communism, Stalinism is red fascism.” Even hardcore Marxists could not help but equate Fascism with Stalinism. The German Communist Otto Ruhle, declared that “Fascism is merely a copy of Bolshevism.” Even Leon Trotsky, the Russian Marxist who headed the Red Army, pointed out the same comparison, writing in 1936, “Stalinism and fascism, in spite of a deep difference in social foundations, are symmetrical phenomena. In many of their features they show a deadly similarity.” Goebbels not only promoted the Nazi party as an offshoot of the German left branch. He spent time and energy proving it. In 1925, as a budding regional Nazi orator who spoke to crowds of thousands, he repeatedly praised Lenin and encouraged the Nazi leadership to ally with Stalin’s Soviet Union. By late November of 1925, he views finally made national headlines. As reported by the New York Time, Goebbels declared, “Lenin was the greatest man, second only to Hitler, and that the difference between Communism and the Hitler faith was very slight.” But Goebbels was eager to show off his Marxian catechism as well. In 1925 he wrote, “We will turn National Socialism into a party of class struggle,” a major requirement for a full-fledged leftist with Marxian credential. He even spoke up for “strict social justice.” Then again, such extreme left-wing bravado would be expected from a political war-horse who professed in 1924 to be a “German Communist.” Such leftwing grit and grime resonated throughout Goebbels’ political career. In 1929, he referred to Nazi Germany as “a party of “revolutionary socialists.” By 1939, he promulgated the narrative that World War II was a bitter battle between capitalism and socialism, declaring, “England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people’s state” in his famous “England’s Guilt” speech. Apparently, Hitler agreed with his close friend. Bragging about his military successes in Western Europe in 1941, Hitler declared, “It is already war history how the German armies defeated the legions of capitalism and plutocracy.” Joseph Goebbels was no minor figure in the upper echelons of the Nazi party. He was not only the Propaganda Minister of Nazi Germany, but also one of Hitler’s closest and most devoted associate. And achieving success in that role, he climbed the Nazi ladder to be the only other man to serve as Chancellor of Nazi Germany. Goebbels’ secret was simple. He was a fanatical political extremist to the core, prepared to die for his cause, declaring that it was “better to go down with Bolshevism than live in eternal capitalist servitude.” Goebbels’s socialist and anti-capitalist dreams of collective sacrifice inspired the German public. “To be a socialist,” Goebbels wrote, “is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.” And sacrifice they did. So, what about the Italian Fascists? Benito Mussolini made it clear that he believed that Fascism sat firmly on the “Left.” He was a diehard Marxist for much of his life, considering himself a disciple of his friend, Vladimir Lenin. The English historian Denis Mack Smith concurred, writing, “Mussolini had once belonged to the Bolshevik wing of the Italian Socialist Party and still in 1924 confessed admiration for Lenin.” In his famous 1933 “Doctrine of Fascism”, Il Duce made it crystal clear, writing, “It may be expected that this will be a century of authority, a century of the Left, a century of Fascism.” This quote comes from Mussolini’s 1933 “authorized translation” by Jane Soames, an accomplished journalist and translator for The Times of London. As a flaming atheist who declared, “Christ is dead and his teachings moribund,” and who opposed monarchism, Mussolini never considered himself part of the reactionary right. In Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime, Polish-born American historianRichard Pipe puts the history of Mussolini’s Fascism into perspective, asserting, “Genetically, Fascism issued from the ‘Bolshevik’ wing of Italian socialism, not from any conservative ideology or movement.” The American historian Charles F. Delzell knew this instinctively. He wrote in Mediterranean Fascism 1919-1945, “A good many Fascists… came from the ranks of left-wing Marxism and syndicalism, and when the Fascist regime was overthrown in 1943-45 it was not hard for a certain number of ex-Blackshirts to swing to left-wing political extremism.” In fact, the Fascist-left radicals for Mussolini’s regime were so in tune with Marxist ideology and violent tactics that it is difficult to see much difference between them and the American Antifa radicals. Because of their similarities, the current crop of Antifa agitators are unabashed imitators of Mussolini’s blackshirt violence and revolutionary socialism. Moreover, the reason Antifa is part of the Fascist left is that historically Fascism originally came out of Marxism. Who have made those claims? Many historians, including two of the world-leading experts on Fascism, Zeev Sternhell and A. James Gregor. A Polish-born Israeli historian, Sternhell wrote, “Fascist ideology… was the direct result of very specific revision of Marxism,” while UC Berkeley political scientist, Gregor, has a slightly different take, arguing that “Fascism was a variant of classical Marxism.” David Ramsey Steel, a former member of the Socialist Party of Great Britain, explained it most succinctly: “Fascism began as a revision of Marxism by Marxists.” Mussolini was never sly about revealing his communist roots. In a 1932 interview with Emil Ludwig, Mussolini eagerly attesting, “It was inevitable that I should become a Socialist ultra, a Blanquist, indeed a communist. I carried about a medallion with Marx’s head on it in my pocket.” After winning a legislative seat in Italy’s Chamber of Deputies in1921, Mussolini spoke with pride, “I know the Communists. I know them because some of them are my children.” He was also overjoyed in 1934 when he announced that Italy’s economy had been mostly nationalized-socialized, boasting, “Three-fourths of the Italian economy, industrial and agricultural, is in the hands of the state.” Mussolini was celebrating the public ownership of the economy, the main hallmark of Marxist socialism. Who else referred to Italy’s Fascists as the “Fascist Left?” One is the American historian Stanley G. Payne in his A History of Fascism, 1914–1945, who employed the term “Fascist left” to describe a number of major Fascist leaders in Italy, including Edmondo Rossoni, Michele Bianchi, Angelo Oliviero Olivetti and others. Many of these “Fascist Syndicalists,” favored “class consciousness,” “labor’s autonomy” and heavy doses of socialism and unionism. By 1923, Italian industrialist were so horrified by the Fascist syndicalists (unionists), that they wondered whether it was “now wise to pay the Communists to fight the Fascists!” As leader of the Fascist Syndicalists, Rossoni instigated hostile strikes in his effort to eventually abolish capitalism. He demanded workers’ control of factories, “class consciousness,” and believed that “only the Fascist syndicates could complete the revolution.” Rossoni was famous for depicting Italy industrialists as “vampires” and “profiteers.” So why is there a general belief that German National Socialism and Italian Fascism rest on the right? After all, according to the French Revolution’s sitting arrangement in 1789, authoritarians sat on the right while the classical liberals, like Thomas Paine, sat on the left. It was because of Soviet propaganda during and after World War II. The Russian Soviets, embarrassed by their cozy corroboration with Hitler and Mussolini, decided to conceal their striking Fascist-Marxist similarities. They prohibited communists and their sympathizers from using the term “National Socialist”in public or in media outlets. They organized massive disinformation media campaigns to convince the world that Fascism and Communism were polar opposites, devoid of any common traits. Of course, it was all a big propaganda lie worthy of the myth-making Pravda. When the worldwide disinformation effort by Soviet Russia started to gain traction in the 1940s, Winston Churchill was flabbergasted at the news. Churchill, a historian in his own right, clearly saw the glaring parallels between Nazism and Communism, commenting that, “As Fascism sprang from Communism, so Nazism developed from Fascism.” When Churchill was confronted by Soviet propaganda to falsely depict the world’s two major totalitarian ideologies as polar opposites, he remarked to his son, “Fascism and Communism… Polar opposites—no, polar the same!”
The post The ‘Fascist Left’: Myth or Reality? appeared first on LewRockwell. |
from https://youtu.be/V0EQNQssk6U
May 10, 2021
from https://youtu.be/UuC5mCL9HC8
May 10, 2021 at 02:29AM
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.