Saving Civilization, by Robert Gore

sydney_opera_house_-_dec_2008

Savagery or civilization?

Imagine you had been picked as a juror for the Derek Chauvin trial. Before you hear a shred of evidence, you very well might make a decision most people would not only admit was the better part of valor, but that harmonized perfectly with prevailing morality.

Your pretrial verdict? Guilty. There had been threats since Chauvin was charged with second and third degree murder and second-degree manslaughter that acquittals would provoke rampaging riots. After the riots last summer, no one could doubt the threats’ credibility. A guilty verdict on all counts could avoid injuries, deaths, and billions of dollars in property damage. Against those consequences, what do the rights or the life of a policeman matter? You’re predetermined verdict is for the greater good.

Even if such considerations never entered your head, you’d need extraordinary courage and independence to impartially hear the evidence and if you thought it warranted, vote for acquittal. You’d have to withstand pressure from your fellow jurors. You’d run the risk that your personal information was leaked by some mainstream or social media scumbag and mostly peaceful thugs showed up at your door. You might be canceled out of a job, your business network, and your social circle. Your privacy would be obliterated and reputation ruined in the wilting glare of nonstop publicity and odium. Politicians and other public figures would denounce you.

The chance that one such person would land on the jury was remote, the chance of twelve nonexistent. Under the inverted standard of justice that prevailed, the outcome was always going to be dictated not by the facts of the case, reasoned consideration of the evidence, deliberation, and the applicable law, but by “social considerations,” which is a polite way of saying the mob.

The mob hailed the verdict as justice. It’s the same justice as John Gotti’s three acquittals after his goons intimidated jurors. Chauvin was guilty unless proven innocent beyond a “reasonable” doubt as defined by the mob. In the same vein, the policeman who shot and killed Ashley Babbitt at the Capitol is not guilty—without a trial—because that’s what the mob demanded. Such blatant contradiction is mob justice.

A morality that confers “rights” on mobs and strips those of an individual is the morality of savages. Maxine Waters is a savage, but so too are the members of the Minneapolis City Council who agreed to pay George Floyd’s estate $27 million before Chauvin’s trial had begun, the judge who recognized the prejudicial unfairness of Waters’ inflammatory statements but passed the buck for doing anything about it to the appellate courts, and the political, media, and celebrity jackals from Joe Biden on down who’ve been howling for Chauvin’s conviction since Floyd’s death.

Whatever the justifications they cite for their pre-verdict demands, they are implicitly insisting that Chauvin’s rights are of no consequence. When the “rights” of some outweigh the rights of one, anything goes. There are people who call for reducing the world’s population to 500 million, which implies a genocide of over 7 billion. That such people are on university faculties rather than denounced and shunned as advocates of mass murder shows just how far the barbarism of collectivist justification has advanced, even when the collective embraced is a fraction of the number of individuals whose lives are to be canceled!

Amazon Paperback Link

Kindle Ebook Link

Service and sacrifice are the watchwords of government, the ultimate mob. Who’s served and who’s sacrificed? There has never been a government that has not arrogated to itself the privilege of using force and fraud to strip individuals of their production, their property, their rights, their liberty, and ultimately, their lives. That privilege is governments’ defining essence and is the privilege that has always threatened humanity. The rationales and rhetoric are invariably collective: the demands of the mob supersede individual rights and individual justice.

Continue reading

The Pros And Cons Of Going Into Crippling Debt To Acquire A Useless Degree

From The Babylon Bee (sponsored by Praxis):

College is more expensive than ever! Many young people are going into debt that will crush them for the rest of their lives to attend college– all for a degree that ends up being totally useless! But is it worth it? You betcha!

We want you to be as informed as possible before you decide to go to college. Here are some pros and cons:


Pro: You’ll learn to master genderqueer feminist intersectionality! Yay!

Con: Genderqueer feminist intersectionality isn’t as useful as burger flipping.


Pro: Grandma cares about your degree.

Con: No one else does.


Pro: You won’t have to work with your hands when you graduate.

Con: You most likely won’t find any work when you graduate.


Pro: Bernie promised debt forgiveness.

Con: He lost the election.


Pro: Your diploma will look great in a frame.

Con: It will hang on the wall of your room in your parent’s basement.


Pro: Getting out from under your parents’ roof

Con: Dave, your 500-pound roommate who wants the top bunk


Pro: College Football games

Con: Sitting in the nosebleed section, behind all the people with money and jobs


Pro: Meet exciting new people!

Con: They all have chlamydia.


Pro: The satisfaction of knowing you helped fund the education of the next generation

Con: Realizing all your money went to a new trampoline park for next year’s incoming class


Pro: You get to learn PowerPoint!

Con: You now have to use PowerPoint.


Pro: You’re learning from the world’s best

Con: Pretty much everything you learn is readily available online and free

Latest CDC VAERS Data for 12- to 17-Year-Olds Include 7 Deaths, 271 Serious Adverse Events Following COVID Vaccines, by Megan Redshaw

A review of the date from the latest weekly Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System release, from Megan Redshaw at childrenshealthdefense.org:

VAERS data released today by the CDC showed a total of 358,379 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 5,993 deaths and 29,871 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 11, 2021.

This week’s number of reported adverse events among all age groups following COVID vaccines surpassed 350,000, 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.

Data released today show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 11, 2021, a total of 358,379 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 5,993 deaths — an increase of 105 deaths over the previous week. There were 29,871 serious injury reports, up 1,430 compared with last week.

Of the 5,993 deaths reported as of June 11, 23% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 16% occurred within 24 hours and 38% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

Continue reading→ 

Middlemen, by The Zman

There are only so many ends you can play against the middle. From The Zman at theburningplatform.com:

The American economy is a middleman economy, designed around the idea of there being a person or group of persons between the parties of a transaction. No matter how trivial the transaction, there is someone trying to get in on the deal. This middleman brings nothing to the transaction. He adds no value and only facilitates the deal because the rules have been set so that he is required. The middleman is the ever-present silent partner that is the point of the economic arrangements.

 

If you go back a century, selling a house involved three parties. The seller and buyer, of course, and the government. You had to register the transaction with the government so it was known who held the deed for the property. If there was a lien on the property, then the bank would be involved, but only on one side. Today there are dozens of people involved in the transaction. The government is promising to add dozens more in order to flood stable neighborhoods with magic.

Just about every transaction in the economy now has silent partners. This is why the economy is still a mess due to the Covid lockdowns. Shutting down supply chains was always a dumb idea, but getting them restarted means activating millions of middlemen who have to get paid for the system to work. In a completely financialized economy, nothing moves without money moving first. The money men are the ever-present middlemen in every deal, no matter how small.

Continue reading→

NYT Midwit Mara Gay—Affirmative Action Face of America’s Anti-White Cultural Revolution, by John Derbyshire

You have to twist yourself into a moral and intellectual pretzel to argue that racism can fight racism, but it’s being done with astonishing frequency and is not generally challenged. From John Derbyshire at unz.com:

I’ve been telling myself for twenty years that America’s ongoing Cultural Revolution couldn’t get any worse. But year by year it has gotten worse. The Red Guards now control all our major media outlets, including of course Social Media, and the entire educational system, public and private, from kindergarten to the Ivy League. This new Biden Administration has radicalized the federal government, too: the judiciary, the agencies, even the military have all been put in the hands of Red Guards.

What is it, this poisonous weed, this kudzu smothering our culture and silencing some of our smartest and most eloquent voices?

Well, if you’ve been paying attention, you’ll know that a central concept in the revolutionary mindset, a central target of the Red Guards, is whiteness.

So, in hopes of improving our understanding, let’s take a short trip down Anti Whiteness Lane.

My starting point here: a group discussion broadcast by MSNBC on Morning Joe, June 8, 2021. There were five people in the discussion, four whites and a token mulatto lady named Mara Gay. Of the four whites, two were MSNBC Woke Bots whose names are vaguely familiar to me; I don’t know who the other two were.

Continue reading→

The mechanisms of action of Ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2: An evidence-based clinical review article, by Asiya Kamber Zaidi and Puya Dehgani-Mobaraki

This excerpt links to a long and difficult article from a scientific publication, The Journal of Antibiotics. If you can make it through the article, but you may just want to stop at the abstract or skip to the conclusion. From Asiya Kamber Zaidi and Puya Dehgani-Mobaraki at nature.com:

Abstract

Considering the urgency of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, detection of various new mutant strains and future potential re-emergence of novel coronaviruses, repurposing of approved drugs such as Ivermectin could be worthy of attention. This evidence-based review article aims to discuss the mechanism of action of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 and summarizing the available literature over the years. A schematic of the key cellular and biomolecular interactions between Ivermectin, host cell, and SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 pathogenesis and prevention of complications have been proposed.

Continue reading→

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection, by Bryant, Andrew MSc1,*; Lawrie, Theresa A. MBBCh, PhD2; Dowswell, Therese PhD2; Fordham, Edmund J. PhD2; Mitchell, Scott MBChB, MRCS3; Hill, Sarah R. PhD1; Tham, Tony C. MD, FRCP4

This is not the full article published in the American Journal of Therapeutics, it is only the abstract of the article written by the people listed above. However, you’ll get the point from the abstract—Ivermectin works. By the way, this is real science, as opposed to “The Science” or more accurately, Officially Approved Propaganda Masquerading as Science. From the American Journal of Therapeutics at journals.lww.com:

A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines

Bryant, Andrew MSc1,*; Lawrie, Theresa A. MBBCh, PhD2; Dowswell, Therese PhD2; Fordham, Edmund J. PhD2; Mitchell, Scott MBChB, MRCS3; Hill, Sarah R. PhD1; Tham, Tony C. MD, FRCP4

Abstract

Background:

Repurposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials.

Areas of uncertainty:

We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in reducing mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemoprophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, COVID-19 infection.

Data sources:

We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.

Therapeutic Advances:

Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average risk ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.73; n = 2438; I2 = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence). This result was confirmed in a trial sequential analysis using the same DerSimonian–Laird method that underpinned the unadjusted analysis. This was also robust against a trial sequential analysis using the Biggerstaff–Tweedie method. Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86% (95% confidence interval 79%–91%). Secondary outcomes provided less certain evidence. Low-certainty evidence suggested that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for “need for mechanical ventilation,” whereas effect estimates for “improvement” and “deterioration” clearly favored ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare among treatment trials and evidence of no difference was assessed as low certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.

Conclusions:

Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

Continue reading→

Jon Stewart, The High Priest Of Cultural Liberalism, Reprimands His Flock, by Michael Tracey

Being liberal means never being wrong, until you’re wrong, in which case you quietly discard your position and either ignore or adopt the right one, never ever apologizing or even acknowledging your prior error. From Michael Tracey at mtracey.substack.com:

If contemporary American liberalism has any High Priests, foremost among them would have to be Jon Stewart. Arguably, he’s the functional equivalent of a supreme pontiff. So much of contemporary American liberalism hinges on aesthetic presentation — the ever-present need to convey that you and your peers “get it” — and Stewart pioneered the perfect public sensibility tailored to this ambition. For years, cultural liberals’ sense of savviness and ironic detachment, coupled with an underlying pretension to earnestness, was cultivated and affirmed by Stewart. His method of communicating political information on The Daily Show became the dominant style not just of mainstream corporate comedy, but of left-liberal politics as a whole. Everyone from establishment Democrats to cynical online leftists speaks of Stewart with worshipful reverence.

Stewart is also very smart. Like any good leader of a religious order, he knows on occasion he must chide his fellow clergymen for their doctrinal blindspots, tactical blunders, or personal indiscretions. He knows how to gently but firmly advise parishioners when they’ve gone astray, or gone too far. He also mostly kept his head down throughout the Trump presidency — declining to weigh in on every fleeting micro-scandal — which was a wise decision, so as to not get himself too brain-melted by the endless frenzy of that period. He didn’t even join Twitter until this past January.

Empathizing with the habits and tastes of those who are culturally dissimilar is always healthy, but it’s a major struggle to understand why some people still voluntarily watch late-night network TV. Nonetheless, Stewart appeared this week on the first back-in-studio taping of his protégé Stephen Colbert’s late-night show. There he issued what amounted to a new Papal encyclical. In that signature weary, deadpan delivery everyone knows and loves, he averred that the “lab leak” theory of COVID origins — previously a contemptible heresy — should not just be seriously considered as plausible, but had in fact become trivially obvious. So obvious that you’re now the dummy if you don’t think so. Watch as Colbert awkwardly wrestles with the implications of what his longtime hero Jon Stewart is saying; he looks almost pained. Six months ago, anyone who broached this topic on Colbert’s show would’ve been assumed to be some sort of QAnon crank. But here’s Jon Stewart, repeating Steve Bannon talking points. Colbert, understandably, appears quite disoriented.

Continue reading→

From the Notebook – Jon Stewart Does Davos, by Tom Luongo

Is Jon Stewart a shill for the WEF, Davos crowd? From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:

Continue reading→

Governments Are Failing at Their Most Basic Duties—While Promising Free Stuff, by Gary Galles

Seems like there’s a contradiction in the title, doesn’t it? From Gary Galles at mises.org:

Three city blocks were systematically burned to the ground as hundreds of the local police stood by and viewed the violence. They were obeying orders not to harm the arsonists. The National Guard was called, adding more armed watchers. A passive gendarmerie consorting with open rebellion has rarely been seen in American history, until recently.

Except for variation in detail and numbers, this sort of thing is happening today.

Does the above sound as if it had been written recently? While it could easily have been written earlier this year, it was not. Leonard Read wrote it in “Social Reformers as Keepers of the Peace,” chapter 8 in his 1969 The Coming Aristocracy. But it offers keen insights into America’s recent turmoil and violence.

Most important for us today, however, is Read’s analysis of why it has happened. In particular, the relationship between what is being promised by political candidates and their ability to keep the peace seems just as descriptive of this year as when he wrote.

Continue reading→

Powell Just Made A Huge Error: What The Market’s Shocking Response Means For The Fed’s Endgame, by Tyler Durden

The Fed is fooling itself if it thinks it can raise its administered interest rates much with the huge amount of debt outstanding. Any significant increase will incrementally increase the debt service burden far more than the over-leveraged real economy can sustain. The heart of this article is the graph at the bottom of this excerpt. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Back in December 2015, just days before the Fed hiked rates for the first time since the global financial crisis, in its first tightening campaign since June 2004, we said that Yellen was about to engage in a great policy error, one which like the Ghost of 1937, would end in disaster…

… and sure enough it did, when after 9 rate hikes, Powell realized that a rate of 2.50% is unsustainable for the US economy which first cracked during the summer of 2019 repo crisis when the Fed cut rates three times, only to cut rates to zero from 1.75% in a matter of days after covid conveniently emerged on the global scene and led to an overnight shutdown of the US economy and “forced” the Fed to nationalize the bond market as well as inject trillions of liquidity into the market.

But what is it that prompted us to predict – correctly – that any rate hike campaign is doomed to fail (similar to the Fed’s ill-conceived plan to hike rates in 1937, which brought the already reeling country to its knees and only World War 2 saved the day, giving FDR a green light to unleash a fiscal stimulus tsunami the likes of which we hadn’t seen until the covid response)?

Simple: as we explained back in Dec 2015, the equilibrium growth rate in the US, or r* (or r-star), was far far lower than where most economists thought it was. In fact, as the sensitivity table below which we first constructed in 2015 showed, the equilibrium US growth rate was right around 0%.

Continue reading→

%d bloggers like this: