The Capitalist Manifesto

Here are the most important facts:

The capitalist revolution began in Great Britain in the late-18th century. Since that time, the capitalist nations have been the freest countries of history. In Western (and now parts of Eastern) Europe, in the United States, in Japan, Hong Kong and the other Asian Tigers hundreds of millions of human beings are guaranteed freedom of speech, of religion, of intellectual expression, of assembly, and of voting. Men are free there to earn and to own property – their own homes, farms and land. They are free to start their own businesses and to retain the profits that they earn. A hallmark of capitalism is a rule of law that protects private property, safeguards investments and enforces contracts. The fundamental moral principle upon which capitalism is based is that individuals have inalienable rights and that governments exist solely to protect those rights.

Capitalism requires the limiting of governmental power to maximize the freedom of the individual.

Capitalism, the system of individual rights, has brought increased freedom to men all over the world. In Europe, capitalism ended feudalism, the dictatorship of the aristocracy. In America, the principle of individual rights impelled the British colonists to throw off the rule of the monarchy and establish history’s freest nation – and the logic of the country’s founding principles led, in less than a century, to the abolition of slavery, a practice that existed everywhere in the world through all of history, and one still practiced widely today throughout the non-capitalist world. In post-World War II Japan, under America’s influence, a semicapitalist, vastly freer society replaced the military dictatorship that preceded it. In Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea, the freedom of their capitalist or semi-capitalist systems enabled those countries (or colonies) to become havens for millions of refugees fleeing Communist oppression.

More broadly, it is to the capitalist nations across the globe that immigrants come, millions of them, both historically and currently, often fleeing political and/or religious persecution in their homelands. They come on rafts to the United States from Cuba. By the millions and for 15 years, the Vietnamese “boat people” fled for their lives from Communism – and today, more than 1.6 million of them have found freedom, mostly in the West. Muslims seeking religious and political freedom flee to the Western capitalist nations from all over the Islamic world. And, of course, for more than 150 years, America has been the hope and the chosen destination of persecuted peoples from around the globe, including from Ireland, Jews from Eastern Europe, Sicilians suppressed by the 19th century remnants of aristocratic rule, and Chinese and Koreans oppressed by the Communists.

Finally, the Western capitalist nations, by inflicting military defeat on the Fascists, and political-economic defeat on the Communists, eliminated the scourge of totalitarianism from large parts of the earth, bringing greater freedom to hundreds of millions of human beings in Japan, Germany, Italy, Eastern Europe and Russia.

Capitalism is the system of freedom.

Freedom leads to dramatic economic results. The “great laboratory” of capitalist West Berlin side-by-side with communist East Berlin provided the most vivid example — West Berlin, a modern, prosperous commercial center, East Berlin so destitute and squalid that, by 1989, the rubble remained from World War II battles four decades earlier. The striking truth is that the capitalist nations are the wealthiest countries of history. For example, famine, the scourge of all non-capitalist societies, past and present, has been wiped out in the West. There has never been a famine in the history of the United States. Has there ever been one in any capitalist country? The author does not know of any.3

Regarding the empirical correlation between economic freedom, i.e., capitalism and prosperity: the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal jointly publish an annual survey examining the degree of economic freedom in the world. Its title is the Index of Economic Freedom. “The story that the Index continues to tell is that economically freer countries tend to have higher per capita incomes than less free countries… The more economic freedom a country has, the higher its per capita income is.” The editors organize 155 countries into four categories, which are, in ascending order – repressed, mostly unfree, mostly free and free. “Once an economy moves from the mostly unfree category to the mostly free category, per capita income increases nearly four times.” The mostly free countries, including Japan, Taiwan, Canada, Poland and Sweden, have an average per capita income of greater than $11,000. Additionally, the per capita income among free countries is, on average, almost double that of the mostly free countries. The free countries, including the United States, Great Britain, Hong Kong and Singapore show an average per capita income of greater than $21,000.4 Capitalism is the system of wealth.

But under statism, conditions are diametrically opposite. Many political systems have ruthlessly suppressed the rights and lives of individuals. Feudalism, military dictatorships, theocracies, National Socialism (Nazism) and Communism are merely several examples. What these and other such systems share in common is the denial of individual rights. These are the anti-capitalist systems in which the individual is forced to live and die for the state. The horrors of such lack of freedom are historically and currently manifest.

Under feudalism, for example, the common man – the overwhelming preponderance of mankind – was suppressed by the ancien regime. Heretics were often burned at the stake; countless women were condemned to death for practicing “witchcraft;” the serfs were tied to the land and possessed few rights; and the most advanced thinkers were persecuted – Galileo’s forced recantation under threat of torture was merely the most notorious such case.

In the 20th century, statism reached its most virulent form. The National Socialists plunged the world into the most catastrophic war of history and butchered 25 million innocent victims in a 12-year reign of terror. The Communists were just as prolific in their commitment to brutality, establishing in Russia, China, Cambodia, North Korea and elsewhere totalitarian regimes that murdered a numbing 100 million victims in 80 years.

In Africa, oppressive dictatorships and ghastly tribal slaughters are the norm. In Sudan, the Islamic regime currently holds tens of thousands of blacks in slavery. In Rwanda, Hutu “militia” in 1994 hacked to pieces 800,000 victims, mostly members of the Tutsi tribe. In Somalia, endless, bloody warfare rages between rival warlords. In Zaire, the dictator, Mobutu, bankrupted the economy, pushing countless individuals into starvation by embezzling billions of dollars. In Zimbabwe, the Marxist dictator, Mugabe, stole the land from commercial farmers with the inevitable result: famine for millions of people. The shocking truth is that more than 225 years after the American Revolution, freedom is virtually unknown around the globe.

Statism – the subordination of the individual to the state – leads inevitably to the most hideous oppression.

Further, just as the freest nations, i.e., the most capitalist ones, are the wealthiest – so the most repressed countries are the most destitute. For example, according to one economist, Angus Maddison, feudal Europe and its aftermath was as miserably poor as is commonly believed.

Economic growth was non-existent during the centuries 500-1500 — and per capita GDP rose by merely 0.1 percent per year in the centuries 1500-1700. In 1500, the estimated European per capita income was roughly $215; in 1700, roughly $265.

In the 20th century, China under Mao suffered massive famine that killed anywhere from 20 to 43 million individuals – and hundreds of millions subsisted on less than a dollar a day. Also under the Communists, conditions were similar in North Korea and worse in Cambodia. The Soviet Union and its slave states of Eastern Europe were miserably poor by Western standards. The repressive dictatorships of Africa are countries where per capita living standards are measured in hundreds – not thousands – of dollars. Across the globe, the oppressed nations of Asia, South America and the Middle East are unspeakably poor.

For example, the Index of Economic Freedom shows that the repressed nations – including Cuba, Iran, Iraq (under Saddam Hussein) and North Korea – have an average per capita income around $2800. The mostly unfree countries – including Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Brazil – possess an average per capita income of approximately the same. This means that the freer countries – the semi-capitalist and capitalist nations – enjoy per capita incomes from four to ten times as great as those in the non-capitalist world.

Additionally, it must be pointed out that the unfree nations of the world have per capita incomes as high as $2800 for primarily one reason: the enormous aid they receive in various forms from the West, especially the diffusion of American technology. Without investment, loans, aid, technical training and supplies, etc., from the capitalist nations, the unfree countries would subsist in vastly worse misery than they already do. As merely one example, without massive food shipments from the West, an incalculable number of human beings would starve to death in the endless famines that recur in the unfree countries, from Ethiopia to North Korea to Zimbabwe.

Statism – in all its forms – is the system of appalling destitution. The facts show that capitalism is the system of freedom – and that it creates wealth. The facts similarly show that statism is the system of repression – and that it causes poverty. Capitalism is the system of freedom and prosperity. Its antithesis – statism in any form – is the system of oppression and destitution. Despite these facts, however, widespread antagonism toward capitalism exists; and generally from among society’s most educated members – Humanities professors, writers, artists, journalists, teachers, clergymen and politicians.

Anti-capitalist intellectuals and writers present a constellation of related criticisms. They hold that capitalism creates inequalities of income, that it exploits the workers and the impoverished, that it supplants spiritual values with materialism, and that it leads to imperialism and war. Successful businessmen, according to their view, accumulated fortunes largely by means of fraud and peculation. Such accusations come alike from socialists and conservative defenders of the current mixed economies, from secularists and religionists, from Marxists and from Catholic clergymen, from Jews and from Muslims.

Marx and Engels, for example, wrote:

“The bourgeoisie [the practitioners and supporters of capitalism]…has left remaining no other bond between man and man than naked self-interest and callous ‘cash payment’… In one word, for exploitation veiled by religious and political illusions, [the bourgeoisie] has substituted naked, shameful, direct, brutal exploitation.”

Pope Paul VI in the encyclical, Populorum Progressio, claimed:

“But it is unfortunate that on these new conditions of society a system has been constructed which considers profit as the key motive for economic progress, competition as the supreme law of economics, and private ownership of the means of production as an absolute right that has no limits and carries no corresponding social obligation.” The Pope went on to state that “a certain type of capitalism has been the source of excessive suffering, injustices and fratricidal conflicts whose effects still persist.”11

Such “liberal” modern American historians and writers as Charles Beard, Richard Hofstadter and Matthew Josephson routinely denigrated leading industrialists and capitalists, arguing that Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, et al., built their careers by “exploiting workers and milking farmers, bribing Congressmen, buying legislatures, spying upon competitors, hiring armed guards, dynamiting property, [and] using threats and intrigue and force.”

The system of freedom and wealth is repeatedly and savagely attacked by many intellectuals and other highly educated individuals — worse, by men and women claiming to be “liberals,” humanists, lovers of man, i.e., the very individuals who should function as the protectors and preservers of human life. There is an enormous disconnect between the facts of capitalism’s nature and history – and the evaluation of these by many “progressive” writers and the millions whose thinking they influence. The facts of capitalism’s nature and history are not unknown. Certainly the educated critics are well aware of them. Capitalism’s enemies are simply unimpressed. Why? What is responsible for the great disconnect? The reason is that the objections to capitalism are not based on factual grounds – and all the evidence in the world establishing the freedom and prosperity of those living under capitalism will not influence the system’s critics to the slightest degree. The criticisms are motivated solely by moral and philosophical theories.

Since long before capitalism’s 18th century inception, moral theories antagonistic to egoism and profit-making have been dominant. From its birth, therefore, capitalism was an intellectual anomaly: a great boon to human prosperity that was unsupported, even opposed, by men’s dominant moral and philosophical codes. Hence the tragic historical spectacle of capitalism providing abundance for the first time for untold millions while sustaining repeated intellectual blows from its moral and philosophical enemies — from thinkers who claimed to care about mankind. For example, socialists – whether of a Marxist or non-Marxist variety – insist that it is an individual’s moral obligation to sacrifice himself for the state. Capitalism, they accurately point out, is not founded on principles of self-sacrifice. Rather, capitalism rests on an egoistic moral code – on the inalienable right of each and every man to his own life. The freedom that capitalism offers an individual to pursue his own personal, selfish happiness is, to socialists, anathema. To them, individual rights and political-economic freedom are appalling because they follow logically from an egoistic moral code that they regard as evil.

As a further example, modern egalitarians seek equality of income. But, contrary to their wishes, the freedom of the capitalist system will always lead to enormous disparities of income, because, in fact, individuals are not equal. They are not equal in talent, they are not equal in initiative, they are not equal in capacity to satisfy customer demand. Left free, some individuals will cure cancer, some will make the baseball Hall of Fame, some will drop out of school, some will work in the local grocery store, some will refuse to work and sponge off of families, friends and private charities.

The enormous general prosperity of the capitalist countries – the ability of capitalism to inherit widespread poverty and then proceed to create a vast middle class – does not and will not begin to impress egalitarians. The principle of economic equality – not universal prosperity – is their moral god. Consequently, they admire the “equal” destitution of Cuba’s citizens and repudiate the unequally-shared wealth of America. To them, it is morally superior if everybody subsists roughly equally on $1,000 annually and morally inferior if some possess millions while others live on “merely” $15,000 or $20,000 or $30,000. Rational men prefer to earn $15,000 in a country where others are millionaires to $1,000 in a country where others are equally poor. But egalitarians loathe the economic inequalities necessitated by the freedom of the capitalist system.

Finally, to a devout religionist, such as contemporary Islamists, what matters the earthly riches and comforts enjoyed by those in the capitalist countries? To them, all that matters is salvation in a higher world. If Allah repudiates the secularism, selfishness and materialism of capitalism, if such a life leads to eternal damnation, then the religionist must abjure it, even seek to annihilate it. Islamic terrorists, after all, did not destroy the towers of the World Trade Center simply because they were tall buildings. For years, they targeted those buildings because they were the nerve center of the world financial markets, located in the Wall Street area of New York City, the world’s commercial center. Those towers were, in terms both practical and symbolic, at the heart of global capitalism – and this is exactly why they were destroyed.

Too often, freedom’s supporters have limited themselves to responses that demonstrate capitalism’s unparalleled ability to increase men’s prosperity. While true and important, such defenses miss the essence of the criticism. It is as if a great dialogue regarding the most momentous issues held across a span of centuries has been conducted at cross purposes. The critics argue on moral grounds; the supporters on economic grounds. The critics, wedded to a moral code of self-sacrifice, are oblivious to capitalism’s practical success. The supporters, equally wedded to such a code, are morally disarmed against the onslaught of their antagonists — and are reduced to the citation of empirical facts and figures. The supporters, unable to break free of the conventional creed urging selflessness, have too often regarded capitalism’s inherent pursuit of self-interest as a guilty secret, akin to an unsavory skeleton in a family closet.

It is time to come out of the closet.

For two centuries, capitalism has cried out for its supporters to finally embrace the code of rational egoism as an undiluted virtue of which to be proud. That will be an important part of this book. The torrent of facts showing capitalism’s practical superiority will be presented within a philosophical framework showing that capitalism is the only moral system for human beings.

Two intellectual tasks must be accomplished in order to establish capitalism as the ideal social system. The first is to factually document the enormous practical benefits to man’s life wrought by capitalism. These are the tasks of history and economics. The second is the job of philosophy: to show that morality arises only because of the factual requirements of man’s life on earth, i.e., the concepts “good” and “evil,” “right” and “wrong,” are based in the facts of human nature, specifically in the objective requirements of human survival and prosperity. Only when the good is shown to be that which promotes man’s life will it be possible to understand and appreciate the enormous moral virtue embodied in capitalism’s unparalleled ability to do precisely that. All codes upholding human sacrifice must be exposed as anti-life, therefore, antigood, i.e., immoral. When the philosophical job is accomplished, then and only then will men have the moral code by means of which to properly evaluate capitalism’s stunning, life-giving success.

The tragic spectacle of capitalism’s life-promoting achievements evaluated by means of moral philosophies woefully unequipped to understand or appreciate them will finally, after 200 years, end. Part One of this book performs the practical task. In examining capitalism’s essence, its predecessors, and its earliest days, it provides sufficient factual evidence to establish the system’s historic achievements and to refute the common misconceptions that have been fostered about its nature and its past. The data presented are illustrative of the moral-philosophical theories of egoism, individualism and man’s mind as his means of survival — theories that are later identified and articulated as the intellectual foundation upon which capitalism rests.

Part Two — the book’s most important section — is dedicated to the philosophical task: the explanation of the rational moral theories necessary to understand capitalism’s nature and achievements — and to finally assess them properly. After two centuries, the great disconnect between facts and evaluation will mercifully be brought to an end. The book’s thesis will be clear: capitalism is the only moral political-economic system because it alone embodies the rational principles upon which human survival and prosperity depend.

Part Three refutes the chronic moral accusations levelled against capitalism — that it is responsible for war, imperialism and slavery. It shows that, on the contrary, capitalism and the moral principles on which it is based represent the antidote to these horrors that have long afflicted mankind — and, conversely, that statism and the moral principles on which it is based bear causal responsibility for them.

Part Four is devoted to explaining the essential reason that capitalism is economically superior to any form of socialism or statism more broadly. The writings of the great economists both explain the workings of a free market and validate it as the only means by which to create widespread prosperity. That economics is relegated to the end of this book, therefore, represents no slap at the economists. Quite the contrary, for to a significant degree they have done their job superbly. It is time for the moralists and philosophers to do theirs.

Finally, the Appendix applies the moral principles elucidated in the book to the important and long misunderstood topic of the “Robber Barons.” When evaluated from the standpoint of a rational code of ethics that upholds the requirements of man’s life as the standard of morality, the enormous productivity of Carnegie, Rockefeller, Hill, Harriman, et al., stamps them as productive geniuses who were enormous benefactors of the human race. Originally, this chapter was included in Part One but needed to be cut because of space limitations. But the topic was too important to be removed from the book, so was included in its present form.

The overall goal of rational cognition in any field is to reduce a vast complexity of phenomena to a principle(s) that explain it. For example, consider the quest of the Pre-Socratic philosophers to explain the teeming multiplicity of nature in terms of a single material principle — whether water, air or Anaximander’s “boundless.” The Greeks called it “finding the one in the many.” Regarding the enormity of capitalism’s success, both morally and practically, in different centuries, on far-flung continents, involving a hundred issues, the explanatory principle that will emerge is: capitalism is par excellence the system of liberated human brain power. This principle will recur throughout the book.

The moral and philosophical theories presented in this book are grounded fully in the revolutionary intellectual work of Ayn Rand — and the reader is strongly encouraged to read her seminal novel, Atlas Shrugged, as well as her non-fiction works, The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.

This book is written for the rational mind anywhere and anytime, whether the reader is a professional intellectual or an intelligent layman. It seeks to make the case for individual rights and freedom in terms intelligible to all rational men.

This book is in full, one-hundred percent support of capitalism, and repudiates all forms of the initiation of governmental force, whether in the economic or personal affairs of innocent men. As such, the presentation is neither balanced nor open-minded, if “open-minded” means the belief that all opinions hold equal cognitive weight — for they do not. Rather, the book is objective. It is open exclusively to facts and to rational argumentation. It is because of its objective method that its content is relentlessly pro-capitalist, for no facts exist and no rational arguments can be adduced to show the superiority of statism.

The author has a proudly selfish stake in promoting capitalism. As an American — though a teacher — he is rich, as are all Americans by both historic and current non-capitalist standards of wealth and poverty. Since capitalism is the only system capable of creating universal prosperity, he recognizes that his ongoing wealth depends on its continued 

Andrew Bernstein

Why I refuse to be Vaccinated

I have been vilified for refusing to be jabbed with an experimental vaccine.  I have been told that I am among the worst people on the face of the earth as that refusal is putting an inordinate number of people at risk of near-certain death.  That it is my civic duty and obligation to be swept up in the hysteria and march meekly in lockstep with whatever the omniscient government bureaucrats tell us to do.  That I must sacrifice personal choices and freedom for the benefit of the collective.  That, in fact, the choice to get a vaccine and to wear a mask is an expression of one’s freedom to be a moral citizen and to protect family, community, and country.

Joe Biden has told me that I am unpatriotic, and a very stupid person for not being vaccinated and robotically believing his claim: “You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccines.”  (That is an out-and-out lie.)

I am in my later 70’s; over my lifetime I have lived among and have been exposed to people in refugee camps suffering from tuberculosis, cholera, hepatitis B, and diphtheria and, after arriving in the United States, polio.  I managed to get through the Asian Flu pandemic in 1957-58, the Hong Kong Flu pandemic of 1968-69, the HIV/Aids pandemic in the 1980s, and the Swine Flu pandemic in 2009-10. 

Thus, I am well aware of medical risks and realities, particularly when it comes to my health.  I have been vaccinated for everything from tuberculosis to diphtheria to smallpox to polio to the annual flu.  I have been reliably informed that I have a very robust immune system and, thankfully, I have never been seriously ill with any viral or bacterial infections.

I researched, from credible non-government sources, the evolution and development of the mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) vaccines, their possible side effects, and the approval process.  After considering the short and long-term unknowns of a new type of vaccine that contains attenuated virus based on the Covid-19 genetic code provided by China combined with the realities of Covid infections, I concluded that I was unwilling to run the risk of compromising an immune system that had maintained my good health for nearly eight decades. 

My medical history and attendant health decisions are unique to me.  Every person in the United States has their own distinctive medical history and, depending on circumstances, heredity and previous access to medication, and an immune system able or unable to fend off a variety of diseases.

A one-size-fits-all vaccine, particularly one that was approved on an emergency basis with unknown short and long-term side effects, requires allowing the citizenry to evaluate the risk for themselves.  Instead, those that choose not to vaccinate are being called vile names and being threatened, intimidated, and coerced by politicians and government bureaucrats.  Additionally, vaccines are being mandated as a condition of employment by many private businesses and in the federal government at the direction of the Biden Administration.

There are those who are attempting to compare the Supreme Court’s approval of individual states mandating the smallpox vaccination in response to a virulent outbreak around the turn of the 20th Century as a legal justification for the de facto mandating of Covid vaccines. 

But the differences could not be starker.  Nearly 30,000 out of 100,000 of those that contracted smallpox died of smallpox.  Less than 110 out of 100,000 of those who contracted Covid-19 died of Covid-19.  Further, the smallpox vaccine had been developed over a hundred years before 1900 and its benefits and side effects were well known.

As further validation that the Covid vaccines were approved with little or no assessment of short- or long-term effects, this past May, Professor Luc Montagnier, a French virologist and Nobel Prize winner, predicted a potential outcome of mass vaccinations.  He said:

Mass vaccinations are a scientific error as well as a medical error.  It is an unacceptable mistake.  The history books will show that because it is the vaccination that is creating the variants. 

…there are antibodies created by the vaccine forcing the virus to find another solution or die.  [This how the variants such as the Delta variant are created] These variants are a production and result of the vaccination.

Every country that has pushed mass vaccination has experienced tremendous growth in Covid cases as well as increased hospitalizations and death rates among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people brought about by these variants. Fortunately, the variants to date, while highly contagious, do not appear to cause the same hospitalization and mortality rate as the first or alpha variant. 

But that does not stop the Marxist-inspired Democrats and the Biden Administration from using the growth in cases to again threaten mandatory vaccinations, mask mandates and potential lockdowns in furtherance of the strategy put in place at the beginning of the pandemic to strip Americans of their rights and transform the populace into one that will meekly acquiesce to any specious government edicts.

It became clear to me in March of 2020 that the Chinese Coronavirus would be politically weaponized to defeat President Trump in the 2020 election and to launch the creation of a hybrid American version of a police state. And that all edicts and mandates from elected politicians were politically motivated.  Further, drug approvals or disapprovals, as in the case of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, emanating from the Democrat party-dominated federal medical bureaucracy had to also be viewed through the lens of political and/or financial motivation. 

Individual freedom is an increasingly rare commodity in the world today.  As it is under siege virtually everywhere and now in the one country that once epitomized liberty.  Making an informed decision whether to be vaccinated or not is part and parcel of the most fundamental of all freedoms.

The American Marxists currently in control of the Democrat party and myriad institutions believe that not only public health programs but all public policy should be based on force and coercion.  By forcing the American citizenry to compromise their rights through overt prevarications and enforcing ill-advised mandates, the entire structure of individual freedom is eroded and trust in government permanently compromised. 

These collectivists fail to understand that protecting constitutional rights encourages societal solidarity.  People are more likely to trust officials who protect their personal liberty.  Without trust, public officials will not be able to persuade the public to take the most reasonable precautions during future emergencies which will make a bad situation even worse.  21st Century public health depends on good science, good communication, and trust in public officials to tell the truth.

By refusing to succumb to the pressure to get the Covid vaccination, these Americans are telling those in government that preserving the public’s health in the 21st Century requires preserving respect for personal liberty.

Steve McCann

Far-Left Democrats Want Eviction Moratorium to Last Forever

Far-left Congressional Democrats Cori Bush (Missouri), Ilhan Omar (Minnesota) and Ayanna Pressley (Massachusetts) slept in the rough on the Capitol steps over the weekend, surrounded by cases of bottled water, pizza boxes, staffers and fawning press. These Democrats, who are part of a group who call themselves “The Squad,” are protesting the end of the federal moratorium on evictions, which expired Saturday night, and warning of soaring homelessness.

They should have been shooed away by Capitol Police for their stunt. Camping on public property is against the law in the District of Columbia. It threatens public safety, creates disorder and health hazards and wrecks neighborhoods. Last week, the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance banning encampments in most public areas and ordering police to clear tents and cardboard colonies. Even uber-liberal LA has had enough.

The Squad is playing on this public concern over homeless to demand Congress enact a new eviction moratorium. It would not only suspend rent and mortgage obligations but actually cancel them until the pandemic is over. When is that? In their view, maybe never.

Far-left Democrats have a socialist agenda, which can be seen in their message: Don’t pay rent, we’ll block evictions; don’t pay back college loans, we’ll cancel them; don’t work, we’ll take money from those who do work and give it to you.

Before Omar set up camp Friday, she introduced a bill in the House for guaranteed incomes. Everyone would receive $1200 a month from the government whether you work or not. Utopia, unless you happen to be one of the people toiling to pay for it.

The truth is there’s no need for an eviction moratorium. Congress has provided $47 billion in rent relief with generous terms. A New York City household of four earning as much as $95,450 is eligible. There are delays in getting the money out, but in New York, California, Massachusetts and several other states, any renter who applies for aid is protected from eviction while waiting.

That federal rent aid is on top of stimulus checks and unemployment benefits with federal add-ons, and in New York State, newly enhanced state vouchers for renters who need help.

The White House said Monday, “Money is available in every state to help renters who are behind on rent and at risk of eviction.” The White House and US Treasury are pressuring states to get the money distributed.

The economic problem is not tenants unable to find work. It’s too few workers willing to take the jobs available.

“America’s employers can’t fill a record 9.2 million jobs because the government has been paying people more in unemployment to stay home,” Rep. Nicole Malliotakis told the New York Post. “So why aren’t they paying their rent?”

Continuing the moratorium would clobber mom-and-pop landlords who need revenue to pay mortgages and repair buildings. They’ve been hardest hit during the pandemic, according to the University of Pennsylvania Housing Initiative. Prolonging the moratorium threatens their survival, putting housing supply at risk.

Let’s be clear. A moratorium won’t relieve the crime, filth and disorder caused by hardcore homeless lying on the streets, benches and subway stairs. Most are mentally ill or addicted. They didn’t become homeless because of pandemic layoffs. Some have been living rough for a decade.

They need sensible love: removal from the streets to supervised shelters with mental health and addiction services. For their sakes, as well as to restore quality of life and safety in cities such as New York.

As for homelessness caused by the pandemic, Republicans and Democrats alike supported a temporary moratorium on evictions during the lockdown, when millions were forced out of work. That time has passed.

Yet Monday morning, Bush tweeted from her sleeping bag, predicting 11 million would become homeless. A lot of theatrics, but none of it true.

Layoffs are way down from the pandemic peak in April 2020, and it’s time to get the capitalist engines humming. Unfortunately, that’s not what left-wing Democrats want.

Betsy McCaughy

Defining Liberty

Here we have a most interesting collection of signage. Some low-level civil servant who’s in charge of deciding what the motorist may do at this particular junction has become quite thorough in creating restrictions.

The motorist may not proceed, may not turn left or right, and, most interestingly, in the second sign from the bottom, may not reverse out. In essence, “You’re stuck here and whatever you do to get out, you’re in violation of the rules we’ve placed upon you.”

Of course, if we were to encounter this particular intersection, we might say, “That’s absurd – they can’t possibly hold me to this.”

But, interestingly, under the traffic laws, a policeman can cite us for violating the signage. If we’re lucky, he might agree that it’s absurd and give us a break, but his job is to enforce it, regardless of its absurdity. And if he enjoys his position of authority, as many in his position do, he just may choose to demonstrate his power.

And, if we defy him, we’re in real trouble.

How many laws exist in the US today? The answer is that no one knows. It’s too complex to define. There are roughly 20,000 laws regarding gun control alone – and that’s just the federal laws. State, county and city laws also exist in abundance.

The level of governmental dominance now exists to such a degree that literally everyone is a criminal, whether they know it or not. It’s been estimated that the average American commits about three felonies per day, in addition to many lesser crimes. If, for any reason, the authorities wished to victimize you, they’d find their task quite simple.

Yet, there’s a general assumption amongst those who simply accept the laws that are heaped upon their shoulders, that they were somehow “necessary,” that legislators only pass laws if they have no other choice.

In my estimation, this view is diametrically opposite to what is true. One of my own principles regarding governance is,

“It is the primary business of any government to grow its own power and wealth at the expense of its people.”

This is an important principle to understand, as it opens the mind to recognize that governments always move in a direction of increased control. Given enough time, governments will always create a state of despotism. And, historically, no government has ever reversed its level of control and introduced greater liberty.

It then follows that each country is in the process of becoming increasingly tyrannical. The only difference between them is the degree of tyranny that’s been achieved so far.

Liberty and governmental control are polar opposites. Yet, most people have a rather vague perception of the term “liberty” and might even find it difficult to define. This is unfortunate, as it means that, when liberty is lost, those same people will be unlikely to recognize the fact.

Here are two good working definitions of liberty, courtesy of the dictionary:

“The power or scope to act as one pleases.”

“The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views.”

The first is interesting, as it suggests that liberty means each person doing exactly as he pleases. Doug Casey often offers a similarly simple, but more refined rule of life:

“Do as thou wilt, but be prepared to accept the consequences.”

The latter dictionary definition is probably in keeping with the perception of most Americans around 1800, but today’s American would caution that, “Ideally, that would be true, but without our current laws and regulations, there’d be chaos.

Libertarians would disagree and offer only two principles that they believe would largely negate the need for laws:

“Do all that you say that you’ll do and don’t initiate aggression against another person or his property.”

And, again, non-libertarian thinkers would shake their heads and assert that this would result in chaos. Americans have become indoctrinated to believe this through slow measures. As Thomas Jefferson said,

“Even under the best forms of Government, those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”

The key to governmental domination is that we tend to tolerate the loss of liberty if it’s taken away slowly.

In the US, liberty has been in decline, by my reckoning, for about one hundred years, but has been in rapid decline since 2001.

Of course, in all countries, at some point, the governmental domination becomes so intolerable that the people rise up. Revolution follows – a period of great upheaval and hardship. Eventually, a recovery begins and the entire process starts over.

It stands to reason that the best place to be is a country that has already recovered and is in the reconstruction stage – a time when liberty is at its greatest.

The US was in this stage in the nineteenth century – a period of great expansion and development.

However, by the mid-twentieth century, the rot had set in. America was past its peak and was ready to begin the final, and most rapid, period of decline.

At that time, the Russian Ayn Rand, living in the US, stated,

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

At the time Ms. Rand made this statement, she was largely dismissed. After all, Americans had never seen riot squads, dressed in black and heavily-armed, barging into homes without a warrant.

Authorities did not yet have the legal right to confiscate all of the possessions of an individual, based upon suspicion alone.

Yet, this is exactly what Ms. Rand warned against when she said, “the stage of total dominance is fast approaching.”

In reflection, we can have a laugh at the signage above, as it was clearly created by a low-level civil servant who was careless with his own puffed-up authority to the point of creating an absurdity.

But, in the larger picture, the signs are equally in place. Liberty in the US, at this point, is all but extinguished. And greater restrictions are being written every day.

The reader is left with a choice. He can either accept the signs that tell him he’s not allowed to go left, right, forward or back and wait until his government instructs him as to what he’s allowed to do, or he may say, “That’s it – I’m reversing out of here and finding a location where liberty is still in abundance.

Jeff Thomas

How the Left Destroyed the Olympics, America, and Western Civilization

A “woke” Olympics, and a “woke” military mean: an indication that our former freedom-loving, rights-respecting, achievement-adoring republic is now occupied by an enemy force. It’s as if the Nazis, the Soviets or the present-day Communist Chinese government had invaded our country and taken it over.

The difference is that this invasion isn’t merely political or military. In such a case, the citizens would resent it, and perhaps even openly rebel. This invasion goes deeper: to the brainwashing of the hearts and minds, the very souls, of the former republic’s citizens themselves.

In a very real sense, we did this to ourselves. Either through succumbing to the brainwashing or — more often the case — being afraid to challenge the brainwashing while it was still possible.

Now it’s too late. Not too late in the sense that it’s all absolutely irreversible. But too late in that the laws, customs, practices and attitudes entrenched are now primarily “woke” ones. They control the government, the corporate world, the majority of the younger generations, the practice of medicine, the entertainment and sports world, and (as we watched, in horror) even the Olympics.

The U.S. has performed poorly in the Olympics. If that isn’t a metaphor for the fall of a once great society, what is?

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

COVID Scam Unraveling at High Speed

CDC internal data published by Washington Post totally contradicts the CDC’s claim that “vaccination provides substantial protection against the virus.” There is no basis in the CDC’s own data for the false claim.

Despite vaccination providing “substantial protection,” “universal masking is essential to reduce transmission of the Delta variant,” the CDC says. This amounts to the claim that masks offer more protection than vaccination. This claim is also known to be false. Unless the mask is a N95, masks offer no protection.

The CDC document says “new research suggests vaccinated people can spread the virus.”

The CDC document says: “vaccinated individuals infected with delta may be able to transmit the virus as easily as those who are unvaccinated. Vaccinated people infected with delta have measurable viral loads similar to those who are unvaccinated and infected with the variant.”

The CDC document says: “Vaccine breakthrough cases are expected to increase as a percentage of total cases as vaccine coverage increases.” In other words, the breakthrough cases described as “rare” by the CDC are not rare. Studies in Singapore and other countries show that 75 percent of new Covid infections reportedly occur in people who are vaccinated.

CDC reports that 74% of new Covid Cases in Massachusetts are in fully vaccinated people.

Sooner or later perhaps the CDC and NIH will consider whether there is a “delta variant” or whether the “variant” is the illnesses caused by the vaccine. With the majority of what are called “new Covid cases” or “breakthrough cases” in Singapore, UK, Israel and many other countries occurring among the vaccinated, certainly the circumstantial evidence is that the “outbreak cases” are illnesses caused by the vaccines.

The irony is that the “pandemic” will likely turn out to be the product of the pcr test that is being withdrawn because of its high rate of false positives and inability to differentiate between flu and Covid, and the real outbreak is the result of injecting people with the Covid spike protein. In other words, the vaccination program created the Covid problem.

Instead of considering these likelihoods, the health agencies and Big Pharma shills are trying to achieve universal vaccination for profit reasons and are ignoring the evidence of the mass outbreak of Covid illnesses among the fully vaccinated.

What we are likely facing is a public health catastrophe entirely caused by Big Pharma greed and incompetent and corrupt public health agencies.

Paul Craig Roberts

False Beliefs Blocking You from Happiness

A regular reader emails that he is having difficulty coming to terms with his girlfriend’s sexual history. He says that they are very much in love, but that he obsesses over her past with other men. He asks if it’s possible to get over these feelings.

Well, dear Reader, assuming that your girlfriend doesn’t have a medical condition directly related to her past sexual behavior, then the only thing standing in the way of your getting past this is … you. Concerns about a person’s past behavior, sexual or otherwise, are sometimes valid. For example, “You started a relationship with me while you were still with your husband/boyfriend. How do I know you won’t do the same thing again?” Though this is reasonable, it’s also fair to ask yourself: “Why did I get involved with someone who was already attached? And why did I choose to participate in the lie?” Forgiving yourself for that can make it easier to forgive her.

In my experience, much of the concern over a partner’s prior sexual history arises from insecurity brought about by unfounded beliefs. For example:

False belief #1: “I won’t be as good a lover as her prior lovers.” First of all, she’s no longer with those prior lovers. Either they weren’t as good as you think they were, or other things matter more to her. If you need to compare anything, compare your personality traits with theirs. What do you have to offer that they didn’t? And why didn’t it work out with them? It could be that things other than sex matter to her just as much or more.

False belief #2: “Her prior relationship was very different from the kind she now has with me.” So what? People change. If you don’t think much of her prior relationships, i.e., that her sexual activity was too frequent or unusual, then she has apparently reached the same conclusion.

False belief #3: “I want her to love only me. If someone else offered her something I don’t have, then she doesn’t really love me.” Nope, wrong again. Every relationship is different. Think of your own past relationships. Weren’t some of them exciting and right for their time, though perhaps not what you’d want now? If you had met your girlfriend, say, five years ago, it’s quite possible that she wouldn’t have been interested in you. But now you are her choice.

False belief #4: “I want control over her. I don’t have control if I know someone else has appealed to her physically.” This is an immature attitude. Love is not control. Healthy romantic love is a response to the values and attributes you see in a person. This response, however, does not make her your property. Unfortunately, a lot of insecurity and eventual unhappiness come from the incorrect assumption that one can control the person they love. This childish idea is one of the major false beliefs that ultimately destroys a relationship.

Though love and trust are obviously important, respect is essential. A partner or spouse cannot respect you if you’re chronically insecure. If this insecurity manifests itself in the form of control, things will go from bad to worse. Years ago, I heard about a newlywed friend’s husband who insisted she throw out all the sheets and pillow cases she might have owned when she was involved in a physical relationship with any prior boyfriend. Now, I’m all for clean linens and such, but this struck me as profoundly insecure and infantile. To dwell on these kinds of things suggests that he was lacking the confidence in himself to be a satisfied — and satisfying — partner. To many people, this sort of behavior is a turnoff. Most everyone wants to be in love with a winner, and first and foremost, a winner has confidence in him- or herself.

So, to the gentleman who wrote the email, keep reminding yourself that the past is past. Try to remember that in the present, and for the foreseeable future (perhaps maybe forever), YOU are now your girlfriend’s choice. And she has her reasons.

Michael J. Hurd

Will Bill Maher Save the Left ?

President Biden and Speaker Pelosi are scared to death of the left.  We saw this in 2020, when they wouldn’t condemn the looting and violence we saw from coast to coast.  They may never have said “defund the police,” but every police officer knew who was watching their back.  It certainly was not the Washington Democrats.  Since assuming the presidency, Biden has allowed the left to open the border and write his executive orders.  Has he pushed back?  No!

Over at HBO, Bill Maher is on his own and calling out the “wokes.”  This is the latest from  Maher:

Remember when your teacher used to try to scare you, they’d say, ‘You know, this is going to go down on your permanent record?’ No longer an empty threat now. This is called a purge. It’s a mentality that belongs in Stalin’s Russia. How bad does this atmosphere we are living in have to get before people who say cancel culture is overblown admit that it is, in fact, an insanity that is swallowing up the world?

That is not a conservative position, my friends. My politics have not changed. But I am reacting to politics that have. And this is yet another example of how the woke invert the very thing that used to make the liberals liberal. Snitches and b——? That’s not being liberal. The Associated Press is a real news organization, yeah? So why am I reading this headline: ‘Olympic surfing exposes whitewashed Native Hawaiian Roots.’ Yeah, the Olympics added surfing this year. Good. Surfers deserve to be recognized as athletes. I’m sorry, what I meant to say is no, that’s cultural appropriation[.] …

I must say of all the violations of the woke penal code, cultural appropriation just might be the dumbest of all. First of all, there are 25,000 islands in the Pacific. How do we know a Hawaiian was the first to stand on a board in the water? It seems like something anyone in any ocean would eventually get around to. And if you’re a surfer, it doesn’t matter if you’re black, white, or in between you all taste the same to sharks[.] …Top ArticlesREAD MOREThe Three Horsemen ofthe Bidenapocalypse

Change is not synonymous with progress. Newer doesn’t automatically mean better. This new idea that each culture must remain in its own separate silo is not better, and it’s not progress. And in fact, it’s messing with one of the few ideas that still really does make this melting pot called America great. Not everything is about oppression, stealing natural resources from indigenous people.

Well done, Mr. Maher.  My guess is that he speaks for a lot of Democrats who are scared to death of expressing similar opinions.

Maybe Maher should have reminded the networks that the Olympics have been a ratings disaster.  Maybe it’s the time zone difference, but more likely it’s commercials and athletes who keep telling you how terrible the country is.  To be fair, some U.S. athletes saluted the flag, but too many people are just turned off by Megan Rapinoe and others.

Memo to the Democrats: Listen to Maher, because he is the only one making sense on your side.

Silvio Canto, Jr., American Thinker

Image: Angela George at Sharon Graphics.

If you would like to comment on this or any other American Thinker article or post, we invite you to visit the American Thinker Forum at MeWe. There, you can converse with other American Thinker readers and comment freely (subject to MeWe’s terms of use). The Forum will be fully populated and ready for comments by midday (Eastern time) each day.

Thank you.


American Thinker on MeWe

| Print| Emailsponsored contentFrom the WebPowered by ZergNet

Insanely Offensive Kamala Harris Cartoon Sparks Massive Outrage

Meet The Man That Simone Biles Has Chosen To Be Her Boyfriend

Biden’s Latest Speech Slip Up Is Raising Eyebrows

The Tragedy of Woody Harrelson Just Gets Sadder and Sadder

The Property Brothers Lawsuit Is Getting Ugly

What Was Dusty Hill’s Net Worth When He Died?sponsored content


Urologist: Try This Tonight to Help Shrink Enlarged Prostate (Watch)The Most Successful Attorneys in Bellefonte. See the ListKnee Surgeons Are Losing It over These Breakthrough Knee SleevesIf You Have More Than $1,000 in Your Checking Account, Make These 6 Moves ASAPPennsylvania Launches New Policy for Cars Used Less Than 50 Miles/dayThis Ingenious Sink Hack Will Change Your Hotel Stays ForeverScience Myths Your Teachers Should Never Have Taught YouLegendary Singer George Strait Made This Startling Admission About His MarriageThe Horrifying Truth About CBDOne Key Detail on Archie’s Birth Certificate Was Erased


Urologist: Try This Tonight to Help Shrink Enlarged Prostate (Watch)Knee Surgeons Are Losing It over These Breakthrough Knee SleevesPennsylvania Launches New Policy for Cars Used Less Than 50 Miles/dayThe Horrifying Truth About CBDGorgeous Photos of Julie Andrews in Her HeydayYou’ll Be Green with Envy at These Real-life Tales of Rags to RoyaltyKat Von D Made a Dramatic Change to Her AppearanceThe Most Successful Attorneys in Bellefonte. See the ListRemember Chunk from the Goonies? Take a Deep Breath Before You See Him NowEveryone Who Believes in God Should Watch This. It Will Blow Your Mindnull


American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on MeWe

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

nullnullsponsored contentFROM THE WEBby ZergNet

Bachelor Andrew Spencer Breaks Silence About Insensitive Tweets

Rush Limbaugh’s Stunning Net Worth At The Time Of His Passing

The First Assassination Carried Out By Michael Collins’s ‘Squad’

WKRP In Cincinnati Star Dead At 79

The Truth About Laura Ingraham Nobody Wants To Mention

GOP Lawmaker Facing Outrage Over Violent Joke About Nancy PelosiAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2021

Why is a Toxic Vaccine Being Mandated ?

Two medical scientists acquired the animal studies that Pfizer provided Japanese health authorities in its application for emergency use authorization of its Covid vaccine in Japan. The scientists saw that the animal studies had a number of red flags that were ignored in the rush to market a vaccine. The scientists discuss the vaccine, how it works, and the ignored red flags: They conclude that it was gross negligence for regulatory authorities to grant emergency use of the vaccine. They say that the use of the vaccine constitutes crimes against humanity.

Here are the scientists’ conclusions:

“Pfizer’s animal data clearly presaged the following risks and dangers:

  • blood clotting shortly after vaccination, potentially leading to heart attacks, stroke, and venous thrombosis
  • grave harm to female fertility
  • grave harm to breastfed infants
  • cumulative toxicity after multiple injections

“With the exception of female fertility, which can simply not be evaluated within the short period of time for which the vaccines have been in use, all of the above risks have been substantiated since the vaccines have been rolled out—all are manifest in the reports to the various adverse event registries. Those registries also contain a very considerable number of reports on abortions and stillbirths shortly after vaccination, which should have prompted urgent investigation.

“We must emphasize again that each of these risks could readily be inferred from the cited limited preclinical data, but were not followed up with appropriate in-depth investigations. In particular, the clinical trials did not monitor any laboratory parameters that could have provided information on these risks, such as those related to blood coagulation (e.g. D-dimers/thrombocytes), muscle cell damage (e.g. troponin/creatine kinase), or liver damage (e.g. γ-glutamyltransferase). That the various regulatory agencies granted emergency use authorization based on such incomplete and insufficient data amounts to nothing less than gross negligence.

“Of particularly grave concern is the very slow elimination of the toxic cationic lipids. In persons repeatedly injected with mRNA vaccines containing these lipids— be they directed against COVID, or any other pathogen or disease—this would result in cumulative toxicity. There is a real possibility that cationic lipids will accumulate in the ovaries. The implied grave risk to female fertility demands the most urgent attention of the public and of the health authorities.

“Since the so-called clinical trials were carried out with such negligence, the real trials are occurring only now—on a massive scale, and with devastating results. This vaccine, and others, are often called “experimental.” Calling off this failed experiment is long overdue. Continuing or even mandating the use of this poisonous vaccine, and the apparently imminent issuance of full approval for it are crimes against humanity.”

The illegitimate president Biden has accepted the role of chief propagandist for mass mandated vaccination. He said today (July 29) that all federal employees and contractors will have to show proof of vaccination or wear masks, use social distancing, and have regular testing.
A number of state governors are also mandating vaccination of state employees, and corporations are requiring it of their employees and some are requiring prospective employees to be vaccinated prior to their job interview.

Danny Meyer, the founder and chairman of Shake Shack just announced that both employees and customers must be vaccinated. No proof of vaccination, no service.

To understand how utterly stupid all are from Danny Meyer to Joe Biden, consider that these tyrannical and strictly illegal mandates (see: ) are being blamed on the “delta variant” against which health authorities admit the vaccine is ineffectual. What then is the point of the vaccination?

We know from the adverse vaccine effects databases that the US, UK, and EU alone have 3,000,000 adverse vaccine cases and tens of thousands of deaths. Clearly, the vaccine carries high risk. We also know from reports from the UK, Israel and elsewhere that it is the countries with the highest percentage of their populations vaccinated that are having the highest rate of new cases, and the cases are vaccinated people.

There is now abundant evidence that the mRNA injections are creating identical symptoms to those created by the Covid virus—life-treating blood-clotting for example. It is an act of murder to mandate a vaccine that is known to kill people.

To ask the question again, what is the purpose of the vaccination? Is the purpose the “grave harm to female fertility”? Is the purpose the large percentage of the vaccinated population that some experts expect will die from the vaccine’s toxicity? Is the purpose Big Pharma’s profits? Is the purpose to breach the law that requires informed consent for any intervention in one’s body so that authorities can mandate that we be microchipped?

Something is going on that we are not being told.