Ideology is political religion, said the conservative sage Russell Kirk.

And what is the defining dogma of the political religion, or ideology, of America in 2022?

Is it not that, “All men are created equal”?

Yet, as with every religion, a basic question needs first to be asked and answered about this defining dogma of liberal ideology.

Is it true? Are all men truly created equal? Are all races and ethnic groups equal? Are men and women equal? Are all religions equal? Or do we simply agree to accept that as true — and treat them all equally?

All Americans, we agree, have the same God-given rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” the same constitutional rights in the Bill of Rights, and the same civil rights, enshrined in federal law.

But where is the historic, scientific or empirical proof of the defining dogma of American democracy that “all men are created equal”?

Thomas Jefferson, the statesman who immortalized the words, did not believe in equality, let alone equity. How he lived his life testifies to this disbelief.

When he wrote the Declaration of Independence that contained the famous words, Jefferson was a slave owner. In that document, he speaks of the British as “brethren” connected to us by “ties of our common kindred,” ties of blood.

But not all of those fighting against us were the equals of the British.

There were, Jefferson wrote, those “merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

In an 1815 letter to John Adams, Jefferson celebrated “a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents … The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society.”

Jefferson was an aristocrat, not a democrat.

Abraham Lincoln opposed slavery but did not believe in racial or social equality. Though he cited Jefferson’s “all men are created equal” at Gettysburg, he had conceded in an 1858 debate with Stephen Douglas that, “We cannot, then, make them equals,” adding that the white race in America should retain the superior position.

With the Brown v. Board of Education decision desegregating public schools in 1954, and the civil rights acts of 1964, 1965 and 1968, a national effort was undertaken to bring about the social and political equality that Jefferson’s words of 1776 seemed to promise but failed to deliver.

At Howard University in 1965, Lyndon Johnson took the next step, declaring: “Freedom is not enough … We seek … not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result.”

Yet, over half a century after the civil rights revolution, incomes and wealth are not equal. Nor is there equal representation in professions like law, medicine and higher education.

President Joe Biden’s people have pledged to Black America that they will mandate and deliver that equality of results. If equity does not now exist, the Biden administration will impose it.

And why not?

If all men (and women) are created equal, the most reasonable explanation for a consistent inequality of riches and rewards between men and women, and black and white, is that the game has been rigged. An inequality of riches and rewards exists because “systematic racism” coexists in American society alongside “white privilege.”

The remedy is also clear. As Ibram X. Kendi, author of “How to Be an Antiracist,” told The New York Times’ Ezra Klein: “Racist policies are defined as any policy that leads to racial inequity … intent of the policymaker doesn’t matter. It’s all about the fundamental outcome.”

Thus, a policy that ensures an equal place at the starting line but consistently fails to deliver an equal place at the finish line is, de facto, racist.

If Asian and black kids start kindergarten in the same class, and Asian kids in 12th grade are studying calculus while most black kids are still trying to master algebra, racism alone, by Kendi’s rule, can explain such a regular result.

The solution to persistent inequality?

Mandate equity; mandate equality of results; mandate equal rewards for black and white. Compel the government to produce policies that deliver an equality of results.

But what if inequalities have another explanation?

What if Asian Americans are naturally superior in mathematics?

What if an inequity of rewards in society is predominantly a result of an inequality of talents and abilities?

What if it is more true to say that, based on human experience, no two men were ever created equal, than to say all men are created equal?

As Kirk said, ideology is political religion.

What we witness today is the refusal of true believers in egalitarian ideology to accept that their core doctrine may not only not be true, but may be demonstrably false.

What we are witnessing in America is how true believers behave when they realize the church at which they worship has been erected on a bright shining lie and reality must inevitably bring it crashing down.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Memorial Day observances are replete with references of the fighting men and women who made “the ultimate sacrifice.”  But Ayn Rand invited us to think of this loss in a deeper, and more ennobling way still when she observed, “If a man dies fighting for his own freedom, it is not a sacrifice: he is not willing to live as a slave…”

Ayn Rand hated war which she viewed as antithetical to rational self-interest and the ultimate denouement of collectivism, which destroys the productive capacities of its subjects, and therefore “cannot exist for long without looting some freer, more productive country.”

But despite her distaste for war, she admired the military men who waged war in defense of human liberty, an admiration underscored by her addresses to military audiences, including her 1972 talk at the U. S. Naval Academy, and her 1974 speech to cadets at West Point Military Academy (which later became the title essay of Philosophy: Who Needs It.

On a personal note, in my family, Memorial Day means more than an excuse to barbecue.  Both of my parents and sister are veterans, my brother is an active duty airman, and my cousin is an Embassy guardsman in Oman. For them, serving in the military is more than a job, but a calling to defend our country and its founding ideal: individual rights.

While I didn’t directly follow in their footsteps by donning the uniform, I feel that I’m doing my patriotic part by waging the philosophical battle for reason, individualism, and capitalism, along with my sisters and brothers-in-arms here at The Atlas Society.  We do this by creatively crafting an arsenal of heat-seeking, light-bearing content that takes direct aim at the deadly ideas that threaten freedom at home—and abroad.

Some of the most effective weapons in that arsenal are our Draw My Life videos, including: 

• My Name is Postmodernism—taking aim at the relativism and nihilism of cultural Marxism
• My Name is Frederick Douglass—celebrating the abolitionist who recruited African American men for the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment, the first Black military unit raised by the North during the Civil War
  
• My Name is Socialism—dramatizing socialism as a serial killer rampaging throughout history
• My Name is Kira Argounova—capturing her heroic struggle to love and live under totalitarianism
• My Name is Venezuela—a hostage drama, with Venezuela imprisoned by socialism, yearning for her escape 

In the months ahead, we’ll be releasing several NEW Draw My Life videos, including

• My Name is Francisco d’Anconia
• My Name is Cuba
• My Name is Crypto
• My Name is Critical Race Theory

We can’t all defend America’s founding ideals by serving in the military—or by working full time to advance Objectivist ideas.  But you can fight for your own values by supporting the work of those of us who are fighting, day in and day out, on your behalf.

On this Memorial Day, I encourage you to consider even a small gift to help us arm the next generation with the ideas of Ayn Rand, as an act of rational self-interest, benevolent generosity, and in tribute to those who paid the highest price for our freedom. 

Thank you in advance for supporting The Atlas Society, Friend. Our organization would not be here today if not for your investment!

In liberty, 

Ana

Authoritarian politicians wasted no time using the recent shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, to justify new infringements on liberty. Just days after the Buffalo shooting, the US House of Representatives passed a law creating new domestic terrorism offices in the FBI, the Justice Department, and the Department of Homeland Security.

This is a step toward achieving the longstanding goal of many progressives of focusing the national security state on “domestic terrorists” and “right-wing extremists.” Supporters of these efforts have used the Buffalo shooter’s mention of “replacement theory” in his “manifesto” to attack prominent conservative commentators, most notably Tucker Carlson. Carlson and others are accused of spreading the replacement conspiracy theory because they have pointed out that the Left has for years celebrated the coming “replacement” of the white majority population. The goal is to stigmatize, intimidate, and even criminalize those expressing views or facts that contradict the cultural Marxists or the Democrat party establishment.

Painting the Buffalo shooter as a conservative requires ignoring his self-description as an environmental-fascist and his disdain for “Fox News conservatism.” The mainstream media also ignores the shooter’s use of the same neo-Nazi symbol used by the Ukrainian Azov brigade. This may be because they do not want the American people to realize their tax dollars are supporting actual Nazis in Ukraine.

The push to use the police state against “right-wing extremists” is supported by many progressives who (correctly) oppose the national security state’s civil liberties abuses of Muslim and other minorities. Conversely, many conservatives who have defended all infringements on liberty done in the name of the “global war on terror,” (correctly) oppose federal crackdown on “right wing extremists.”

Both sides fail to realize that a violation of any individual’s liberty is a threat to everyone’s liberty.

The massacre of 19 school children and two teachers in Uvalde Texas was followed by calls for expanded gun controls from President Biden and other prominent politicians. Among the proposals floated are a renewed push for federal Red Flag laws. Red Flag laws allow law enforcement to take someone’s guns without due process based on a mere allegation that an individual poses a risk of violent behavior. Despite being unconstitutional, easily abused, and ineffective at stopping violent crime, Red Flag laws enjoy broad bipartisan support. For example, former President Donald Trump endorsed a policy of “take the gun first, worry about due process later.”

If Congress was serious about protecting liberty and security, they would pass Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie’s legislation repealing the “Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990.” This poorly worded law leaves children defenseless against mass shooters who are not dissuaded from their evil intentions by “Gun-Free Zone” signs. Video showing the Uvalde police not only standing around outside the school, but tasering parents who were trying to protect their children reinforces the importance of allowing school personnel to protect themselves and their students by carrying firearms.

Expanding the police state to “monitor” right-wing extremism and giving the government new powers to deny law-abiding individuals access to firearms make us less safe and less free. Instead of allowing politicians to use mass shootings as an excuse to further expand their powers, we must insist they repeal all federal laws that trade real liberty for phony security starting with the USA FREEDOM Acts (previously known as the USA PATRIOT Act) and the so-called Safe and Gun Free Schools Act.

Ron Paul

The greatest soldiers of American history knew that freedom was sacred; no price paid on its behalf was a sacrifice.

First published in 2005 this op-ed is still relevant today.

Memorial Day is a solemn and sad occasion honoring the American soldiers who gave their lives in war. But it is also a hallowed day — because the values those men fought to defend form the essence of our country: freedom and the rights of the individual.

The United States has never fought a war of conquest. The Revolutionary War was waged to gain freedom from the tyranny of King George. The Civil War was fought to end slavery in this country. The Americans defended liberty in World War II against the murderous collectivism of the Nazis. Even the Spanish-American War was fought against the brutal colonialism of the Spanish Empire.

The greatest soldiers of American history knew that freedom was sacred; no price paid on its behalf was a sacrifice. George Washington, as commander of the Continental Army, led the way. Despite his years of struggle and the hardships endured, Washington refused pay for his service. He used his own fortune to help finance the war effort, and, when the Revolution was won, took no money from Congress to help with the much-needed rebuilding of his Mount Vernon estate.

Gen. Washington recognized that freedom from tyranny was its own reward. His stirring words to Joseph Reed make clear his (and his compatriots’) reasons for waging the Revolutionary War: “The spirit of freedom beat too high in us to submit to slavery.”

Douglas MacArthur — another great leader — as military commander of occupied Japan, made it his highest priority to establish the post-war Japanese government and economy on the principle of political/economic freedom. The relative liberty and prosperity of Japan’s newly semi-capitalist system owes much to MacArthur’s wisdom and efforts.

Observing the fruits of his labor, he stated before Congress that America’s former enemies had “from the ashes left in war’s wake, erected in Japan an edifice dedicated to the primacy of individual liberty, freedom of economic enterprise and social justice.”

Gen. MacArthur recognized that part of America’s real victory in the Pacific was Japan’s vastly increased freedom.

Regular American soldiers have fought and died for freedom around the globe. South Korea today is free, not a part of North Korea’s murderous dictatorship, because U.S. soldiers helped defeat Communist aggression in the Korean War. Similarly, as long as American soldiers fought in Vietnam, the Communists were held at bay, unable to achieve their goal of conquest. Only after American politicians pulled all U.S. military personnel out of Vietnam in 1975 did the country fall, and the Communists, then unrestrained, enslaved the Vietnamese.

To appreciate fully the virtue of our soldiers we must remember what freedom means. It means we can choose our own fields of study, our own careers, our own spouses, the size of our families and our places of residence. It means we can speak out without fear regarding any issue — including governmental policy — choose our values, without interference from the state.

Freedom is based on the inalienable right of each individual to pursue his own goals and his own personal happiness. During America’s Revolutionary Period, one New Hampshire state document summed up the thinking of our Founding Fathers regarding an individual’s rights, “among which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; and in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness.”

This is the principle — and the spirit — that our soldiers defend.

The meaning of Memorial Day is particularly pressing today when the United States is engaged in a war against fanatics who represent the extreme of intellectual, religious and political suppression. Freedom is unknown and utterly alien in the countries that support terrorists. They feel threatened by our most cherished principles and institutions, and so they seek to destroy us.

What protects us is our moral courage and our military might. If the President has the moral conviction to permit our soldiers to wage war fully against our enemies, they will prevail, as they have so many times in the past. Once again, their blood and their lives, spilled and lost in defense of freedom, will not have been given in vain. On Memorial Day we solemnly and properly honor those heroes who have fought and died in defense of America’s freedom.

Copyright 2005 Ayn Rand Institute. All rights reserved. That the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) has granted permission to Capitalism Magazine to republish this article, does not mean ARI necessarily endorses or agrees with the other content on this website.

Memorial Day matters, but not in the usual way. These brave warriors fought and even died for freedom. We are now, as an occupied country, losing that freedom. Nearly half of our fellow Americans, including a majority of ignorant young people, seem even to support it. So while we honor these brave soldiers of the past and recent wars, we must also learn and be inspired by their example: Because we are the generation that either loses America’s freedom, or fights to get it back.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason