The Roadmap for the “Great Reset”

Posted on by
1

As far back as 1996, Mikhail Gorbachev laid bare the agenda driving climate alarmism: “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order.” He was underscoring the importance of advancing Marxist objectives by creating an emergency to convince people they must surrender freedom to be safe. That idea has been parlayed over the decades into a global campaign of the Left to control vibrant economies, end individual freedom and national sovereignties, and impoverish the world. In America, it is being served up as the Green New Deal (GND).

Author Marc Morano exposes that elaborate con game in Green Fraud: Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse Than You Think. Morano is a former senior staff member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and narrator of the film Climate Hustle. His book shows how the GND — which dovetails with the U.N.’s Agenda 21 — has nothing to do with “saving the planet” and is actually about “transforming modern America into a centrally planned and managed society and imposing an ideology that will rein in the freedoms of individual Americans.”

Like Gorbachev, GND champions admit as much. Morano quotes Saikat Chakrabarti, former chief of staff to debutant Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as saying, “We really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.” And he cites Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign aide Waleed Shahid explaining the GND as “a proposal to redistribute wealth and power from people on top to the people at the bottom.”

For an agenda so ambitious, the name ironically draws on FDR’s failed New Deal of the 1930s, a massive program that expanded the size and scope of the federal government to stimulate an economic recovery but ended up prolonging the Great Depression. The prognosis for the GND — which includes components like universal healthcare, guaranteed annual income, affordable housing, clear water and air projects, and special social and racial justice goals — is worse. Says David Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, “To reach zero net-carbon emissions in 10 years, the government would regulate and ultimately prohibit the use of affordable energy sources. This would trigger a massive decline in industrial productivity and result in mass layoffs.”

Morano attacks the misconception that CO2 levels are rising, explaining how they are in fact among the lowest now in Earth’s history, and debunks the idea that it is the “control knob” of the climate. He notes how land use, volcanoes, wind oscillations, ocean cycles, solar activity, the Earth’s tilt, and multifarious other factors impact climate, adding up to much more than the impact of CO2. He explains that the gas is a harmless and essential component of the atmosphere, a natural product of respiration. Climate scientist Anastasios Tsonis, a former distinguished professor emeritus of University of Wisconsin, is in agreement: “I’m a skeptic not just about global warming but also about many other aspects of science… Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one .aause

truth, the GND is an all-encompassing attack on capitalism, wealth creation, and freedom; it’s a vehicle for a “fundamental transformation” of our constitutional republic. The list of non-climate issues tagged on to so-called green goals is ludicrous: income inequality, racial wealth divide, gender earnings gap, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Ocasio-Cortez even believes 100% renewable energy will lead to “economic, social, and racial justice” in America. Meat-eating isn’t spared: the GND proposes to end meat-eating, in line with U.N. climate advisors’ suggestion that meat-eaters be ostracized like smokers and meat prices wildly inflated to discourage consumption. Why? Flatulent cows and sheep flood the atmosphere with climate-changing methane. To get to “net zero” emissions by 2050, GND proponents want to eliminate private vehicles, home ownership, and air travel; they also want to ban new roads, fossil fuel production, and nuclear power. These will be achieved through draconian taxes and regulations that advance the Left’s depopulation and deindustrialization agenda.

Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.

In Green Fraud, Morano tallies the astronomical cost of the GND’s fossil fuel phase-out, predicated on the false premise that fossil fuels are a cost rather than a net benefit to society. According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a libertarian think tank, phasing out fossil fuels and regulating how electricity is produced will cost the average household $75,000 annually. It will also result in steep economic depression and a massive increase in land use for no meaningful climate benefit. The institute calls the GND a “back-to-the-Dark-Ages manifesto” and has released a series of educational videos on the GND’s “heavy-handed regulations.”

Contrary to the GNP’s insistence on renewables, the world continues to run on fossil fuels. According to the Statistical Review of World Energy 2019 by BP Plc, oil, coal, and gas constitute 85% of the world’s energy consumption while wind and solar represent only 3%. This despite $50 billion in subsidies. Fans of wind and solar energy ignore the mining of rare earth minerals used in components, the toxic wastes produced, and that components — like windmill blades, which are buried upon scrapping — cannot be recycled. Solar panels create 200 times more waste than nuclear plants. To produce the same amount of energy, solar and wind farms require 300-400 times more land on average than a natural gas or nuclear plant. Manufacturing the rechargeable batteries used in electric vehicles requires the mining of huge amounts of cobalt, lithium, manganese, copper, and other minerals, resulting in massive environmental costs.

During the pandemic, climate activists and left-leaning celebrities celebrated the economic collapse and hoped it would result in an inflection point for the planet as the world came to a standstill. Some linked the coronavirus to climate change. Actress-turned-scientist Jane Fonda nonsensically ventured: “The melting of the Arctic sheet is releasing untold pathogens to which humans are not immune.” Lockdowns necessitated by the pandemic were viewed as a template for the GND. Klaus Schwab, chairman and founder of the World Economic Forum, gleefully contemplated how COVID lockdowns could morph into climate lockdowns.

These might seem like over-the-top instances of Lysenkoism at work — the willful distortion of science to serve a political purpose. But the ‘woke’ Left has long been utilizing environmentalism to advance its agenda, insidiously linking climate issues to race, identity, gender, and whatnot. Unfortunately, fashionable ‘wokeness’ is gaining traction. NASA climate scientist Kate Marvel thinks “climate justice and racial justice are the same thing, and we’ll never head off climate catastrophe without dismantling white supremacy.” U.N. delegates came up with a Gender Action Plan based on observations that climate change “exacerbates existing gender inequality.”

Morano final statement on saving America and the world from a crew of anarchists and radicals says it all: “The way forward is already clear. Improving technologies, expanding energy access, and growing economies in the developing world are already improving the environment in the United States and across the world more than any Green New Deal, UN treaty, or carbon (dioxide) taxes ever conceivably could.”

We must halt the GND and curtail this leftist madness. Or we will lose the world’s greatest experiment in liberty. We will lose America and what it stands for.

truth, the GND is an all-encompassing attack on capitalism, wealth creation, and freedom; it’s a vehicle for a “fundamental transformation” of our constitutional republic. The list of non-climate issues tagged on to so-called green goals is ludicrous: income inequality, racial wealth divide, gender earnings gap, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Ocasio-Cortez even believes 100% renewable energy will lead to “economic, social, and racial justice” in America. Meat-eating isn’t spared: the GND proposes to end meat-eating, in line with U.N. climate advisors’ suggestion that meat-eaters be ostracized like smokers and meat prices wildly inflated to discourage consumption. Why? Flatulent cows and sheep flood the atmosphere with climate-changing methane. To get to “net zero” emissions by 2050, GND proponents want to eliminate private vehicles, home ownership, and air travel; they also want to ban new roads, fossil fuel production, and nuclear power. These will be achieved through draconian taxes and regulations that advance the Left’s depopulation and deindustrialization agenda.

Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.

In Green Fraud, Morano tallies the astronomical cost of the GND’s fossil fuel phase-out, predicated on the false premise that fossil fuels are a cost rather than a net benefit to society. According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a libertarian think tank, phasing out fossil fuels and regulating how electricity is produced will cost the average household $75,000 annually. It will also result in steep economic depression and a massive increase in land use for no meaningful climate benefit. The institute calls the GND a “back-to-the-Dark-Ages manifesto” and has released a series of educational videos on the GND’s “heavy-handed regulations.”

Contrary to the GNP’s insistence on renewables, the world continues to run on fossil fuels. According to the Statistical Review of World Energy 2019 by BP Plc, oil, coal, and gas constitute 85% of the world’s energy consumption while wind and solar represent only 3%. This despite $50 billion in subsidies. Fans of wind and solar energy ignore the mining of rare earth minerals used in components, the toxic wastes produced, and that components — like windmill blades, which are buried upon scrapping — cannot be recycled. Solar panels create 200 times more waste than nuclear plants. To produce the same amount of energy, solar and wind farms require 300-400 times more land on average than a natural gas or nuclear plant. Manufacturing the rechargeable batteries used in electric vehicles requires the mining of huge amounts of cobalt, lithium, manganese, copper, and other minerals, resulting in massive environmental costs.

During the pandemic, climate activists and left-leaning celebrities celebrated the economic collapse and hoped it would result in an inflection point for the planet as the world came to a standstill. Some linked the coronavirus to climate change. Actress-turned-scientist Jane Fonda nonsensically ventured: “The melting of the Arctic sheet is releasing untold pathogens to which humans are not immune.” Lockdowns necessitated by the pandemic were viewed as a template for the GND. Klaus Schwab, chairman and founder of the World Economic Forum, gleefully contemplated how COVID lockdowns could morph into climate lockdowns.

These might seem like over-the-top instances of Lysenkoism at work — the willful distortion of science to serve a political purpose. But the ‘woke’ Left has long been utilizing environmentalism to advance its agenda, insidiously linking climate issues to race, identity, gender, and whatnot. Unfortunately, fashionable ‘wokeness’ is gaining traction. NASA climate scientist Kate Marvel thinks “climate justice and racial justice are the same thing, and we’ll never head off climate catastrophe without dismantling white supremacy.” U.N. delegates came up with a Gender Action Plan based on observations that climate change “exacerbates existing gender inequality.”

Morano final statement on saving America and the world from a crew of anarchists and radicals says it all: “The way forward is already clear. Improving technologies, expanding energy access, and growing economies in the developing world are already improving the environment in the United States and across the world more than any Green New Deal, UN treaty, or carbon (dioxide) taxes ever conceivably could.”

We must halt the GND and curtail this leftist madness. Or we will lose the world’s greatest experiment in liberty. We will lose America and what it stands for.

Janet Levy

×

In truth, the GND is an all-encompassing attack on capitalism, wealth creation, and freedom; it’s a vehicle for a “fundamental transformation” of our constitutional republic. The list of non-climate issues tagged on to so-called green goals is ludicrous: income inequality, racial wealth divide, gender earnings gap, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Ocasio-Cortez even believes 100% renewable energy will lead to “economic, social, and racial justice” in America. Meat-eating isn’t spared: the GND proposes to end meat-eating, in line with U.N. climate advisors’ suggestion that meat-eaters be ostracized like smokers and meat prices wildly inflated to discourage consumption. Why? Flatulent cows and sheep flood the atmosphere with climate-changing methane. To get to “net zero” emissions by 2050, GND proponents want to eliminate private vehicles, home ownership, and air travel; they also want to ban new roads, fossil fuel production, and nuclear power. These will be achieved through draconian taxes and regulations that advance the Left’s depopulation and deindustrialization agenda.

Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.

Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.Shorn of environmental hysterics and the accompanying litany of socialist solutions — massive government intervention, population control, wealth redistribution, economic restructuring, and limits to national sovereignty — the GND is an onslaught on the very American spirit of freedom, innovation, and creativity that leads to prosperity. It’s well known that prosperous countries do a better job preserving the environment and providing efficient healthcare and cleaner air and water to their people.

In Green Fraud, Morano tallies the astronomical cost of the GND’s fossil fuel phase-out, predicated on the false premise that fossil fuels are a cost rather than a net benefit to society. According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a libertarian think tank, phasing out fossil fuels and regulating how electricity is produced will cost the average household $75,000 annually. It will also result in steep economic depression and a massive increase in land use for no meaningful climate benefit. The institute calls the GND a “back-to-the-Dark-Ages manifesto” and has released a series of educational videos on the GND’s “heavy-handed regulations.”

Contrary to the GNP’s insistence on renewables, the world continues to run on fossil fuels. According to the Statistical Review of World Energy 2019 by BP Plc, oil, coal, and gas constitute 85% of the world’s energy consumption while wind and solar represent only 3%. This despite $50 billion in subsidies. Fans of wind and solar energy ignore the mining of rare earth minerals used in components, the toxic wastes produced, and that components — like windmill blades, which are buried upon scrapping — cannot be recycled. Solar panels create 200 times more waste than nuclear plants. To produce the same amount of energy, solar and wind farms require 300-400 times more land on average than a natural gas or nuclear plant. Manufacturing the rechargeable batteries used in electric vehicles requires the mining of huge amounts of cobalt, lithium, manganese, copper, and other minerals, resulting in massive environmental costs.

During the pandemic, climate activists and left-leaning celebrities celebrated the economic collapse and hoped it would result in an inflection point for the planet as the world came to a standstill. Some linked the coronavirus to climate change. Actress-turned-scientist Jane Fonda nonsensically ventured: “The melting of the Arctic sheet is releasing untold pathogens to which humans are not immune.” Lockdowns necessitated by the pandemic were viewed as a template for the GND. Klaus Schwab, chairman and founder of the World Economic Forum, gleefully contemplated how COVID lockdowns could morph into climate lockdowns.

These might seem like over-the-top instances of Lysenkoism at work — the willful distortion of science to serve a political purpose. But the ‘woke’ Left has long been utilizing environmentalism to advance its agenda, insidiously linking climate issues to race, identity, gender, and whatnot. Unfortunately, fashionable ‘wokeness’ is gaining traction. NASA climate scientist Kate Marvel thinks “climate justice and racial justice are the same thing, and we’ll never head off climate catastrophe without dismantling white supremacy.” U.N. delegates came up with a Gender Action Plan based on observations that climate change “exacerbates existing gender inequality.”

Morano final statement on saving America and the world from a crew of anarchists and radicals says it all: “The way forward is already clear. Improving technologies, expanding energy access, and growing economies in the developing world are already improving the environment in the United States and across the world more than any Green New Deal, UN treaty, or carbon (dioxide) taxes ever conceivably could.”

We must halt the GND and curtail this leftist madness. Or we will lose the world’s greatest experiment in liberty. We will lose America and what it stands for.

Image: Regnery Publishng

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

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.

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

If Rioting and Looting are 24/7, How do They make Their Point ?

Posted on by
Reply

People riot and loot to make a point. Whatever you think of their “points” or tactics, this is their claim. “We’re protesting racism. We’re protesting income inequality.” In order to make a point, rioting and looting cannot become a 24/7, everyday event. If rioting is the norm, and not the exception, then what are we to think? So my question for woke supporters: If looting and rioting are NEVER, EVER going to stop, and are to become a permanent part of human “civilization” — then what the hell is your point?

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

The Vanishing Hong Kong…China’s Latest Casualty

Posted on by
Reply

Over the past nine months, China’s Communist Party rulers in Beijing have launched a wholesale transformation of nearly every aspect of life in this prosperous territory – in the schools, the courts, the civil service, the media, the elected legislature, and even the relatively powerless local neighborhood councils. Only the local business community has been largely spared – but not untouched – by the changes.

As a result, in less than a year, this once freewheeling city known for its frenetic energy, lively debates, rambunctious local media, and long tradition of street protests has become hardly recognizable. This longtime British colony which once embodied the perfect blend of East and West now resembles every other sprawling megacity on the Chinese mainland, marked by soaring skyscrapers and impressive infrastructure, but stifled by repression and fear.

The vehicle for Hong Kong’s rapid transformation is the new draconian national security law (“NSL”) imposed by Beijing and handed down last year. Hong Kong’s China-appointed local government was supposed to draft and implement its own version of the national security law immediately after the ’97 handover, but successive leaders repeatedly demurred in the face of intense local opposition.

Finally, Beijing’s leaders decided to step in and do it themselves. The proximate cause was a series of large-scale and often violent anti-government protests that erupted here in June 2019 and continued unabated for the next seven months, until the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic early last year brought a ban on all public gatherings.

The demonstrations were sparked when the city’s Beijing-appointed administrator, called “Chief Executive,” Carrie Lam, introduced an ill-conceived criminal extradition bill that would have allowed suspects arrested in Hong Kong to be shipped over the border to stand trial in China’s opaque and unjust legal system. In the face of government intransigence and increasingly brutal police tactics, the demonstrations soon morphed into a broader movement that began to challenge China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong.

The 2019 protests saw unprecedented scenes of masked, black-clad demonstrators armed with rocks, slingshots, Molotov cocktails, and even bows and arrows battling riot police who fired tens of thousands of rounds of tear gas, water from a spray cannon, rubber bullets, and live ammunition. High-end shopping malls, subway stations, university campuses, and even the upscale financial district of Central came to resemble a single fluid and shifting battle zone. Thousands were arrested under the charge of “rioting,” which carries a lengthy prison term.

At first, China’s Communist leaders tried to ignore the protests. In the early days, there was almost no mention of the riots made in the tightly controlled, heavily censored state-run media. When stories eventually did begin to appear, it was almost always to depict the demonstrators as a small band of “rioters.” But when protesters attacked the Beijing central government’s main office in Hong Kong and provocatively defaced the Chinese emblem with black paint, defiantly tossed the Chinese flag into the harbor, and began targeting China-affiliated banks and mainland-owned restaurants, authorities in Beijing decided enough was enough… And the result is the new NSL.

The national security law is actually somewhat a misnomer. The new law is much more an Internal Security Act of the kind commonly used in Britain’s other former colonies like Malaysia and Singapore, which is aimed at crushing internal dissent, not deterring an attack from abroad. China’s version of the law, imposed on Hong Kong with no local input or debate, defines four broad categories of offenses: terrorism, secession, subversion, and collusion with foreign forces. Those sweeping categories are left deliberately vague, meaning the NSL can proscribe virtually anything police, prosecutors, or the Chinese government wants it to.

Under the law, singing “Glory to Hong Kong,” the anthem of the 2019 protest movement, or chanting the movement’s slogan, “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Time,” can now be deemed a national security offense. Carrying a banner, wearing a T-shirt, or posting a social media text advocating Hong Kong independence can lead to arrest and a lifetime prison sentence. Under the new law, inciting hatred against the local government, the Communist authorities in Beijing, or against the Hong Kong police is now a national security crime.

The law is so broadly written that even criticizing the NSL itself is a crime against national security.

Keith Richburg

How Will Decolonizing the Curriculum Help the Poor and Dispossessed?

Posted on by
Reply

February 8th, 2021, the Students of Color Liberation Front at the University of Michigan made a series of anti-racist demands, including a call to “Decolonize the University of Michigan’s pedagogies and campus broadly.” This is a recent manifestation of the “decolonize the university” movement, which has been making similar demands over the past few years at most Western academic institutions. The movement has called for universities to decolonize curricula and math, to privilege “other ways of knowing,” and to #DisruptTexts from the Western canon, among other demands. The Rhodes Must Fall in Oxford (RMFO) campaign explains that decolonization aims to “remedy the highly selective narrative of traditional academia—which frames the West as sole producers of universal knowledge—by integrating subjugated and local epistemologies” thereby creating “a more intellectually rigorous, complete academy.”

Demands for decolonized epistemology stem from legitimate grievances about colonial era atrocities. Some activists propose helpful suggestions for improving access to higher education for students in the global South, especially in STEM fields. For example, in Decolonise the University (2018), Pat Lockley promotes open access resources, including courses, publishing, data, lab, scholarship programs, and research exchanges. In the same volume, William Jamal Richardson makes an excellent case for an increased focus on “undone science”—areas of research “identified by social movements and other civil society organizations as having potentially broad social benefit.”

However, everyone should be deeply concerned about the serious damage to knowledge advancement that will occur if activists accomplish their goal to decolonize the epistemological foundation of science. During the 2016 #FeesMustFall protests at the University of Cape Town, a #ScienceMustFall activist explained her views on decolonizing science. A video was taken, which Emeritus Professor Tim Crowe analyzed in detail. The activist “derided science as enshrined unshakable ‘truth’ developed and driven as ‘Western modality.’” Therefore, “the whole thing should be scratched off” and replaced with an Afrocentric science.

This is a total misrepresentation of science, which doesn’t assert unshakable truths, but provisional ones; and which doesn’t belong to the West, but to the world. Science is a method for inquiry—guided by intellectual humility, skepticism, careful observation, questioning, hypothesis formulation, prediction, and experimentation—that is open to everyone, that aims to advance knowledge and improve the lives of all. While indigenous epistemologies are certainly worthy of study, and valuable in their own right, such epistemologies should not be promoted as superior to, or as a replacement for, Enlightenment epistemologies. This is not least because Enlightenment thinkers—most notably the founder of modern science Francis Bacon—articulated the intellectual foundation for extremely rapid improvements in global living standards.

The intellectual genealogy of decolonization demands

Why has decolonization become an increasingly popular rallying cry for social justice activists? The framework for decolonization demands stems from Critical Theory, specifically postcolonial and postmodern feminist critiques of the Enlightenment. During the “Science Wars” of the 1990s, between scientific realists and postmodernists, Sandra Harding, Carolyn Merchant, and Evelyn Fox Keller condemned Francis Bacon for what they deemed misogynistic sexual metaphors. Although they could have critiqued Bacon’s writing and left it at that, these feminists went much further, arguing that misogyny is at the heart of modern science. In 1995, Alan Soble made a convincing case that postmodern feminist readings of Bacon are based on misquotations, passages taken out of context, projection, and scholarly uncharitability. I would add that these critiques are wholly contingent upon the technological advancements produced by applying the epistemology advocated for by thinkers like Bacon. Imagine the short-sightedness of encountering a metaphor you dislike in a 17th century philosophical treatise, then proclaiming that the entire epistemological basis of modern civilization is inherently flawed—all while typing on a computer powered by reliable electricity, in a stable country, where you’ve never gone hungry.

Students promoting the decolonize the university movement make some reasonable demands, among them the integration of more Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) authors in the curriculum and hiring more BIPOC faculty members. However, the activists also make a more radical demand: epistemology itself must be decolonized by becoming decentered from the European Enlightenment tradition. In the introduction to Decolonising the University, the editors call for completely restructuring the knowledge systems of Western universities because, within them, “colonial intellectuals developed theories of racism, popularised discourses that bolstered support for colonial endeavours and provided ethical and intellectual grounds for the dispossession, oppression and domination of colonised subjects” (p.5). The editors do not mention that many Western universities were founded several centuries before European colonization began, including the universities of Bologna (1088), Oxford (1096), Salamanca (1134), Paris (1257), and Cambridge (1209), to name a few.

Lest one observe that the colonial period has passed, the editors assert that Western universities continue to “reproduce and justify colonial hierarchies” (p.6). But is providing intellectual grounds for colonialism all that Western universities have done, even now? The Decolonising the University scholar-activists think so. Rosalba Icaza and Rolando Vázquez assert that “movements to decolonise the university are fighting the ‘arrogant ignorance’ that is produced by a system of knowledge that is Eurocentric.” Western epistemology, they argue, claims to have “universal validity, while remaining oblivious to the epistemic diversity of the world” (p.112).

Similarly, Dalia Gebrial attacks the Enlightenment for having “forged and reproduced modalities of colonial thinking,” and for “racialising” the “values of reason and objective knowledge pursuit as white and European” (pp.27-8). Gebrial takes issue with how “the Enlightenment is geographically mapped as a self-contained, European project, rather than constituted through and alongside imperialism and slavery.” Gebrial, however, is silent on the question of whether non-Western empires that engaged in imperialism and slavery (for example, Barbary enslavement of Europeans) also have inherently flawed epistemologies that require decolonization. Neither Gebrial, nor any of the other Decolonising the University authors, mention that an estimated 40.3 million people are enslaved now.

Moreover, the scholar-activists mention only one instance of non-Western colonialism: the “profound impact of Japanese imperialism and Japan’s history of fascism” (p.72). However, they do not call for the decolonization of Japanese epistemology and universities. The contributors are also silent about Chinese territorial expansion, which has affected East Asia for the past four thousand years; the volume does not call for the decolonization of Chinese epistemology. Nor do they state that universities in the many regions colonized by the Ottoman Empire must be decolonized. And these are just a few examples of a much longer list of non-Western regions that have engaged in colonialism.

While some Western thinkers within universities did indeed justify colonialism, the implication that all Western universities, and their epistemological foundations, can be characterized as colonial enablers of dispossession, oppression, and domination, is a radical oversimplification.

Moreover, the assertion that the epistemology of Western universities is entirely a product of Western hegemony is an insult to every non-Western person who has contributed to knowledge production within Western universities. Decolonization activists demonize the Enlightenment, creating straw man arguments, which they propose to solve with “decolonial epistemology.” But what is decolonial epistemology? Although scholar-activists make a variety of recommendations, they all share similarities. I will address one proposal as a representative sample.

Decolonial epistemology and a recuperation of Francis Bacon

Decolonial activists, in their understandable anger over Western colonial injustices—provoked by Critical Theorist scholar-activists—are unlikely to read Francis Bacon. He can be dismissed as “pale, male (and often stale),” per the Decolonising the University’s editors’ formulation. Yet, decolonization activists might be surprised to find that Bacon makes strong arguments for much of what they demand. In Decolonising the University, Icaza and Vázquez identify three aspects of decolonial epistemology: positionality, relationality, and transitionality. Epistemic practices of positionality reject Enlightenment epistemology, which they characterize as a “closed form” of expertise that presents itself as “ahistorical and universally valid.” By contrast, positionality, an “open” form of expertise, is a “humble” approach in which researchers make the “location of their knowledge an integral part of their doing” (p.119).

In The Great Instauration (1620), one of the most important works of the Enlightenment, Bacon identified humility as his most important virtue: “Wherein if I have made any progress, the way has been opened to me by no other means than the true and legitimate humiliation of the human spirit.” Operating from a position of radical skepticism, Bacon maintained that the information we gather from our senses is a positioned knowledge, unique to the individual observer and not universal: “the testimony and information of the senses bears always a relation to man and not to the universe, and it is altogether a great mistake to assert that our senses are the measure of things.”

Because of these sensory limitations, Bacon recommended a process that we now call the scientific method. This process, which is open to everyone, relies on experimenters publishing their methods so that others can identify errors and correct them. Bacon made it clear that any “phantoms”—a metaphor for unfalsifiable hypotheses—must be rejected:

In every new and rather delicate experiment, although to us it may appear sure and satisfactory, we yet publish the method we employed, that, by the discovery of every attendant circumstance, men may perceive the possibly latent and inherent errors, and be roused to proofs of a more certain and exact nature, if such there be. Lastly, we intersperse the whole with advice, doubts, and cautions, casting out and restraining, as it were, all phantoms by a sacred ceremony and exorcism.

In addition to his cautions about experiments, Bacon urged vigilance about the purpose of knowledge: “we would in general admonish all to consider the true ends of knowledge, and not to seek it for the gratifications of their minds, or for disputation, or that they may despise others, or for emolument, or fame, or power, or such low objeets, but for its intrinsic merit and the purposes of life, and that they would perfect and regulate it by charity.” Bacon’s rejection of self-gratification, hate, fame, and power might gain the approval of 21st century decolonization activists.

Icaza and Vázquez’s second epistemological change, “relationality,” dismisses Enlightenment pedagogy as “authoritarian” and “one-directional.” In contrast, their proposed relational approach “is one in which the diverse backgrounds and the geo-historical positioning of the different participants in the classroom are rendered valuable” (120). This description of Enlightenment epistemology and pedagogy as “authoritarian,” “one-directional,” and failing to value diverse participants is uncharitable, to say the least. Bacon was completely anti-authoritarian; his epistemology was an explicit rejection of the knowledge deemed authoritative at his time. As Bacon explained, “That wisdom which we have derived principally from the Greeks is but like the boyhood of knowledge.” His purpose was to “commence a total reconstruction of sciences, arts, and all human knowledge, raised upon the proper foundations.”

Rather than asserting his own authority or seeking to impose it on others in a one-directional manner, Bacon discussed how he depended on assistance from others to advance knowledge benefiting “the human race,” a phrase he used five times in the prefatory section alone. Bacon bemoaned his ignorance about knowledge advancement in different locations: “we are far from knowing all that in the matter of sciences and arts has in various ages and places been brought to light and published, much less all that has been by private persons secretly attempted and stirred.” Bacon highlighted how knowledge production is an open form of expertise that happens in diverse locations.

Icaza and Vázquez’s final proposed epistemological change, “transitionality,” rejects “the abstract position of knowledge” and enables “students to bridge the epistemic border between the classroom and society.” The “recognition of difference as enriching for teaching and learning” is connected to “knowledge that has been humbled” and “recognises its own limits” (120). Since transitionality is related to teaching, it is fortunate that Bacon explained his pedagogical philosophy:

And the same humility which I use in inventing I employ likewise in teaching. For I do not endeavor either by triumphs of confutation, or pleadings of antiquity, or assumption of authority, or even by the veil of obscurity, to invest these inventions of mine with any majesty; which might easily be done by one who sought to give luster to his own name rather than light to other men’s minds. I have not sought (I say) nor do I seek either to force or ensnare men’s judgments, but I lead them to things themselves and the concordances of things, that they may see for themselves what they have, what they can dispute, what they can add and contribute to the common stock.

Bacon did not articulate an abstract position of knowledge. Instead, he emphasized what decolonial activists call for: knowledge that humbly recognizes its own limits. Bacon urged his students to think for themselves and participate in knowledge production. His pedagogy valued other perspectives because he implored his students to dispute bad ideas and to contribute their own. Additionally, Bacon affirmed the relevance of knowledge beyond the classroom. He wrote that he sought the sciences “not arrogantly in the little cells of human wit, but with reverence in the greater world.”

What is to be done?

The path to progress is definitely not paved by destroying the epistemological framework bequeathed to us by the Enlightenment. Yet it is important to understand why many young people are more attracted to social justice-based decolonization demands than to Enlightenment era intellectual advancements. Social justice ideology appeals to young adults’ desire to establish their identity, independent from their parents, and an ideology that represents itself as subversive is compelling. Also, as young people become aware of injustices, they are understandably captivated by a movement that represents itself as the most righteous way to advocate for justice.

For these reasons, it is necessary to make Enlightenment ideas not merely palatable, but inspiring. Educators must respond to decolonization activists’ arguments, then explain why Enlightenment ideas are a better foundation for improving people’s lives all over the world. Philanthropists are needed to fund a movement that popularizes an informed understanding of Enlightenment era scientific and political advancements. This movement should use online platforms and its curricula should have students read influential Enlightenment thinkers, in their own words, not only misleading representations promulgated by Critical Theory scholar-activists, as they do now.

This movement should explain how Enlightenment ideas accelerated global knowledge advancement. It is important to center the voices of immigrants to Western countries who have been drawn to the West for its liberal values, and for the wealth generation and scientific advancements produced by Enlightenment epistemology. People should create video and written testimonies of immigrants discussing their experiences in their home countries—specifically the lack of Enlightenment principles—and why these principles are attractive because they have been shown to work.

It is also essential to underscore that demands for decolonization in Western universities are the product of affluence. What do you think that impoverished people in the global South care about more: decolonizing Western epistemology or increasing their prosperity? While indigenous people are probably proud of their epistemology, I would bet that the majority care more about meeting their material needs. Decolonization activists might consider how changing epistemology in Western universities will solve the main problems experienced by most people in the world, including extreme poverty, rampant political corruption, substandard infrastructure, inadequate police, and dysfunctional judicial systems. The political advancement of the Enlightenment, liberalism, provides a framework for solving these problems by establishing limited, republican government; enforcing the rule of law; and protecting individual rights and liberties, especially freedom of speech, so that people can have honest discussions about problems and work toward solutions—without descending into authoritarianism and violence.

People in the West must ensure that our educators teach the epistemology bequeathed to us by Enlightenment intellectuals so that we continue to advance and prosper. In the 17th century, Francis Bacon lamented people in his time who did little to improve knowledge, remarking that such people “made a passage for themselves and their own opinions by pulling down and demolishing former ones; and yet all their stir has but little advanced the matter, since their aim has been not to extend philosophy and the arts in substance and value, but only to change doctrines and transfer the kingdom of opinions to themselves.” This strikes me as the most precise description of decolonial activists that I have seen. Be forewarned: decolonization demands won’t stop at the university gates. As Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang state, decolonization is not a metaphor; it is a struggle over dispossession, the repatriation of indigenous land, and the seizing of imperial wealth. If you have any European heritage, the activists will soon demand that you be decolonized, too.

Samantha Jones is a pseudonym for a dissident Women’s Studies PhD. Her writing has also appeared in New Discourses.

White America Is Succumbing to Fierce Racial Attack on White Americans

Posted on by
Reply

White Americans Have No Will to Resist Their Demonization and Dehumanization?

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/02/14/americas-catastrophic-disintegration/

Death Camps on the Horizon

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/04/09/white-liberals-have-achieved-their-goal-white-americans-are-now-second-class-citizens/

The New Untouchables

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/04/09/mercer-university-has-a-black-theology-professor-who-hates-white-people/

White Corporations Declare Election Integrity to be Racist

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/04/05/coca-cola-delta-airlines-and-mlb-oppose-election-integrity/

Western Man Now a Contradiction in Terms

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/03/25/the-feminization-of-western-man/

White Americans Are the Persecuted Untermensch

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/03/23/are-white-americans-privileged-or-persecuted/

White Liberals Resurrect Segregation As Black Privilege

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/519080-racial-segregation-progressives-white-supremacy/

White Americans Need to Realize that Their Enemies Are White Liberals, Not Russia and China

https://www.rt.com/usa/519611-virginia-school-race-theory/

https://www.rt.com/usa/520530-cdc-epidemic-racism-health/

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/520592-public-health-industry-medicalise-racism/

https://www.rt.com/usa/519206-california-city-low-income-white/

https://www.rt.com/usa/518873-evanston-black-reparations-first-city/

Paul Craig Roberts, UNZ Review

Why Rational People Never Have Boycotts

Posted on by
1

Why are leftists so good at boycotting people they dislike, at the drop of a hat? While reasonable people never boycott anything?

Because leftists are losers. They have nothing going for them — except politics. Imagine what it must be like, to be a leftist. Where politics is the only thing governing your life.

Will baseball get boycotted for all its woke leftism? No, of course not. Sports fans are generally not losers. They’re generally not leftists. But there will be a boycott — indirectly, gradually. Already the numbers tell us that millions are losing interest in sports. As woke politics continues in the corporate world of sports, and as stupid little Marxist lectures are delivered throughout the games and by the moronic players who subscribe to leftism, the Great Turnoff will grow and grow and grow … until at some point, probably not that far in the future, sports will no longer be profitable.

With things like Coca Cola it will be harder. Loser leftists would have had no problem boycotting Coke if the company had, say, supported Donald Trump or endorsed a tax cut. But rational people who enjoy Coke have other things on their minds — like raising their families, running their small businesses, keeping the bills paid (something loser leftists don’t have to worry about). You can drink a Coke without necessarily thinking about politics. With sports, it’s different. You can’t turn on a game anymore without being reminded of politics. So it’s going to be harder to engineer a boycott against products like Coke, just like it’s been hard to engineer a boycott against a product like Nike. You can wear shoes and clothes without thinking about politics.

With evil forces in the universe, it’s usually the thing that gives them their advantage that generally does them in, in the end. Loser leftists have nothing to live for but their stupid, irrational and grotesque viewpoints. That has given them the edge against reasonable and normal people who have lives. But the leftist losers are still miscreants. They still have NOTHING whatsoever to offer others, the universe, nor ultimately themselves. It WILL come back to bite them. Because even if they manage to destroy everything valuable, they will still be left with their losing, miserable selves. And loser leftists will not — cannot — sustain themselves on themselves. I guarantee that.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Trump You

Posted on by
Reply


Just a quick message from the Patriots to the Progressives…

* For those who said last summer’s deadly, violent, and felonious actions in our cities were “mostly nonviolent” exercises of free speech and democracy and at the same time called January 6 an insurrection by extremists who committed treason and sedition…Trump you.

* For those that think we will allow for Biden and the Progressives to cancel God, cancel Sunday morning worship, and legislate the Bible as hate speech…Trump you.

* For those that think we will allow Progressive government to deny Second Amendment rights, create a shortage of ammo, make hunting rifles illegal, and take guns away from Trump states while allowing them to remain in Progressive cities…Trump you.

* For those who thought it unconstitutional and unseemly to put military troops on our borders to prevent illegal immigration during the last four years but somehow believe it’s noble to use the military to protect, house, and transport these illegal aliens on military bases…Trump you.

* To Major League Baseball, whose managers think it’s somehow wrong to write legislation to protect voter integrity, to make sure elections aren’t stolen, and to make sure Americans trust in the results of our national elections, and thus moved the All-Star Game out of Atlanta while the commissioner of MLB keeps his membership at The Masters — and by the way, it appears MLB is in negotiations for billions in revenue with the communist Chinese government (who puts its own people in internment camps)…Trump you.

* To the NBA that has gone all “woke” on systematic racism and social justice, while at the same time the officials and players have billion-dollar deals with the Chinese government (who has made slaves of its own people)…Trump you.

* To the Progressive media that lied, deceived, and created faux news against President Trump for six years, but now continuously covers up, ignores, and cancels negative news about the Biden administration…Trump you.

* For those in the Progressive media who never gave the Trump family a moment of peace and continually lied about the Trump family, and who are now covering up the multitude of reported felonies committed by Hunter Biden…Trump you.

* To those in the Progressive media who lied for years about President Trump being a spy, dupe, and puppet of the Russian Putin government but now totally ignore the probable blackmail information that the Chinese government has on Biden, Hunter, and the Biden family…Trump you.

* To CNN, which has lied, deceived, and created faux narratives about Florida’s governor DeSantis but continues to block for and propagandize false positive information about New York’s Cuomo and California’s Newsom…Trump you.

* To Nancy Pelosi, who thought it unconstitutional to use our military to put down the murderous insurrections last summer by the likes of Antifa and BLM but now still to this day uses the military to surround the People’s House — the Capitol Building — for her own protection and convenience…Trump you.

* To the folks who wear “My Body My Choice” shirts in their support of abortions at any time, any place, and during any part of the pregnancy but mock and ridicule people who say “My Body My Choice” when it comes to them refusing the COVID vaccine…Trump you.

* To the American Civil Liberties Union, who in our history stood up for free speech, open expression, and varied opinions and discourse (especially where it’s controversial), but now the ACLU says nothing, absolutely nothing when it comes to our cancel culture, our burning books, muted free speech, destroyed careers, and our indoctrination of politically correct Orwellian speech…a big Trump you. You guys in the ACLU should know better, and you have failed wickedly.

* To the “woke” community that now says wanting a “colorblind” society and that somehow quoting the exact words from Dr Martin Luther King is now racist…Trump you.

* To the Progressives who want to raise taxes on red-state citizens to make up revenue to cover the failures and waste of blue-state leadership…Trump you.

* To the globalists who believe that it is simultaneously possible for America to be a welfare state and a borderless nation that survives (which has never happened in human history, ever)…Trump you.

* To the FBI/CIA/NSA leadership in D.C. that proved the last four years that you are no longer neutral, you are a part of the Deep State, and we can no longer fully trust you…Trump you. What leadership in the agencies are now doing would make J. Edgar Hoover blush.

* To the leadership of the U.S. military establishment in D.C. — not the soldiers, but the political class in leadership — who did not support your commander in chief and undercut and sabotaged his efforts every chance you got the last four years…Trump you.

* To the U.S. Supreme Court who refused to hear any and all legitimate evidence with regard to obvious voter fraud, voter integrity, and voter abnormalities of the 2020 election, because of cowardness or crookedness or compromising behavior…Trump you.

* To the political leadership of our cities that told our police officers to “stand down” while our cities burned, people were killed, and voters were intimidated, much like Kristallnacht in Germany of the early 1930s…Trump you.

* To the Big Tech oligarchs who have made billions of dollars off the American people and American working class and now censure the populists’ opinions, points of view, and speech without a moments thought of the Constitution…Trump you.

* To the university presidents that are now allowing for race-based dorms, classes, fraternities, and even race-based graduation ceremonies…Trump you.

* To Fauci and the rest of the Deep State experts who have given President Trump no credit and no accolades for “Operation Warp Speed” in getting the China virus vaccine created in record time…Trump you.

* To the RINO leadership of politicians, consultants, and Deep State turncoats, we will never go back to the Romneys and McCains. Trump you.

* And finally, to the Progressives who think we are going to allow you to steal, cheat, and bully your way into winning the off-year elections of 2022 and the presidential election of 2024…never again, and Trump you.

Andrew Coy, American Thinker

How Are We Supposed to Cope Living Under Tyranny?

Posted on by
Reply

Knowing I’m a therapist as well as a patriot, people write and ask me, “How are we supposed to cope?”

My answer:

You still have your First and Second Amendments rights; your two most important rights. Well, not really. They’re being dismantled, as we speak. But they’re not consistently squashed — not yet. So use your First and Second Amendment rights while you still have remnants of them. And even after they’re gone, be prepared to go underground. Be an outlaw. Do what you have to do — within reason, whatever you consider reason — to exercise them. Remember those rights are inalienable. They are natural — God-given, if you wish. The point is: They are not bestowed by man. They are part of your nature, of your entitlement as a human being, even if the twenty-first century savages we have put in charge smirk at them.

Practically, this means speaking your mind whenever you wish. Don’t be afraid of everything and everyone. Remember that tyrants are afraid. So are your neighbors, family members, cohorts and “friends” who support those tyrants. If someone declares proudly, “I voted for Biden,” I immediately think, “Good grief. What a hollowed out, neurotic, psychologically trashed human being this must be.” They’re afraid because it’s not a state of serenity and mental health that leads one to support tyrants. Only irrational fear could have done that. The people whom you dread offending are not mentally balanced. They can’t be. If they were, they wouldn’t support what’s going on. At least see them for what they are; don’t make them out stronger than they could ever be.

As for the Second Amendment, buy the weapons and ammunition that you believe you need to protect yourself. Do it while it’s still legal. At some point, it will all be illegal. That’s the open purpose of what they’re doing. Again, they’re scared. They have to do this decisively but in an incremental way. They’re afraid of what gun owners will do, if triggered. There’s fear and loathing on both sides here. Don’t worry about breaking the law. Simply worry about not being found out. There’s no moral justification for what’s going on. Morality trumps the law. If you go underground or start manipulating or deceiving in order to get past an immoral, unjust government — that’s a moral triumph, not a shame. I’m not suggesting you must become a martyr or a crusader for any particular cause — even a great cause, such as the cause of liberty. After all — let’s be honest — we have lost the war. The war is really over. There are no elections or candidates on the horizon who can save us. We’re past that point, sadly. Everything going on politically involves a complete dismantling of the remaining freedoms we had enjoyed, at least through 2019.

Beyond these two things — protect and take your First and Second Amendment rights underground — my main advice is: live your life, as best you can. Without politics. I don’t know what the future holds for people, but the America we once knew is now largely a myth. There may be secession in parts of the country, and I’d love to see secession within states, too — counties breaking off from California and New York, for example. But none of that will come without a price. And if we continue to do nothing, that exacts a heavy price too.That’s just where we are. There will be no easy choices.

In some sense, life must go on. Find love, family, romance, intrigue, purpose and self-esteem wherever you can, and as much as you can. Cherish the music you love and the books that embody your highest, most authentic self. Remember art. Remember the classics. Figure out how to secure these in times ahead. You’re no longer living in a free country. Don’t hold your entire life hostage while waiting for a free country to resume. Sadly, most human beings for 99 percent of human history have NOT lived under freedom and liberty. We were the last of a rare few generations who knew what freedom was really like. I will always remember the cities, the airports, the grocery stores, the amusement parks, the openness of towns, the country, suburbs, the public arenas, the restaurants, the shopping malls — none of those things, in my view, will be like they were, not again. COVID was merely the excuse — the first of many — to implement what we now have: a society of conformity, intolerance and obedience. When they call for a “new normal”, these tyrants, they mean it — and they perceive this as a good thing. The sickos who applaud it clearly hated themselves and their lives all along. Those sickos are now in charge. The dystopians — the “Karens” — were in our midst all along, and now they leer in the triumph of their puny, meaningless souls.

Try to preserve the idea and the reality of beautiful freedom for younger people important to you. Keep the images, the feelings of freedom, alive. Those images will remain alive in numerous books, movies and videos, things which will be hard to eliminate. Some of these young people, no doubt, will want to lead the charge for some kind of a restoration of human liberty. That’s probably the best hope.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

America is at War

Posted on by
Reply

America is at war. This time the enemy isn’t on some distant battlefield or hiding in a barren cave thousands of miles away. Instead, the enemy is not only here, but it’s ruling over us.

That’s the powerful message of David Horowitz’s latest book, The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America. This isn’t just a warning, it’s the reality around us.

“Americans are more divided today than at any time since the Civil War,” Horowitz writes. “In the course of the anti-Trump wars, we have become two nations with little shared ground on the core issues that previously defined us.” And it’s the Left that brought us to this state, not just in the last five years, but going all the way back to the fundamental strategy of its divisive politics.

In The Enemy Within, Horowitz exposes the Communist roots of identity politics that have been used to turn Americans against each other and reduce them to hostile warring tribes, rather than citizens of a common nation invested in its welfare, success, and prosperity.

Identity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate

Identity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate

Identity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate campaign that justifies any extremity, and any attack on the country and her people. “It is this regressive attack on America’s fundamental principles by the Left that is the source of the irreconcilable conflicts and ugly passions that are currently tearing the nation’s fabric apart

Identity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate campaign that justifies any extremity, and any attack on the country and her people. “It is this regressive attack on America’s fundamental principles by the Left that is the source of the irreconcilable conflicts and ugly passions that are currently tearing the nation’s fabric apartIdentity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate campaign that justifies any extremity, and any attack on the country and her people. “It is this regressive attack on America’s fundamental principles by the Left that is the source of the irreconcilable conflicts and ugly passions that are currently tearing the nation’s fabric apart.”

delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate campaign that justifies any extremity, and any attack on the country and her people. “It is this regressive attack on America’s fundamental principles by the Left that is the source of the irreconcilable conflicts and ugly passions that are currently tearing the nation’s fabric apart,” Horowitz
Class warfare, racial warfare, gender warfare, and the countless other forms of identity politics injected into schools, workplaces, government offices, and every area of life are aimed at forcing Americans to identify radically and tribally, rather than nationally. Divide and conquer.

David Horowitz, a veteran of the radical politics of the Left, has the knowledge, the experience, and the training to expose not just what the movement he was once a part of is doing, but the ideological origins of its tactics, and how they feed it into its dreadful vision for America.

America is delegitimized through revisionist history smears, like the 1619 Project, that rewrite the powerful force for equality and freedom that is the true history of the United States into the big lie of systemic racism, while Americans are accused of various forms of oppressive privilege so that, just by existing, they oppress everyone who does not fit into the same artificial category.

In The Enemy Within, Horowitz tackles the radical and racist roots of these ideas, from Karl Marx to Derrick Bell, a supporter of Farrakhan, and how they exploded into violence and tyranny in the streets of our cities and the halls of power as Black Lives Matter mobs used lies to unleash racist violence and Democrat officials used racist myths to build a one-party state.

But it’s not just BLM.

In chapters such as A Public Hanging, David Horowitz takes on sexism politics, the Women’s March, and the Kavanaugh lynchings which, like the accusations of racism, are typical of the character assassinations, witch hunts, deplatforming, and violence that constitute identity politics.

Identity politics is not driven by the need to elevate a downtrodden group, but, in classic leftist fashion, to identify and destroy political enemies using double standards, lies, and hate. And then to declare a crisis and emergency that will allow the Left to rule a one-party state.

The smears dispensed by the Southern Poverty Law Center (“SPLC”), by the 1619 Project, by the Kavanaugh lynchers, and by every leftist group all come down to the same big goal of eliminating political opponents from public life, and using the false claims of pervasive racism, sexism, and other ‘isms’ to justify the creation of political backlists backed by political terror.

Horowitz documents the ugly history of efforts by the SPLC and other leftist groups to smear him and the Freedom Center that he founded (and for which I work) with the willing participation of major corporations. As he notes, “The imprimatur of the SPLC guttersnipes… were sufficient to erase who I was and replace me with the political caricature, ‘extremist, white supremacist, sexist, dangerous hatemonger.’”

Similarly, any American can be erased, canceled, and categorized as a bigot at any time with no due process, and no evidence but the social media hashtags of a politically correct lynch mob.

The Enemy Within lays out the last two decades of leftist treason and tyranny, alternating between abusive power and equally abusive subversion, rotting out our institutions, destroying our political culture, and waging a ruthless war against the nation in order to tear it apart.

“The diversity networks in America do not operate in the name of a party, but of a radical ideology that is the antithesis of America’s constitutional framework. Yet they have the backing of America’s major corporate and educational institutions, which gives them the power to infiltrate every nook and cranny,” Horowitz warns. Their ultimate goal is to make every institution, governmental, business, and non-profit subservient to the Left.

This is the emerging one-party state that The Enemy Within is warning us against in which diversity experts, like the political commissars of the Soviet Union, act as the voice of the party.

“An extremist ideology has been inserted into the cultures of the existing institutions of American society, and a political minority has been put in a position to reshape the whole of American society,” he points out, unveiling the final agenda of the identity politics war on America.

Fascism and Communism have come to America wrapped in the stolen legacy of the civil rights movement, in the looted and tarnished garb of the heroic campaign to end slavery, and in the guise of protecting women, while actually enslaving and threatening all Americans.

The goal of the Left is not rights. It’s never rights; instead it’s absolute power.

Identity politics, like class warfare, is just a means of dividing us into quarreling tribes, inciting violence, and building the emotional sense of crisis to enable a tyrannical one-party state.

The America of Washington and Jefferson, of the Founding Fathers of our nation, whose principles and ideas David Horowitz repeatedly invokes in The Enemy Within, would never tolerate tyrannical rule, speech police, and people looking over their shoulder before speaking.

The only way to take away the freedom of our nation was to divide and conquer, turning Americans against each other, convincing them that their principles and values stood in the way of a utopian society and of a totalitarian regime with the absolute power to achieve it.

That is the one-party state.

It’s this threat of The Enemy Within that David Horowitz, a longtime warrior against the Left, takes on in his latest battle against the nation’s most dangerous enemy ruling over us.

The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America is an important read for anyone who wants to understand the agenda and the threat to our nation and to ourselves.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/04/cancel_culture_and_identity_politics_are_the_road_to_a_oneparty_state.html#ixzz6rgnGJ3if
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Leftists care nothing about ‘facts’ on climate. They care only about power

Posted on by
Reply

I have been reading a book called Factfulness by Hans Rosling. It is a bestseller.

The book is full of charts and graphs and global statistics from the United Nations through 2016. As a nerd who loves numbers and facts, I find that it is truly a great book.

The radical, leftist fear-monger billionaire Bill Gates, who sponsors a program that claims that students who get the correct answer and show their work in math amounts to white supremacy and racism, also loved the book. On the cover is a quote from Gates: “One of the most important books I’ve ever read — an indispensable guide to thinking clearly about the world.”

The basic premise of the book is that the people of the world don’t know about all the rapid progress throughout the world because the media mislead the public. The author should have included educators, entertainers, politicians, and many billionaires, including Gates himself, as people who collude to intentionally misinform the public. The more the public is scared, the more power and money these people confiscate.

Here are three, of the many, facts in the book:

Life expectancy throughout the world stayed flat at around thirty for 8,000 years, until the 1800s. Then it more than doubled in less than 200 years to more than seventy today. What happened in the 1800s? We started using oil and coal and got electricity. Thousands of products that greatly improve our quality and length of life are derived from crude oil.

Number 2: Women throughout the world are having fewer children. The author gave two reasons. The first is that many more children survive past the age of five than they did in the past. The second is that as the economy and productivity improve, fewer children are needed to perform labor.

Think of farming in the U.S. in the 1800s, where around 90% of the people lived on farms. Today, the number is around one percent. The gas combustion engine, tractors, combines, and other oil-powered equipment have allowed the world to be fed with very few people doing the work.

Number 3: The number of deaths from natural disasters went down by more than half in the last hundred years even while the population went up from around 1.8 billion to around 7.7 billion.

Very few people would guess this fact, considering that every day we are bombarded with talking points about the existential threat of climate change caused by humans and oil. Every time we get a major storm, a flood, a drought, or fires, we are told the lie that it is the worst it has ever been as they push the agenda for more government control and to stop using oil.

Here are some climate facts that we do not see in the media, on TV shows, in movies or in schools because they do not fit the agenda:

Climate Claim Fact Checks:

Climate Change Fact Checks

Climate Change Claim Fact Checks With updates through 01/05/21

Below are a series of rebuttals of the 13 most common climate alarmists’ claims such as those made in the recently r” style=”background: transparent; font-size: inherit !important;”>Heat Waves — have been decreasing since the 1930s in the U.S. and globally.

Hurricanes — the decade just ended as the second quietest for land-falling. hurricanes and land-falling major hurricanes in the U.S. since the 1850s. Twenty twenty saw a record 30 named storms and many Gulf impacts like the quiet solar periods in the late 1800s and this century, but the AC index ranked 13th highest. See 2020 Update showing similarities to late 1800s here and global contrasts here.

Tornadoes — the number of strong tornadoes has declined over the last half-century. More active months occur when unseasonable cold spring patterns are present.

Droughts and Floods — there have been no statistically significant trends.

Wildfires — decreasing since the very active 1800s. The increase in damage in recent years is due to population growth in vulnerable areas and poor forest management. See Australia wildfire story here. See this analysis that shows how public lands are ablaze but private lands are not because they are properly managed here.

Here are some more facts that the media could find about the last 140 years, if they cared, with a couple of hours of simple research:

Crude oil usage in 1880 — 55,000 barrels per day. 2019 — 98 million barrels per day. That is up 1,781 times.

Sea levels appear to have risen less than one foot in the last 140 years. For the Pacific Ocean, that would be 0.000028 out of 36,000.

CO2 content, 1880: around 280 parts per million. Today, over 400 PPM or up 40%. CO2 is a clear, innocuous, non-pollutant gas that allows the world to be fed. Lithium, which the leftists promote, is a very flammable pollutant.

The population has increased from around 1.5 billion in 1880 to around 7.7 billion today, or up over 400%.

A little ice age ended around 1850. The Earth has had several lengthy warming and cooling periods where oil, coal, and humans could not have had any impact.

Scientists estimate that the Earth has warmed around one to two degrees (around 3%) Fahrenheit since 1880. That would be minimal and normal after an ice age ended.

As for Arctic ice: It is around 5.3% lower than the average of 1981 to 2010. Some 95% left is a far cry from being gone, which is what we are constantly being told was going to happen in a short time. The measurements started in 1980. It should be noted that the ice has always melted and thickened with seasons. See this:

Arctic sea ice extent averaged for March 2021 was 14.64 million square kilometers (5.65 million square miles). This was 350,000 squ6are kilometers (135,000 square miles) above the record minimum set in 2017 and 790,000 square kilometers (305,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average.

There is clearly no direct correlation among oil use, CO2, and population and temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity. Why the heck would we destroy industries and our quality and length of life based on computer models when the scientific facts don’t justify the destruction?

Here is what the media reports to the public as it attempts to indoctrinate and push the agenda. Children are especially susceptible to this propaganda. These are not scientific facts:

In 1922, the AP posted an article that said because of warming, the Arctic ice would soon be gone, coastal cities would be gone, and the oceans were dying. This warning was 100% wrong.

On the first Earth Day in 1970, after over 25 years of global cooling, after 90 years of exponential growth in oil and coal use, after the population from 1.5 billion in 1880 to 3.7 billion in 1970, and a substantial increase in CO2 content, we were told that billions would die from starvation from a catastrophic ice age. This dire prediction was also 100% wrong.

1989: The U.N. and media repeated the same warnings from 1922, and we had only a few years left to solve the existential threat. This dire prediction was 100% wrong.

For decades we have been told there would be snowless winters. This dire prediction was 100% wrong.

In 2005, after Hurricane Katrina, we were told storms were worse than ever and the situation was extremely dangerous. After Katrina, we had an extremely mild ten years of hurricanes.

In 2008, ABC showed a piece of pure propaganda saying that because of the melting Arctic, Manhattan would be under water by 2015. This made up “news” was 100% wrong.

2019: The U.N. and media repeated the same warnings from 1922 and 1989, and we had only a few years left to solve the existential threat. This dire prediction is not based on scientific data, but is meant to mislead the public into submission to get rid of oil and push some version of the green new deal which will destroy America. There are no data to support this, so they use manipulated computer models, which spew forth predictions to push an agenda. No matter how wrong previous predictions have been, the media always present these made up predictions as if they are factual, with no questions asked.

The children have repeatedly been told that polar bears and other species are dying rapidly because of humans, oil, and CO2 induced climate change. There are very few identified species which have gone extinct the last 100 years. When we see that tens of thousands of species are dying each year, that is a made up number.

This article names ten species that have gone extinct and says there are 500, but most we would have never heard of. That is not remotely close to what the public is told.

As for polar bears, there now are more than five times the number of them that were on Earth 70 years ago. Today there are between 22,000 and 31,000. In the 1950s, there were around 5,000. They were being killed, like many species, by hunting, not climate change. But that wouldn’t push the radical leftist agenda, so the facts are ignored.

Polar bears have become the face of climate change — here’s the current state of the species

We are repeatedly told the lie that the science is settled to shut off debate because facts would destroy the people pushing these policies.

We are repeatedly told the lie that anyone who disagrees and tells the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally a climate change denier. I have never heard anyone deny that the climate changes. We are called deniers to equate us with Holocaust deniers and to mislead the public into believing we are anti-science and stupid. The purpose of these lies is to silence or cancel us.

Shouldn’t the Biden administration be required to justify its policies with scientific data before it destroys industries that provide thousands of products and employ directly or indirectly tens of millions of people? When will supposed journalists ask questions instead of campaigning for the policies?

Higher energy prices will harm everyone, especially the poor, whom the Democrats claim they care about, especially when they are begging for votes.

It doesn’t matter if the media is making up stuff about climate change, seeking to destroy DeSantis with lies about COVID, bragging about Cuomo’s handling on the virus, lying by saying Trump did nothing on the virus, lying about the voting laws in Georgia and elsewhere, burying true stories about the Biden family’s corruption, pretending that the $1.9-trillion slush fund was about COVID, pretending that the $2.2-trillion slush fund is about infrastructure, or spreading lies about Russian collusion. Most of the media are clearly willing to intentionally mislead the public to gain power and money for Democrats. They truly don’t care how many people and businesses they destroy in the process.

The biggest lie of all is when everyone describes Biden’s and other leftists’ policies as progressive. Most of the media act as if they were sensible policies instead of controversial. There is nothing remotely indicating progress from policies meant to destroy our capitalist economy and to move toward socialism. The proper term would be destructive policies. Biden wants to be the most progressive politician since FDR. He is certainly the most destructive president I have seen in my 68 years.

Jack Hellner, American Thinker