VIDEO: Tears for Hong Kong

What a sad day for freedom when the splendor of Hong Kong with its open society and free market enterprise was forced into the CCP’s portfolio of oppression. To make it worse, it happened on 7/1 – the anniversary of when the UK turned her over to China who allowed it a good amount of autonomy and a day to protest any CCP encroachment.

I discuss this latest blow to the world and a warning about Taiwan’s future.

©All rights reserved.

Here Come the Speech Police

Recently, I ran across a piece in The Philadelphia Inquirer that lays out four racist words and phrases that should be banished from the English language. It begins like this:

“Editor’s note: Please be aware offensive terms are repeated here solely for the purpose of identifying and analyzing them honestly. These terms may upset some readers.”

Steel yourself, brave reader, here they are:

  • Peanut gallery.
  • Eenie meenie miney moe.
  • Gyp.
  • No can do.

The same grammarian who authored the piece had previously confronted the “deeply racist connotation” of the word “thug,” noting that President Donald Trump “wasn’t the least bit bashful” when calling Minneapolis rioters “thugs” in a tweet, despite the word’s obvious bigoted history.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


In 2015, President Barack Obama referred to Baltimore rioters as “thugs” as well. He likely did so because “thug”—defined as a “violent person, especially a criminal”—is a good way to describe rioters.

It’s true that not everyone in a riot engages in wanton violent criminality. Some participants are merely “looters”—defined as “people who steal goods during a riot.” That word is also allegedly imbued with racist conations, according to the executive editor of the Los Angeles Times and others.

Attempting to dictate what words we use is another way to exert power over how we think.

Few people, rightly, would have a problem with referring to the Charlottesville Nazis as “thugs.” Only the “protester” who tears down a Ulysses S. Grant statue or participates in an Antifa riot is spared the indignity of being properly defined.

The recent assaults on the English language have consisted largely of euphemisms and pseudoscientific gibberish meant to obscure objective truths—“cisgender,” “heteronormativity” and so on. Now, we’re at the stage of the revolution where completely inoffensive and serviceable words are branded problematic.

CNN, for instance, recently pulled together its own list of words and phrases with racist connotations that have helped bolster systemic racism in America.

Unsuspecting citizens, the piece explains, may not even be aware they are engaging in this linguistic bigotry, because most words are “so entrenched that Americans don’t think twice about using them. But some of these terms are directly rooted in the nation’s history with chattel slavery. Others now evoke racist notions about Black people.”

CNN tells us the term “peanut gallery”—as in “please, no comment from the peanut gallery”—is racist because it harkens back to the days when poor and black Americans were relegated to back sections of theaters.

Now, I hate to be pedantic, but “peanut gallery” isn’t “directly rooted” in the nation’s history of “chattel slavery.” As CNN’s own double-bylined story points out, the cliche wasn’t used until after the Civil War. For that matter, few of the words and phrases that CNN alleges are problematic are rooted, even in the most tenuous sense, in the transatlantic slave trade.

Not even the word “slavery,” which is a concept as old as humankind, is in any way uniquely American. Yet, last week, Twitter announced that it was dropping “master” and “slave” from its coding, to create a “more inclusive programming language.”

Only in this stifling intellectual environment is striking commonly used words considered “inclusive.” Other tech companies are now “confronting” their use of these innocuous words to atone for their imaginary crimes.

We should feel no guilt using the word “master.” Her performance was masterful. She mastered her instrument. The score was a masterpiece. The composer was a mastermind.

Even CNN concedes that “while it’s unclear whether the term is rooted in American slavery on plantations, it evokes that history.”

It’s not unclear, at all. The etymology of the word “master” is from the Old English and rooted in the Latin “magister,” which means “chief, director, teacher, or boss.” “Master’s” degrees were first given to university teachers in the 14th century in Europe.

Until a few months ago, the “master bedroom” evoked visions of the larger bedrooms, and the Masters Tournament evoked images of golfing legends like Tiger Woods, winner of four titles.

Simply because the Nazis used the word “master” in their pseudoscientific racial theories—not in the 1840s, but in 1940s—doesn’t mean I am offended by the postmaster general. We’re grown-ups here, and we can comprehend context.

Or we used to be.

Honestly, I’m disappointed that CNN missed the commonly used “blackmail” —a word that appears in 439 stories on its website. The phrase was first used to describe protection money extracted by mid-16th-century Scottish chieftains. Maybe it’s the Scots who should be offended.

In and of itself, depriving Americans of “eenie meenie miney moe”—a phrase with an opaque and complicated history—isn’t going to hurt anyone. Allowing ideological grievance-mongers to decide what words we’re allowed to use, on the other hand … well, no can do.

“If thoughts can corrupt language, language can also corrupt thoughts,” George Orwell famously wrote. Every time some new correct-speak emerges, CNN and all the media will participate in browbeating us into subservience.

Progressive pundits will laugh off concerns about the Orwellian slippery slope. If we allow the seemingly innocuous attempts to control words and thoughts go uncontested, more-nefarious control will be a lot easier in the future.

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at National Review and the author of “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: 1619 Project Stokes Racial Division, but Offers No Real Solutions


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

REPORT: Biden Struggles To Rally Enthusiastic Support From Young Black Voters

Young black voters said they are not excited about the prospect of voting for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, according to a USA Today report.

Young black voters split from older black voters, with the latter being much more likely to cast their vote for the former vice president, USA Today reported Thursday. An analysis conducted by the Democracy Fund and UCLA Nationscape project found that 91% of black voters ages 65 and up said they were going to vote for Biden, while just 68% of black voters between ages 18 and 29 said the same.

Although polls still show the group favors the former Vice President over President Donald Trump, young black voters say they are hesitant.

Perry Green, a 34-year-old black voter from California who supported Sen. Bernie Sanders in the primary, told USA Today that he’s undecided about voting for Biden. He took issue with Biden’s lack of support for the defunding the police, an idea that’s become popular during ongoing protests.

“You got Black youth across the country, calling for defunding the police and thinking differently about law enforcement, and … a couple days later, in the midst of all the protests … (Biden’s) campaign says ‘Let’s spend more money on community policing,’” Green said.

“I think that if I were to see the campaign attempt to engage with more grassroots leaders, that would make me feel a little more encouraged about voting for Biden,” he told USA Today, adding that if he were in a swing state like Ohio, Michigan, or Pennsylvania, he would vote for the former Vice President.

Nationwide protests began May 25 when George Floyd died after a Minneapolis Police officer kneeled on his neck for several minutes. The protests, which have been ongoing for several weeks, center around race relations and police brutality – issues that will play an important role in the upcoming presidential election.

“I need someone who could carry America with a little bit more dignity and I won’t be so ashamed to be like, ‘Oh, that’s my president. Period,’” said Aerial Langston, a 31-year-old from Houston, Texas. She told USA Today that she plans to vote for Biden because the alternative is voting for Trump, but that she wants Biden to be more careful with his words.

The former Vice President has become well-known for his gaffes, some of which have been offensive. He told black radio show host Charlamagne Tha God in May that “if you don’t know whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t Black!”

Bowdoin College assistant professor of government Chryl Laird said that young black voters likely want to see someone in office who is more progressive. They “are going to have some reservations about Joe Biden,” who is a “very clear image of a status quo politician within the Democratic party,” she said.

“They really don’t see him as the direction that takes the party in a more progressive lean.” However, young Black voters will still likely vote for Biden – they just won’t be happy about it, she said.

Laird also noted that older voters tend to be more practical because they’ve seen change take more time.

COLUMN BY

JORDAN LANCASTER

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here Are The Podcasts That Are Getting Better Ratings Than Joe Biden’s

How Lies Of Systemic Police Racism Fuel The War On Cops

Atlanta Man Shot Dead While Jump Starting Someone Else’s Car

Satanic Temple Will Sue Mississippi If It Adds ‘In God We Trust’ To New Flag

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

3 States Account for 42 Percent of All COVID-19 Deaths in America. Why?

Despite the recent coronavirus surge in southern states, three states—New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts—account for about 42 percent of COVID-19 deaths in America. Why?


In a recent article in The AtlanticThomas Chatterton Williams decried America’s handling of the coronavirus.

The words “utter disaster” are used, and Williams, an expatriate, contrasts America’s response to that of France, where he currently lives.

“As Donald Trump’s America continues to shatter records for daily infections, France, like most other developed nations and even some undeveloped ones, seems to have beat back the virus,” Williams writes.

To be sure, the US response to the coronavirus was far from perfect (more on that later). But the article shows one of the challenges with this pandemic: even as more data is acquired, the picture doesn’t always get clearer.

In some ways, COVID-19 data are like a Rorschach blot from which writers, politicians, and experts can glean whatever conclusions they wish to find. Take Sweden, where daily COVID-19 deaths recently reached zero.

According to Newsweek editorial director Hank Gilman, Sweden’s “lighter touch” approach was a failure because seven times as many people died there than in neighboring Scandnavian countries such as Finland and Norway. He is not alone in the assessment.

On the other hand, Sweden suffered far fewer deaths per capita than several European neighbors that instituted strict lockdowns—including Belgium, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom—and has avoided some of the economic fallout other nations have endured. Unlike other countries, its currency is growing stronger.

Indeed, Sweden’s death rate is remarkably close to that of France, which Williams praised as a model in contrast to the “utter disaster” in the US. However, the US actually has a lower per capita death rate than both Sweden and France—at least for now. (While it’s true COVID cases are on the rise again in the US, deaths recently reached three-month lows.)

This raises questions about how we measure success in the age of COVID-19. While most attention is being paid to rising case numbers, death tolls would seem to be the most important metric. While US deaths per capita (401/1M) put the country among the ten highest in the world—ahead of France and Sweden, but just below the Netherlands—those numbers also don’t tell the entire story.

Few may have noticed that 42 percent of all COVID deaths in the US come from just three states—New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts. These three states account for nearly 56,000 of the nearly 133,000 deaths in the US, even though they represent just 10 percent of the population. If these three states are excluded, the US suddenly finds itself somewhere in between nations such as Luxembourg (176/1M) and Macedonia (166/1M), where some of the better fatality numbers in Europe are found.

Why have New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts suffered so much more than other US states? We don’t yet know the answer to that question, but evidence suggests it could be policy related.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo earlier this year received a great deal of criticism when the state’s policy of prohibiting nursing homes from screening residents for COVID-19 came to light. Cuomo eventually reversed that decision under intense criticism from public health experts and trade group leaders.

This week, the New York State Department of Health issued a report that concluded 6,326 COVID-positive residents were admitted to nursing homes between March 25 and May 8 as a result of the order.

”The data shows that the nursing home residents got COVID from the staff, and presumably, also from those who visited them. Unfortunately, we did not understand the disease early on, we did not realize how widespread it was within our community, and therefore, it was able to be introduced into a vulnerable population,” said New York Health Commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker.

The report, however, also claimed that “most patients admitted to nursing homes from hospitals were no longer contagious when admitted and therefore were not a source of infection … [and] … nursing home quality was not a factor in nursing home fatalities.”

The report cites the high nursing home fatality rates of Massachusetts and New Jersey as additional evidence that New York was not an outlier in nursing home deaths.

“…an examination of fatalities in our neighboring states—despite having populations much smaller than New York’s—illustrates fatalities at these facilities were not a New York-specific phenomenon: Connecticut reports 3,124 deaths in these facilities, New Jersey reports 6,617, and Massachusetts reports 5,115, to New York’s 6,432 fatalities.”

However, it’s worth noting that both New Jersey and Massachusetts had similar policies in place, according to the AARP and other news stories. Moreover, the actual number of nursing home deaths in New York is difficult to know, since New York changed its reporting so that nursing home residents who die of COVID-19 are not counted as a nursing home death if they die at a hospital.

The context of the US numbers matters for several reasons. For one, understanding why New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts have suffered so much more from the coronavirus may hold keys to combating the virus.

Secondly, there is currently a great deal of scrutiny on states such as Florida, Texas, and Arizona, which have seen case numbers increase in recent weeks, a spike that began in mid-June after states reopened their economies. The implication is that these states dropped the ball by reopening too soon.

None of these states, however, has a per capita fatality rate that even approaches New Jersey, Massachusetts, or New York. Below are the figures as of July 7.

  • New Jersey: 1,728.7
  • New York: 1,660
  • Massachusetts: 1,189
  • Arizona: 265
  • Florida: 179
  • Texas: 94

Considering these numbers, one would not expect to see a governor from New Jersey, New York, or Massachusetts lecture these other states on their handling of the coronavirus. But that’s exactly what Gov. Cuomo did, claiming his state-ordered lockdown “saved lives” and chastening governors who opened their economies.

“I say to them all look at the numbers,” Cuomo said, referring to leaders in the states seeing rises in COVID-19 cases. “You played politics with this virus, and you lost. You told the people of this state, you told the people of this country, the White House, ‘Don’t worry about it. Go about your business.’”

Cuomo makes no mention of the social costs of the economic lockdowns—mass unemployment, widespread bankruptcy, and surging mental health deterioration, drug abuse, and global poverty. Nor does he mention his state’s catastrophically high COVID death toll.

The extent to which policy decisions are linked to the high fatality rates in these states is still unknown. We’re in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic and still learning about the virus. But that is precisely why lawmakers should exercise caution in their policy prescriptions.

In his 1974 Nobel Prize speech, the economist F.A. Hayek warned against the temptation to use collective action with incomplete knowledge, saying such action would likely cause more harm than good.

“To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm,” Hayek stated. “The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society – a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.”

Hayek saw a world that increasingly seemed to believe central planners could solve any and all social problems. Such a worldview carried the seed of great harm, he believed.

We don’t yet know how this pandemic or economic collapse will end, but some have predicted it shaping up to be a blunder of historic proportions.

“The first half of 2020 will go down in history as the largest nationwide public policy failure since the Great Depression,” the economic historian Phil Magness recently observed. “A part of that failure derives from the largest wide-scale suppression of economic and social liberties in most of our lifetimes, all executed to negligible effect at solving the problem it intended to target.”

If Magness is correct, the crisis, though tragic, may also offer a healthy dose of an elixir Hayek would say humans desperately need: humility.

“The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society,” Hayek concluded in his address.

The lockdowns and the nursing home tragedies show just how destructive and fatal such striving to control society can be.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Colorado City to Mandate Face Masks, Violators Face up to a Year in Jail

The “Old” vs. the “New” Liberalism

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Author Argues African Americans Gained Ground Under Trump’s Leadership

President Donald Trump’s policies are helping minority communities across America. Today, Horace Cooper, senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research and co-chairman of Project 21, joins the show to discuss his new book “How Trump Is Making Black America Great Again: The Untold Story of Black Advancement in the Era of Trump.” Cooper explains why he believes African Americans are advancing under Trump’s leadership.

We also cover these stories:

  • The Supreme Court decides 7-2 that the Little Sisters of the Poor won’t be forced to provide abortion-inducing drugs or birth control to employees as part of the Catholic order’s health care plan.
  • The Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic schools in a case balancing religious freedom with employment law.
  • Alexander Vindman, a central witness in Democrats’ effort to remove Trump, announces his retirement.

“The Daily Signal Podcast” is available on Ricochet, Apple PodcastsPippaGoogle Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Virginia Allen: I am joined by Horace Cooper, senior fellow at the National Center [for Public Policy Research], Project 21 co-chair, and the author of “How Trump is Making Black America Great Again: The Untold Story of Black Advancement in the Era of Trump.” Mr. Cooper, welcome to the show.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


Horace Cooper: Hey, it’s great to be on today.

Allen: Well, congratulations on the book, it just released and we’re so excited to talk about it today, learn a little bit more about it. Can you begin by just telling us why you chose to write it?

Cooper: Sure. One of the things that led me to write the book has been, I travel across the country, I speak to a lot of groups, I do a lot of media, and I’m always asked this question about how either the Republican Party, or now President [Donald] Trump in particular, how could anyone embrace or support or be enthusiastic about who the president is, Donald Trump, or, at the time, when Republicans controlled the House of Representatives, when I started this book.

In all instances I was asked this question, “Isn’t it true that black people have to fear from conservatives? Isn’t it true that only liberals and progressives have anything positive to offer for black America?” And I wanted to write this book so I could show with data, with actual data, what’s truly going on in America. And that in fact, there is a lot for people to really, really be excited about.

Allen: So the book is titled “How Trump is Making Black America Great Again: The Untold Story of Black Advancement in the Era of Trump.” You mentioned data, can we get into a little bit of just those ways that the black community has advanced under Trump’s leadership?

Cooper: One of the first things that I want to let everyone know here is, and part of what’s important, what we see today in 2020 is, in many instances, a representation for most people of the reality that they know. And they pay little attention to 10 years ago, they pay almost no attention to 30 years ago, and it is inconceivable to understand or comprehend a hundred years ago.

Here’s the truth—and this is why I really think it’s helpful to look at the data—a hundred years ago, 1920 black America actually was doing an amazing level of achievement. Black America had a higher employment rate than the rest of the country, black Americans were represented in federal prisons at the lowest level of any race group.

In fact, black men and women were married at either the same or higher rates than the rest of the American population. And children were growing up in households where their parents, if they were black, were as likely or more likely to be married.

We don’t think of that today because the numbers are so divergent. There were more black millionaires in the 1920s than there were in the 1970s, even though the population of America had exploded by the time of the 1970s.

So one of the things that I wanted to point out with the data today is how improved black America is over where black America was in just 10 years ago and even 30 years ago. Black America unemployment is skyrocketing in contrast.

Allen: What happened that we went from black America being so successful and having stable homes and jobs to then this real downward slope that now we’re seeing President Trump helped to pull that community out of?

Cooper: Yes. So that’s the great question and that’s the question that often goes unanswered. And the reason it goes unanswered is many people erroneously conclude that whatever’s happening today or whatever happened in the last 10 years is the way that it’s always been.

We had policies under Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge that said it was not the job of government to solve every problem, it was the responsibility of the individual. They supported free enterprise, they supported very, very limited regulation on the part of government. And … if you apply yourself, if you try, you will be amazed at the kinds of things that can be accomplished.

What Donald Trump did was very, very similar to those policies that led to the period that we call the Roaring ’20s. He pulled government back in terms of regulation, he pulled government back in terms of taxation. He made it possible, as I point out, we had a record in 17, 18, 19 of the number of new small businesses that black Americans created.

What you have to have happen is an environment where you are making policies that are great for the country. And when they’re great for the country, it turns out the least among us benefit even better. And that’s the real story of my book is that black Americans actually have done better in almost every single category than other groups in America. And certainly better than the average American.

Allen: You talk about something called MAGAnomics in the book. Can you explain what that is?

Cooper: Sure. MAGAnomics is the idea that it’s not government’s job to promote the interest of international corporations, it’s not the job of government to see to it that every type of foreigner who is interested in coming to America gets the opportunity to do so.

Now, that’s not the same thing as saying, “You can’t come.” But it is saying that’s not going to be the priority.

Black Americans have been the biggest losers with the advance to push for international workforces, particularly from Latin and South America.

We’ve seen unbelievable amounts of job undercutting and one of the reasons that that can happen is, if you’re in the country unlawfully or you’ve overstayed your visa, you are able to negotiate with your employer to opt out of Social Security, to opt out of Medicare, to opt out of all of the kinds of things. [You] even can opt out of the minimum wage, you’re working illegally. Therefore, it’s easy to have the conversation and get the ability to be such a low-priced worker.

That means that if you are a moderate- to low-skilled black American or white American, you’re displaced by people who can completely and totally underbid you. And over the last 10 to 15 years, there has been a major push to encourage those kind of workers who are not here lawfully.

MAGAnomics says that we’re going to focus on Americans, we’re going to focus on those who are citizens, and we’re going to make it easier for citizens to be able to work. Your taxes are going to be lower, the cost of you having your job is going to be lower for the employer because we’re going to lessen the regulatory burden.

And we’re going to put barriers up so that the only foreign workers who can come to America will do so in a lawful way and they will do so with the support that the government has always intended, that either sponsors or employers are supposed to provide. And that has had huge, huge benefits for black America.

Allen: Wow. So in other words, kind of the narrative that we so often hear from the left is kind of like, open borders will be better for everyone. But also there’s so much talk of various programs that will lift up minority communities, but you can’t have it all.

Cooper: Right, let me give you another example, by the way. It’s federal law that if you’re in the country unlawfully, that federal taxpayer services are not supposed to be provided to you except in emergencies and a few other rare areas. But most local and state jurisdictions, they pick and choose whether or not they’re going to use their dollars.

So you have 65 schools in a particular community or jurisdiction. If you bring in people who are not supposed to be in the country lawfully, they are overwhelmingly less likely [to] speak English fluently and so they’re going to need additional services.

There is a huge differential in terms of the type of social services, whether it’s alcohol or drug abuse, whether there’s domestic violence in a given household. All kinds of services are having to be provided. And many of the Latin America and other foreign or international visitors who’ve overstayed their visa unlawfully are using those local resources.

What does that mean in practical terms? That means that in your classroom, instead of there being an advanced math class that you would be able to take, scarce resources are redirected for foreign language conversion efforts to help advance the ability of people who don’t speak the English language.

That means that if you presently don’t have health care and you’re going to a community-provided clinic for assistance, well, you look around and sizable numbers of the people that are sharing that clinic with you are people who are non-residents.

So you’re not seeing an explosion in resources for education locally, you’re not seeing an explosion in resources for health and other related social services. What you’re seeing is black Americans and other working-class people of all races having to compete for those scarce resources.

And let me give you the last part, the hammer is that most of these jurisdictions charge a regressive tax. So unlike the progressive tax at the federal level, which can exempt largely its impact from those who are working class and lower income, the regressive tax hits the working class the hardest.

So you actually, as a poor person, whether black or brown or white, you get to pay for the privilege of providing lower-quality education for yourself, your child, and for the foreigners who were competing with you.

MAGAnomics says we’re going to shift the priority so that the resources that are available actually do benefit Americans as the federal law intends.

Allen: You talk about how many people, specifically white liberals, are shocked when they learn that you’re a conservative, you’re from the South, you’re African American. Can you just share a little bit of your own story of how you developed the political views that you have and became a conservative?

Cooper: So, I am a part of an impact family. My mother and father were part of a tradition in the state of Texas and in the South generally, where certain types of values mattered and that meant that my mother and father were married before I was born.

Now, because they came from a much more lower-income circumstance in rural Texas, they didn’t go off to college before we were born, they had to wait until after we were born. Why, though, did that happen? I say it’s my grandmother, Virgi P. Johnson.

Virginia Johnson had an idea and that idea was that her nine children were going be independent and self-sufficient. Seven of the nine not only were college graduates, but like my mother and several of her sisters, they got master’s degrees and Ph.D.s.

They understood, based on the experience, a summer I spent with my grandmother where she explained that even though she grew up in the midst of Jim Crow segregation, … it did not mean that she couldn’t provide for herself. And she bragged that she never relied on social services, never received food stamps, and encouraged us to be like that. Focus on your education, focus on your skill development, make sure that you can become independent.

Now, when we would stay with my grandmother, we lived in rural Texas and she had indoor plumbing, but she didn’t have a washer and a dryer, she didn’t have a dishwasher. That meant that when I was 5, 6, 7, or 8, all those kinds of tasks that normally we have appliances that help us out with, that was our job and she trained us.

I’ll give you a quick story, we had to hand wash clothes outside and we would do it early in the morning and it was cool because summers are very hot in Texas.

But the washboard that she used was too big for us as little kids. So she made a deal with us, if we agreed to do some extra chores, we could earn the money so that we could buy our own washboards that were smaller in size. We did extra chores and got the smaller washboard, which made it possible for us to wash even more.

That is counterproductive to what you see in many communities where people are shirking, people are trying to get away from work, people are trying to get away from responsibility.

My grandmother got us up at 5 a.m., sometimes earlier, I’m a morning person because of that. My grandmother saw to it that by the time I was 3, that we started reading, my brother and I. We need the ability in many of our communities to have this kind of attitude and this mindset.

I grew up where it was taken for granted that you were going to hit your books, I grew up where it was taken for granted that you’re going to stay on the right side of the law.

I never had to have “the talk,” instead I had the, “You’re going to be home on time, you’re going to be respectful in the classroom, and you’re actually going to be the kind of person that will amount to something,” as my grandma would say.

Allen: Wow, your grandmother sounds like an incredible lady, my goodness. What an honor to have that influence in your life. And those things that she obviously taught her children and her grandchildren so well, those are the exact principles that it’s so evident our nation is in need of today.

How do we further that narrative of empowerment that your grandmother obviously instilled in you? And really pull back from this victim mentality and mob rule and just this really, really negative narrative that we’re seeing played out right now by the left?

Cooper: So, my grandmother had this benefit, if she didn’t do it right, no one was going to do it for her. We have the detriment now, if you don’t do it right, don’t worry, someone is going to do it for you.

Getting up early can be hard, working long hours outside also can be hard. I got to see my grandmother save up and pay cash for a house that she lived in until she died when I was in junior high. No mortgage, she never ever had a mortgage, paid cash.

We don’t hear that mindset, instead we live in a society where, all too often, if you’re having a difficulty, if you’re having a challenge, well, you’ve got an idea, there’s a government program for that. Well, my grandmother had a different idea, apply yourself, strive, work at it, and you will be amazed at what you can accomplish.

One of my biggest regrets, I hadn’t many, but one of my biggest regrets about the Obama administration was his failure to accept the role as a model.

There are many black kids who [attend] struggling schools, many of those schools don’t work well. They’re overrun by unions more interested in featherbedding themselves than ensuring those children achieve.

But what [President Barack Obama] could have said to young people, black, white, or brown, “Apply yourself, try, make the effort. America is such an amazing place, even with whatever struggles I have had, I ultimately was able to become president of the United States. If I can do that, you can too.”

Now that would have been more aligned with the kind of opportunity to model that my grandmother was able to do and that would have given true hope to people.

Instead he castigated America, he said America wasn’t fair. He said that America wasn’t interested in giving black America a shot. And it was like a lottery land or something that we had a black American who happened to be president. Not that we are the exceptional, amazing country on the planet where that’s possible.

Name a European country, name a Latin America country or a South American country where they have one member of their minority, a black man or woman, as their prime minister or president. You keep looking because you are not going to find it.

America is that kind of a place and that would have been an amazing example for him to repeat over and over again. Even with his bad economic policies, by encouraging people to strive and achieve, he could have had a positive effect.

Allen: Mr. Cooper, I want to give you just a moment to share a little bit about Project 21 and the work that you’re doing there.

Cooper: Project 21 is actually now 25 years old, I’m a founding member and I only recently became a co-chair.

Project 21 is made up of black Americans who recognized during the riots in the wake of the Rodney King trial—during those riots we were informed by the media in an airy way, the same way we are today, that the rioting, the looting, the violence, the mayhem are legitimate out workings of the frustrations that black Americans feel.

And we looked around, I talked to many professionals, I talked to many middle-class educated black Americans and asked, “Is that your idea of how people achieve change or express angst?”

So Project 21 was founded so that we could provide the other perspective, the other view that families matter, that the private sector is far more important than the government sector. That people need to have initiative and be motivated with the kinds of community organizations like the Boy Scouts, … [the] Future Farmers of America, like I had when I was a kid, that help our communities develop and be better.

We need more of that and so Project 21 tries as much as it can and as often as it can to be able to do that. There are good policies that are great for our country and they’re great for minorities. That’s the purpose of my book, that’s the story of my life. If you help the least among us, the best way to do that is to help all of us.

Allen: And how can our listeners follow your work and the work of Project 21?

Cooper: Sure. You can check us out at www.nationalcenter.org, at the National Center for Public Policy Research, or you can follow us on Twitter, @project21news. I’m on track right now to do 420 radio and TV appearances this year, so I’m sure a quick search of Google you can find me or many of the other members of Project 21.

Allen: Wow, you have a busy year. That’s impressive. Well, for all of our listeners, you can purchase the book “How Trump is Making Black America Great Again” on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, I even found it at Target. So be sure to look it up, great read. Mr. Cooper, thank you so much for your time.

Cooper: Thanks for having me today.

COMMENTARY BY

Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: .


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

These 18 Corporations Gave Money to Radical Black Lives Matter Group

Some of America’s largest corporations have pledged or donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the main Black Lives Matter organization, founded by “trained Marxists,” that calls for replacing the nuclear family with a “village.”

Prominent brands giving money include Amazon, Microsoft, Nabisco, Gatorade, Airbnb, and the Atlantic and Warner record labels.

Black Lives Matter as a movement or sentiment is not necessarily tied to the radical organization, called the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, but it has become the greatest beneficiary of corporate largesse.

The Daily Signal previously reported that the website for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation notes that replacing the nuclear family structure and promoting the LGBT political agenda are central to its mission. A co-founder also has said that she and other “trained Marxists” formed the network foundation.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


The BLM Global Network Foundation began in 2016 with the fiscal sponsorship of Thousand Currents, a liberal nonprofit group. Susan Rosenberg, convicted and imprisoned in 1984 for domestic terrorism, is vice chairwoman of Thousand Currents’ board of directors, The Daily Signal also reported.

At least 18 companies have donated or pledged to donate money to the BLM Global Network Foundation, according to a list compiled by the Washington-based Capital Research Center, which monitors nonprofits and charities. Another seven companies have not been clear which Black Lives Matter entity they chose for contributions.

Thousand Currents has said that all donations filtered through it, corporate and otherwise, “are received as restricted donations to support the activities of BLM.”

The Daily Signal contacted spokespersons for all the companies mentioned in this report several times over the course of a week, seeking comment about their financial support for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.

The Daily Signal asked whether the companies supported that organization’s stated beliefs and goals, which extend well beyond advocating racial equality and opposing police brutality.

Several companies state merely that they are giving to “Black Lives Matter,” without specifying which organization. The BLM Global Network Foundation likely is the recipient, given its prominence, but that isn’t always clear in an announcement.

It also is possible that, similar to the tech giant Cisco, other companies gave to the Black Lives Matter cause through donations to traditional civil rights groups such as the NAACP and the Urban League.

A growing roster of corporations has issued press releases, memos, and tweets vowing financial support for “Black Lives Matter,” linking directly to or using the Twitter handle of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. Here are 18 of them, plus some examples of ambiguous giving.

1. DoorDash

DoorDash, which delivers prepared food, gave $500,000 to the organization. In an email to The Daily Signal, DoorDash spokesperson Liz Jarvis-Shean wrote:

In partnership with our Black@DoorDash Employee Resource Group (ERG), DoorDash pledged a total of $1 million in donations, with $500,000 going to Black Lives Matter via the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation and $500,000 to create a fund to be directed by the Black@DoorDash ERG towards state and local organizations.

Our goal with these donations and the other actions we announced is to stand with our employees and community members to fight injustice, inequality and discrimination and to support organizations that are working to root out structural and systemic racism and providing local community development, mentorship, education and entrepreneurship programs to support Black communities across the country.

2. Deckers

“Deckers as a company is standing together in solidarity to fight for equality,” Deckers Brands said in an email to The Daily Signal.

“To show immediate support, we are donating a total of $500,000 to the following organizations,” the company said, listing seven organizations, including “Black Lives Matter Foundation,” which it said “builds power to bring justice, healing, and freedom to Black people across the globe.”

Although a smaller organization called the Black Lives Matter Foundation exists, as does another called Movement for Black Lives, a blog post from the Deckers brand Ugg links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. That post uses language similar to the email from Deckers to The Daily Signal.

3. Amazon

Amazon linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation in a press release June 9, identifying it as among 12 groups that would get a total of $10 million from the online retail giant. Amazon announced:

As part of that effort, Amazon will donate a total of $10 million to organizations that are working to bring about social justice and improve the lives of Black and African Americans. Recipients—selected with the help of Amazon’s Black Employee Network (BEN)—include groups focused on combating systemic racism through the legal system as well as those dedicated to expanding educational and economic opportunities for Black communities.

4. Gatorade

Gatorade, the sports drink maker, identified the BLM Global Network Foundation as being among groups benefiting from a $500,000 donation.

5. Microsoft

Microsoft announced June 5 that it would donate $250,000 to the “Black Lives Matter Foundation,” but linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.

Microsoft also named five other civil rights organizations with whom it would “deepen our engagement” by donating $250,000 apiece.

6. Glossier

Glossier, a skin care and makeup company, said in a May 30 press release that it would divide $500,000 among five organizations, including “Black Lives Matter,” and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation’s website.

7. 23andMe

23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki announced June 2 that the company and its employees would donate to “Black Lives Matter” and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

8.  Airbnb

Airbnb announced on Twitter that it was splitting a $500,000 donation between the NAACP and the “@Blklivesmatter Foundation,” using the organization’s Twitter handle.

9.  Unilever

Two of Unilever’s personal hygiene brands, Axe and Degree, pledged a total of $350,000 to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

10. Bungie

Bungie didn’t provide a dollar amount, but said it would make “financial contributions” to six organizations and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

11. Nabisco

Ritz, a cracker brand from Nabisco, announced June 4 that it and sister brands were donating $500,000 to the NAACP and to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

12. Dropbox

Dropbox founder and CEO Drew Houston announced June 3 that the company was giving $500,000 to the BLM Global Network Foundation, tagging the group on Twitter.

13. Fitbit

Fitbit, the maker of health and fitness trackers, tagged the BLM Global Network Foundation as a recipient of donations, but didn’t say how much.

14. Devolver Digital

Individual employees of Devolver Digital donated $65,000 to the BLM Global Network Foundation as of June 2 through the company’s ActBlue online giving account.

15. Skillshare

Skillshare CEO Matt Cooper, in an online message June 1, said the company was “donating to the following organizations” and referred to the “official #BlackLivesMatter Global Network,” which it said “builds power to bring justice, freedom, and space for imagination and innovation to Black people.  Skillshare was among the few businesses to specifically name the network foundation.

 16. Square Enix

Square Enix, a game developer, announced that it was giving $250,000 to the NAACP and Black Lives Matter, linking to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

17. That Game Co.

In one tweet, That Game Co. announced plans to give a total of $20,000 to both the NAACP and Black Lives Matter. In a follow-up, the company linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

18. Tinder

Tinder, the online dating network, announced that it was donating and provided a link to the BLM Global Network Foundation.

Ambiguous Giving

The California-based tech firm Cisco identifies @Blklivesmatter, the Twitter handle for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, as among recipients of $5 million in donations.

But a Cisco spokesperson says the company isn’t contributing to that main group.

Cisco’s Robyn Blum told The Daily Signal in an email:

With our recently announced $5M donation, we are pleased to be able to pledge funds to these organizations:

• Equal Justice Initiative–a private, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization providing legal representation to people who have been illegally convicted, unfairly sentenced, or abused in state jails and prisons.

• The NAACP Legal Defense Fund–a premier civil rights law organization fighting for racial justice through litigation, advocacy, & public education.

• Color Of Change–America’s largest online racial justice organization.

Contacted again by The Daily Signal with reference to that tweet, Blum said the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation was not among recipients of Cisco’s donations.

The tech company Intel, in a May 31 memo from CEO Bob Swan, announced that the business would donate “$1 million in support of efforts to address social injustice and anti-racism across various nonprofits and community organizations.”

“I also encourage employees to consider donating to organizations focused on equity and social justice, including the Black Lives Matter Foundation, the Center for Policing Equity and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, all of which are eligible for Intel’s Donation Matching Program,” Swan said.

However, the Intel CEO’s memo didn’t provide a link to a Black Lives Matter group. Nor did it specify which foundation—the larger and more prominent BLM Global Network Foundation or the smaller Black Lives Matter Foundation.

The Daily Signal sought clarification from Intel, but it did not respond before publication of this report.

The Pokemon Co. is another example of a company that didn’t specify which organization, but said it was donating $100,000 to Black Lives Matter.

Atlantic Records announced that it “will be contributing to Black Lives Matter and other organizations that are doing crucial work to combat injustice.” But the legendary record company didn’t specify whether it was donating to the BLM Global Network Foundation and didn’t respond to multiple inquiries.

Similarly, Warner Records announced that it would contribute “to Black Lives Matter and other organizations that are doing crucial work to combat racial injustice.”

Discord, a communications company, announced that it is donating to the “Black Lives Matter movement.” It did not respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal about the specific organization.

Pusheen, the company behind the cartoon cat of the same name, called on fans and followers to join it in donating to Black Lives Matter among other organizations, but didn’t specify which BLM entity.

Ubisoft also said that it was contributing $100,000 to both the NAACP and Black Lives Matter, without specifying which organization or affiliate.

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A Deeper Look at Black Lives Matter and Its Impact

TRUTH: The Reasons Why I DO NOT Support George Floyd [Videos]

Rep. Chip Roy: It’s Time to ‘Unapologetically’ Remind People About America’s ‘Greatness’

Trump’s Right. We’re Now Reckoning With a Generation of Anti-American Indoctrination.


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Minnesota: Muslima who claimed discrimination over coffee cup labeled ‘ISIS’ turns out to be named ‘Aishah’

Yesterday we noted a curious aspect of this case: that Hamas-linked CAIR had not revealed the name of the woman making the complaint. Now it turns out that her name is Aishah. Anyone who has ever been in a Starbucks anywhere knows how easy it would be for a barista, without any malice whatsoever, to mix up two words that sound as similar to each other as “ISIS,” “eye-sis,” and “Aishah,” “eye-shah.” And as the manager of this Target Starbucks noted, “people get their names wrong all the time.” Most don’t make a huge case about it, and don’t get any publicity about it, either. But Hamas-linked CAIR knows how to use cases such as this one to intimidate big companies and shake them down for money in the name of “diversity” and “inclusion.” Today’s nationwide race hysteria makes that all the easier. What is the likelihood that Target Starbucks gives Aishah and Hamas-linked CAIR a massive payout to make this whole thing go away? Oh, about 120%.

An update on this story. “Muslim woman outraged after barista writes ‘ISIS’ on her coffee cup in St. Paul. Target calls it a mistake.” by Mara H. Gottfried, Pioneer Press, July 6, 2020:

While ordering a drink Wednesday in St. Paul, a 19-year-old Muslim woman gave the barista her name — Aishah — and repeated it for clarity.

The Minneapolis woman was shocked when she saw what the barista then wrote on her coffee cup: “ISIS.”

“The word that was written on the drink is a word that shatters the Muslim reputation all around the world,” said Aishah, whom the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Minnesota chapter identified only by her first name for safety reasons.

Target, which runs and operates the Starbucks in St. Paul’s Midway store, says it has apologized and “believe that it was not a deliberate act but an unfortunate mistake,” according to a statement Monday.

Aishah and CAIR-MN on Monday called on the University Avenue Target to fire the employees who were involved, and an attorney submitted a charge of discrimination to the Minnesota Department of Human Rights….

“Unfortunately, with Islamophobia, the No. 1 thing Muslims are … discriminatorily identified (as) is terrorists,” said Jaylani Hussein, CAIR-MN executive director. “… Using this word for us would be the same as a Black man today being … (called) the N-word.”

CAIR-MN: MANAGER ALSO PART OF PROBLEM

When Aishah asked the employee why “ISIS” was written on her cup, the worker “claimed that she had not heard her name correctly,” according to a statement from CAIR-MN.

Aishah had been wearing her hijab, a head covering, which is “clearly a sign of her faith,” Hussein said.

When Aishah asked to speak with a manager, Hussein said the manager responded with: “What is the issue? People get their names wrong all the time.”

Aishah said she felt humiliated, enraged and belittled. She was sent away with a replacement drink and a $25 gift card.

Aishah filed a formal complaint with Target. A corporate representative reached out to her the next day to apologize, according to a Target spokesman, but Aishah said Monday morning she still had not received an apology.

TARGET: ADDITIONAL TRAINING, APOLOGY

Target said in a statement they are “taking appropriate actions with the team member, including additional training, to ensure this does not occur again.”

The Minneapolis-based retailer added: “At Target, we want everyone who shops with us to feel welcomed, valued and respected and we strictly prohibit discrimination and harassment in any form. We are very sorry for this guest’s experience at our store and immediately apologized to her when she made our store leaders aware of the situation. We have investigated the matter and believe that it was not a deliberate act but an unfortunate mistake that could have been avoided with a simple clarification.”…

“This unfortunate incident is particularly appalling in light of the local and national appeals for racial justice and the ongoing calls for meaningful steps towards lasting equity in the United States of America,” said Alec Shaw, a civil rights attorney for CAIR-MN, who called on Cornell to “make the same commitment to stand against Islamophobia and all forms of discrimination and hate.”

At a Philadelphia Starbucks last year, a Muslim customer named Aziz had “ISIS” written on his drink cups. Starbucks called that a “regrettable mistake.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslims enraged, demand ban of film glorifying Muhammad, threaten to murder filmmaker, filmmaking is un-Islamic

Palestinian Authority enraged by lack of rage over “annexation,” urges jihad against Israel

UK’s Independent reveals “How Muslim women are using makeup to get closer to their religion”

Italy: Muslim migrant, naturalized Italian citizen, murders Italian for being “white” and “happy”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Black Lives Matter founder: ‘Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here’

Our moral superiors in action.

“The BLM Founder Who Begged Allah For Strength Not To ‘Kill Sub Human Whites’ Received a Government Award ‘Encouraging A Run For Public Office,’” by Natalie Winters, National Pulse, June 27, 2020:

A Black Lives Matter organizer who implored Allah to give her the “strength” to not “kill these men and white folks” and that “white skin is sub-humxn” received an award from the Canadian government meant to encourage a “run for public office.”

The unearthed comments from Yusra Khogali follows co-founders of the U.S. branch of Black Lives Matter (BLM) being exposed by The National Pulse for vowing to oppose capitalism and claiming “we’re trained Marxists.”

The tweet – no longer on the social media platform – read:
“Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz.”

Khogali, an alleged “anti-racist” activist and founder of the Black Liberation Collective Canada, only had one qualm with the tweet: it “drowned out the discussion we sought to spark about the black lives of those who have died at the guns of police in this country.”

The daughter of Sudanese refugees has also insisted white people are “recessive genetic defects” who should be “wiped out,” that “whiteness is not humxness,” and “white skin is sub-humxn” in 2015 Facebook posts.

Despite these clearly racist attacks, Khogali received a Canadian government-sanctioned “Young Women in Leadership Award” in 2018.

Recipients of the awards are connected with “women interested in politics with female leaders on council and in the civil service,” and “the program is meant to encourage women to run for public office. Khogali has also been invited to speak at countless universities….

RELATED ARTICLE: Minnesota: Hamas-linked CAIR enraged, demands firing of barista who wrote “ISIS” on Muslima’s coffee cup

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

New Independent Presidential Candidate Brock Pierce

LOS ANGELES, CA /PRNewswire/ — On July 4, 2020, BROCK PIERCE announced his candidacy for President of the United States, running as an Independent in the November 3, 2020 Presidential election.  Pierce, born and raised in Minnesota, was a child actor who became an entrepreneur at a very early age, then later became a well-recognized figure in technology and innovation.  A staunch supporter of entrepreneurs and small businesses, he understands what it takes to build a business from the ground up. Pierce is campaigning on a vision for a brighter future for Americans after the challenges of 2020 by supporting small businesses and implementing 21st century technology practices that will enable Americans to lead more prosperous lives, from supporting mental health initiatives to supporting grassroots efforts to protect the environment. He leads his campaign with MAKE EVERY VOICE COUNT.

“I’ve spent my life creating great things from nothing and I can help others do the same,” Pierce said. “Entrepreneurs are essential to the rebuilding of this nation that we love, and I’m running in this race because I know that together we can help build a pathway towards the rebirth of the America we love so much.”

About Brock Pierce:

Brock Pierce is a job creator, entrepreneur and philanthropist with a proven track record of founding disruptive businesses. He’s been credited with pioneering the market for digital currency and has raised more than $5 billion for companies he has founded. Pierce is known as one of the leaders of digital currency and is a recognized thought leader in the world of blockchain, gaming and media.

Upon moving to Puerto Rico in 2017, he immediately prioritized philanthropy after seeing the devastation Hurricane Maria left behind. He later led The Integro Foundation, a Puerto Rico based not-for-profit organization, which provides philanthropic resources to Puerto Rico, Caribbean Islands, and the and the indigenous people of the Americas. Integro’s programs are designed to revive areas in critical need, empower humans, promote sustainability and provide the needed resources in order to thrive. Integro provides urgent relief during times of crisis, working with vetted local charities, organizations and government agencies to deploy resources efficiently, with fully accountable donations.

Pierce is a frequent public speaker and has spoken at Singularity University, Milken Global Conference, Mobile World Congress, Wired, INK, Stanford University, USC, and UCLA.

He has been featured in numerous publications including The New York TimesForbes, The London Times, Fortune, Wired, and Rolling Stone.

For more information about Brock Pierce, please visit www.brock.vote #brockthevote

Integro Foundation, Inc. does not directly or indirectly, participate or intervene in any political activity; therefore, Integro Foundation will never endorse, support, or oppose any candidates for pubic office.

WEBSITE: BROCK.VOTE

©All rights reserved.

BLM — Made In China

Made in China is a mutating phrase depending upon its political context. At one time, made in China inferred precision manufacturing and low prices. If clothing was made in China the stitches were precise, uniform, and accurate. Tools, computers, sports equipment, shoes, furniture, virtually anything made in China was considered high quality low price. What happened?

China’s Cultural Revolution is the “sociopolitical movement in China from 1966-1976. Launched by Mao Zedong, Chairman of the Communist Party of China (CPC), its stated goal was to preserve Chinese Communism by purging remnants of capitalist and traditional elements (imperialism) from Chinese society, and to reimpose Mao Zedong thought (Maoism) as the dominant ideology in the CPC.”

Chairman Mao was ideologically a Marxist-Leninist, a hybrid political philosophy of gradualism that seeks to establish a socialist state in preparation for an eventual communist state. Communism is the collectivist socio-political system marketing itself as, “a classless system with common ownership of the means of production, with full social and economic equality of all members of society.”

The seductive narrative of the Chinese Cultural Revolution was that capitalism was evil and had to be removed by violent class struggle. Mao engaged young people to participate in “purging” the country through widespread destruction of historical, religious, and cultural artifacts. Sound familiar? It should. China’s Cultural Revolution was a reeducation campaign designed to erase China’s history and culture.

Mao’s Marxist-Leninist dogma is the source of the “social justice” and “economic equality” narrative taught in American universities, in American high schools, in American middle schools, and even elementary schools K-12. Marxist-Leninist dogma is the root of the slogans that indoctrinated Americans echo like parrots at political protests, and that paid political anarchists shout while burning American cities.

The weaponized education of disinformation launched when Jimmy Carter established the Department of Education in 1979, has succeeded in graduating indoctrinated, impassioned, American Marxist-Leninists. They are the ideological soldiers in the American Cultural Revolution seeking to erase our history and culture, overthrow the government, and replace our free-market capitalism with socialism. The Chinese communist narrative has been unapologetically adopted by Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) activists in the United States. Even the black fisted BLM flag is taken from the red fisted communist flag. There are many more similarities.

Marxist-Leninist teachings are the central thesis of the Culture War on America launched by America’s enemies after WWII, and the source of today’s American Cultural Revolution seeking to purge American history, American values, American culture, and American capitalism. Soeren Kern’s explosive July 2, 2020 article, “Black Lives Matter: ‘We Are Trained Marxists’” describes the effort. “On the surface, Black Lives Matter (BLM) presents itself as a grassroots movement dedicated to the noble tasks of fighting racism and police brutality. A deeper dive shows that BLM is a Marxist revolutionary movement aimed at transforming the United States – and the entire world – into a communist dystopia.”

Kern quotes Black Lives Matter (BLM) leaders. In there own words:

“We actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia [Garza] in particular, we’re trained organizers. We are trained Marxists. We are super versed on ideological theories.”——Patrisse Cullors, July 22, 2015.

“We are anti-capitalist. We believe and understand that Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system.”——Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), of which BLM is a part, June 5, 2020.

Marxist-Leninist teachings are rooted in the false premise of collectivist, common ownership. Mao’s collectivist proletariat ownership is not equivalent to private property ownership in free market capitalism. Communism’s common ownership exists in theory only because the Communist Party controls the production and distribution of all goods and services. This means that no individual can buy, sell, or profit from anything that any individual produces. In practice, everything is owned by the party, including the citizens. The centralized government has absolute and total control of the people. The fatal flaw of theoretical ownership is that there is no incentive to work.

The centrally planned economy of China’s Cultural Revolution was a disaster. When President Richard Nixon visited China and met with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in February 1972, Nixon said at a banquet in his honor: “This is the week that changed the world.” It was. The cold war balance of power shifted, and China tilted toward the U.S, and away from the Soviet Union. Rapprochement opened U.S. trade with China.

Trade with China was an economic bonanza for the globalists. China was an untapped labor market with .86 billion people in 1972, and is the world’s largest population today at 1.43 billion. American corporations could manufacture their goods very cheaply in China, and sell them globally at enormous profits. China’s interests were economic growth and the development of Chinese industry.

Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s Secretary of State and globalist extraordinaire, practiced Realpolitik. Realpolitik is diplomacy based on particular circumstances and practical objectives rather than ideology. At the time, America was looking for an immediate end to the Vietnam War, and cheap labor for quality, precision manufacturing. China was looking forward to their long-range future. The problem with Realpolitik is its focus on immediate circumstances and short-term gains. It seriously undervalues the power of ideological commitments and strategic long-term gains.

Chairman Mao established a long-term system of economic development that required foreign investments in China, and partnering with the Communist Chinese central government. So, while American companies were busy making huge immediate profits, the Chinese were busy stealing our technology and innovation for their long-range plans.

China’s Cultural Revolution was a murderous reeducation effort, and the death toll remains a classified state secret. The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, an anti-communist organization created in 1993 by an Act of Congress, estimates the death toll of communism at 100,000,000. The purpose of the Memorial Foundation is “educating Americans about the ideology, history, and legacy of communism.” The Foundation is an abject failure. It simply cannot compete with the anti-American dumbed down K-12 education, the university propaganda, and the globalist mainstream media indoctrination.

You think the American Cultural Revolution cannot succeed in America? Think again.

Obama promised to fundamentally transform America. His eight years of job-killing economic policies sent American manufacturing to China and weakened America. His eight years of political correctness, moral relativity, and historical revisionism supported the anti-American, Marxist-Leninist propaganda indoctrinating our children through Common Core. The first casualty of freedom is always free speech. The colluding globalist Internet behemoths are curating and censoring news with impunity. They are even censoring the President of the United States! The mainstream media defends China and advances the radical leftist anti-American, Marxist-Leninist narrative.  Why?

The globalists need the social chaos created by the radical leftists, particularly Antifa and BLM, to make the country ungovernable in hopes of defeating Trump in November. Here is the problem.

While Kissinger was busy congratulating himself on opening trade with China, and the globalists were busy congratulating themselves on the profitability of exploiting China’s cheap labor markets, China was quietly pursuing its China Dream of becoming the premier global superpower by 2049, the 100 year anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. The China Dream, a 2010 book written by military strategist Chinese Colonel Liu, advised against antagonizing the United States. “The competition between China and the United States will not take the form of a world war or a cold war. . . .It will be like a protracted ‘marathon.’ China’s Hundred-Year Marathon will be a struggle for supremacy over economics, trade, currency, resources and geopolitical alignments.”

What better way for China to win the hundred-year marathon than to support the American Cultural Revolution with ideological, material, and financial support for Marxist-Leninist Antifa and BLM. The 279 globalist companies that manufacture and/or do business in China are supporting the insurrection with the fiction that America is a white supremacist country of institutionalized racism. The vulgar “virtue-signaling” actions like the National Basketball Association’s decision to paint Black Lives Matter on the court floor, and the National Football League’s decision to sing the “Black National Anthem” are corporate complicity in the American Cultural Revolution.

The globalist elite and the Communist Chinese have common cause to defeat Trump in November. Their shared objective is to install a pro-Chinese, radical leftist Democrat, like Joe Biden, in the oval office.

Today’s American Cultural Revolution is not Orwellian, it is made in China.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Not All Black Lives Matter to Black Lives Matter

A Deeper Look at Black Lives Matter and Its Impact

Black Nationalist Fresno killer member of Black Lives Matter

VIDEO: The Vortex — Some Black Lives Matter

RELATED VIDEOS:

The Russian Origins of Black Neo-Marxism.

Armed Black Marxists swarm innocent family’s car — Then shoot and kill their 8 year-old daughter….

De-Americanizing America

Inconceivably, ever greater circles of Americans seem swept up in a movement bent on jettisoning a paradigm that brought resounding success, while enthusiastically embracing one that wrought failure and deprivation wherever implemented

Africa has the fastest-growing number of immigrants in the United States, according to …US Census Bureau data…The number of African migrants grew at a rate of almost 50% from 2010 to 2018. This is more than double the growth rate of migration to the US from Asia, South America or the Caribbean.—African migration to the United States is the fastest-rising, Quartz-Africa, Oct 14, 2019.

Nation-wide protests weeks after George Floyd’s murder turned into a movement to destroy a nation. Parading as an attack on racial injustice, the movement has turned into an obliteration of history…Whether they come for statues today or people tomorrow, the goal of any extremist movement is to rewrite the narrative by obliterating any other narrative. The goal of this current movement is no different. It isn’t just to level racial injustice; it’s to level America–Shireen Qudosi ,. The Movement to Destroy a Nation, June 24, 2020.

For well over the last half-century, the USA has arguably been the most remarkable—and certainly the most powerful and prosperous—country on the face of the globe—a magnet for immigrants around the world, wishing to partake in the material plenty and political and intellectual liberty it can provide.

In many ways, it has been an inspiring—if not unblemished—model, showing how widely disparate societal elements can be synthesized into a functioning and cohesive entity, welding broad ethnic diversity, social tolerance, religious freedom, and individual liberties into a binding sense of national identity, that helped propel a highly effective and inclusive socio-political unit.

Indeed, in a relatively short space of time (in historical terms), it quickly overtook older and more established nations in Europe, outstripping them with regard to political power, military prowess and economic prosperity.

In essence, this success was fueled by an ethos of rugged individualism, self-reliance and personal responsibility. It fostered a sense of national exceptionalism and propelled it to rarely surpassed heights of achievement in virtually every field of human endeavor.

Doctrine of endeavor vs. Doctrine of envy

Yet now, almost inconceivably, we watch, as across the country seemingly ever greater circles of Americans seem swept up in a movement bent on jettisoning a paradigm that brought such resounding success, while enthusiastically embracing one that has wrought failure and deprivation wherever its implementation has been attempted: From Venezuela of today and Chile and Argentina of yesteryear, via pre-Thatcher UK (with omnipotent labor unions, soaring inflation and unemployment—“stagflation”—precipitating the need for an emergency IMF bailout) to the collapse and breakup of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw pact bloc, under the crushing poverty it brought to the citizens of the USSR and its East European allies.

It is a movement that has supplanted a doctrine of endeavor with a doctrine of envy—whereby success and achievement of others that surpass that of themselves are not perceived as a product of effort and enterprise, of toil and talent, of diligence and determination. Instead, it is being portrayed as ill gotten fruits of cunning and corruption, mendacity and malfeasance, discrimination and duplicity.

The purported rationale for the movement is opposition to ongoing institutionalized discrimination against non-White minorities in the US, particularly Black Americans. The banner, around which its members rally, is the alleged inherent privilege enjoyed by Whites in the US at the expense of other ethnic groups, and its battle cry, urging action, is to purge the ostensible prevalence of enduring “White supremacy”.

Destruction as a means to achieve equality?

It is a movement that has coopted destruction as a means to achieve equality. For it is only by destroying what some have, and others do not, that the gaping gap, between those allegedly unfairly privileged and those commensurately unfairly deprived, can be narrowe..

There are, of course, myriad examples of impressive accomplishment and success by non-White minorities, including Blacks, that are difficult to reconcile with the accusation of perennial and pervasive prejudice and ubiquitous denial of opportunity from ethnicities with darker skin-tones.

Thus, not only has a Black American been elected (and reelected) to the highest office in the country, but Blacks have reached the pinnacle of achievement in both public and professional spheres. Indeed, Black Americans have served as the Head of the US Military; as Sectaries of State, as Attorneys-General, as National Security Advisors and as US Ambassadors to the UN, and in numerous cabinet positions including as Secretary of Homeland Security, Education, Energy, Commerce, Labor, Transportation, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development in both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Hundreds of Black Americans have reached the most senior rank of General (in the US Army and Airforce), and Admiral (in the US Navy), commanding thousands of troops (including White Americans), ordering them into combat and the possible sacrifice of their very lives.

Black participation and representation

In the legislature, while it is true that Black Americans are significantly under represented in the Senate (only 3 out of 100), in the House of Representatives they comprise almost 12% of the members, closely reflecting their percentage in the total population.

Moreover, these numbers should be viewed against the backdrop of the unfolding development in the make-up of Congress. Indeed, for the last two decades, there has been a steady increase in the ethnic/racial diversity—with the 2020 Congress being the most racially and ethnically diverse ever.


According to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Congressional Research Service, 116 lawmakers today are nonwhite. This represents an 84% increase over the 107th Congress of 2001-03, which had 63 minority members.

Black Americans have excelled—arguably, have dominated—the entertainment and sports industry, and have been admired—even, idolized—by millions, including White Americans, accumulating fortunes most can only dream of.

Dozens of Black actors and artists have won Hollywood’s highest honor, The Academy Award (aka The Oscar) and many more were nominees for the award.

At the state level, there is a long list of non-White Americans—including Black Americans—who have been elected to the top two gubernatorial positions of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor across a wide range of states, on behalf of both the Democratic and the Republican party.

Black mayors and police chiefs

At the municipal level, 39 of the 100 largest cities in the country, have elected Black mayors. In 2020, Black Americans serve as mayor in almost 40 cities with a population of over 40,000, almost 45% of them in cities with White majorities (including Washington DC, Chicago and Dallas).

Significantly, Black Americans have, paradoxically—the less charitable might say, perversely—over the decades, voted consistently to sustain the rule of the Democratic politicians, who brought decades of deprivation, delinquency and decay to the cities they controlled. Indeed, all of the cities designated as the ten most dangerous in the USA—with the sole exception of one (Indianapolis)—have been under the almost total dominance of mayors (a good number of them Black Americans), affiliated with the Democratic party—seemingly dooming themselves to an ongoing cycle of peril, penury and privation.

Blacks make up the second largest ethnic group in police forces nation-wide, comprising almost 13%, closely mirroring the proportion of Blacks in the total population. Some sources estimate Black participation in law enforcement at 15% , higher than the share of Blacks in the overall US population.

Significantly, in both Minneapolis and Seattle, the cities in which the incidents of police slayings of Black men sparked the current uproar, the police chiefs were Black officers, Medaria Arradondo and Carmen Best,serving under Democrat-affiliated mayors, Jacob Frey and  Jenny Durkan.

 “White supremacy” doctrine sits uneasily with the facts.

It is difficult to reconcile allegations of anti-Black prejudice with the evident enthusiasm of Black Africans to make their way to the US. Indeed, according to the US Census Bureau, Africa has the fastest-growing number of immigrants to the US. Thus, the number of African migrants reportedly grew at a rate of almost 50% from 2010 to 2018—more than double the growth rate of migration to the US from Asia, South America or the Caribbean.

Moreover, the claim of white supremacy sits even more uneasily when one analyzes the socio-economic performance of other non-white ethnic minorities, who regularly do better than the national average in terms of income and educational qualifications.

According to a 2017 Pew Research Center analysis, The U.S. Asian population does well on measures of economic well-being compared with the U.S. population as a whole…

Earlier Pew studies show that American Japanese, Korean, Filipinos and Chinese all significantly surpass the national average for household income, and attainment of higher education.

Perhaps of particular note are the Indian Americans, arguably the most successful ethnic group in the US, with a median household income almost 90% higher than the median income for the general American population. Likewise, an Indian American is almost two and a half times more likely to have a university education, almost twice as likely for a bachelor’s degree and almost four times for an advanced degree. Similarly, Indian Americans were less than half as likely to live in poverty as is the case for the general US population.

Given the fact that Indian Americans are discernably non-White (probably more so than most other ethnic minorities), it is hard to square their impressive success with a doctrine of ubiquitous “White Supremacy” and pervasive bigotry against non-Whites.

 Redefining racism—to include non-racism?

Confronted by the myriad examples of non-White Americans’ success and access to positions of power, “White Supremacy” theorists have had to regroup and redraw the battle lines by restructuring the definition of racism.

This has led to inserting into the public debate terms like “systemic racism” and distinctly oxymoronic epithets like “color blind racism”.

Incredibly, within the framework of these “intellectual constructs” (for want of a better word), racism was no longer a precondition for… racism.

Indeed, this has birthed a genre of publications such as a book bearing the perplexing—seemingly self-contradictory—title of “Racism Without Racists”, which seems to imply that things exist even though they do not—or at least, their constituent elements do not. Thus, according to one review, the book “helps us to understand … the persistence of a color-coded system of inequality, even though most whites insist that race is no longer relevant”.

The fundamental assumption underlying “systemic racism” and “color-blind racism” is that, even without formally explicit, institutionalized provisions for racial discrimination (or even without intentional and conscious informal prejudices), overarching societal systems/structures embody enduring ethno-racial biases.  These biases are the precipitate  of historical events and processes, and operate to obstruct egalitarian pan-ethnic opportunity for socio-economic advancement.

Thus, every adverse encounter experienced by Black Americans can be ascribed to some element of “systemic racism” lingering on from bygone days in an essentially “White Privilege”-oriented culture.

The problem with the “systemic/color-blind racism” proposition is it that it can explain everything…and nothing.

After all, it can account for every failure of Black Americans, on the one hand and for none of the successes of other non-White Americans, on the other.

Indeed, to adopt this line of thought would surely compel us to adopt a doctrine of Hindu-Supremacy to explain the extraordinary success of dark-skinned Indian Americans. Or am I missing something here?

The movement to de-Americanize America

The notion of “systemic racism”, fed by the belief that persistent remnants of “White Privilege”—even “White Supremacy”–permeate the very fabric of American society, frequently determining the outcome of a wide range of societal interactions, mandate the need to question the very foundations of the national ethos.

After all, it was—according to the “Systemic Racism” narrative—those foundations that fostered, or at least facilitated, the onerous and oppressive obstacles that obstruct Black advancement and achievement today. So, in order to obviate those obstacles, the societal foundations must be radically changed, which inevitably calls for the discrediting of the value and merit of core elements of that national ethos.

Accordingly, manifestly racial neutral ideas must be tainted with pejorative racist shades. Thus, concepts such as individualism; objectivity and perfectionism (aspiring for excellence) are being branded as elements comprising “White Supremacy Culture” whose removal/replacement is perceived as essential for dismantling racism—and are being inserted as such into school curricula – also see here.

This compulsion to excoriate and eradicate the very elements that made America America, bring us full circle back to the introductory excerpt by Muslim American writer Shireen Qudosi at the start of this essay.  She cautioned that the ongoing nation-wide protests have: “…turned into a movement to destroy a nation. Parading as an attack on racial injustice, the movement has turned into an obliteration of history…Whether they come for statues today or people tomorrow, the goal of any extremist movement is to rewrite the narrative by obliterating any other narrative. The goal of this current movement is no different. It isn’t just to level racial injustice; it’s to level America.

We are left to hope that this shrill warning will not be ignored…or heeded too late.

©All rights reserved.

The Patriotic Tribute: “Why I Stand”

During RFD-TV’s The American presented by DISH, fans were treated to a moving video of Meredith Looney LaMirande‘s poem, “Why I Stand.” Read the complete poem below.

Why I Stand

By: Meredith Looney LaMirande

I  don’t do it out of obligation, I don’t do it because I’m told.

I don’t do it because I was trained, I don’t do it to be bold.

I stand for our National Anthem, because I’m forever grateful to be free.

I stand for the Anthem to respect, those before me.

The broad stripes and bright stars, are symbols of freedom which is rare.

The type of freedom that was won, while bombs burst in the air.

I stand for bravery dating back, to the Revolutionary War.

Battling the greatest army, not knowing what was in store.

I stand for the heroes who stormed Normandy, that fatal day.

Accepting that the ultimate sacrifice, might be the price to pay.

I stand for our twin towers, as a tribute that we have not forgotten.

I salute our military for ending, our fear that was Bin Ladin.

Our children are born, with rights and freedoms at birth.

How blessed are we to live, in the greatest nation on Earth.

Where democracy is our foundation, and there is opportunity for all.

A country free from oppression, our Lady Liberty stands tall.

A first class military whose dedication, is second to none.

Patriots ready to perform, when the war must be won.

We have wounded warriors who would return, if only they could, Doing more for this country, than any single person should.

Heroes have fallen, their caskets draped in red, white and blue. Stand up, sing along, their lives were given for you.

So as long as the star spangled banner, yet wave.

I stand for the land of the free, and the home of the brave.


Music in this video

Learn more

Listen ad-free with YouTube Premium

Song: Light Through Water (12549)-15738
Artist: Steven Gutheinz
Album: Man on Wire
Licensed to YouTube by AdRev for a 3rd Party (on behalf of Music Bed (Music Bed)); AdRev Publishing, ASCAP, and 2 Music Rights Societies

©All rights reserved.

Abortionism – Cult of Death

What is “abortionism”? When you search the word “abortionism” on Google, you get a paltry 7,010 results and not a whole lot of substance. Even as I type the term into my word processor, a squiggly red “error” line appears underneath it telling me it’s not a word. Yet, abortionism is very real. It is my purpose today to introduce you to abortionism and raise my warning voice against this evil.

In a brilliant 2014 article for LifeSiteNews, one of the premier sources for pro-life news, Jonathon Van Maren gave us this description of abortionism:

““Abortionism” is essentially a philosophy that raises abortion to a sacred status, above all other democratic principles.

“. . . Abortion’s now-sacred status is symptomatic of something far more sinister: the sweeping success of the Sexual Revolution. So-called “sexual rights” are now considered to be the most important “rights” our society has, and take precedence over all other rights, regardless of how fundamental they are.”

Abortionism is part and parcel of a creed that places sex on an altar. For adherents, sex and self-gratification is a religion. Anything connected with sex, such as “sexual rights” – of which abortion ranks first – is considered sacrosanct. “My body, my choice” has become their mantra. And abortion is their highest sacrament. The deluded parishioners of this death cult view any opposition to abortion-on-demand and the hedonistic culture that necessitates it as an attack on their core beliefs.

This sycophantic assembly of abortion-lovers is oblivious to the fact that they are imitating the cultures of the past which sacrificed precious babies to pagan gods. In my article “Moloch’s Modern Children,” I wrote:

“Abortion is nothing if not child sacrifice. It is perhaps more systematized and sanitized by impersonal medical jargon than its ancient counterpart, but the result is the same – the mass slaughter of infants. Whereas the heathen peoples of the past sacrificed their children to false gods and idols for religious purposes, we sacrifice our children on the altar of political ideology. . . .

“Truly, abortion is modern human sacrifice disguised in medical terminology and deceptively euphemistic language. It is just as grotesque and cruel today as when the heathens did it anciently. . . .

“Abortion is infanticide, plain and simple. It is our modern-day version of public ritual sacrifice. We don’t sacrifice our children to Moloch by making them “pass through the fire” (2 Kings 23:10), but we do sacrifice them in murder facilities known as abortion clinics. We don’t burn them to death, but we do rip their little skulls apart and suck out their brains, inject them with fatal chemicals, snip their spinal cord, leave them in freezers to die, or cut them apart while still alive in order to harvest their organs. How are we any different than the pagan peoples of the past? If anything, we are worse because we deny that our actions are wrong and turn a blind eye to the gruesome ways in which our children are butchered.”

Like the Hebrews of the past in their times of wickedness, modern peoples sacrifice their children to false gods – whether those gods be ideologies, political parties, or religious beliefs. Though we don’t usually burn our children to death before a chanting crowd, we nevertheless butcher them – and then feminists and LGBT maniacs clamor for this “right” in mass protests. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Al Lemmo, a self-declared “pro-life activist” and current Republican congressional candidate running against the radical socialist feminist Muslim Rashida Tlaib, has written some of the most scathing rebukes of abortionism you can find on the net. Lemmo defined abortionism as an “idolatrous cult . . . based in a philosophy of human self-worship.” He further observed:

“Its standard practices are three “abortions”:

“1) The Theological Abortion of the authority of God to grant us our human rights . . . This act of idolatry is at the heart of all sin. It can also be described as idolatrous worship of the human intellect as competent to choose criteria for who deserves the recognition and protection of the human community as persons under the law. This enables the second abortion, which is…

“2) The Mental Abortion, by which the target population, however defined, is mentally relegated to some subhuman category such that anything can be done to it. This step is essential to overcoming the moral obstacles to committing the most egregious violations of other human beings that all human societies prohibit. Conscience is effectively removed from the picture by this process such that the third and final abortion can be done. This is…

“3) The Physical Abortion of lives or liberties by some form of murder, enslavement, plunder or bodily violation. In the case of prenatal child-slaying it is literally [a] living human sacrifice (abortion rites) to the idols this nation has come to worship (money, power, reputation, convenience, unrestricted sexual expression, etc.).”

The self-worship premise of abortionism brings to mind a statement from the ex-communist Whittaker Chambers. In his exposé Witness, Chambers observed:

“Communism is what happens when, in the name of Mind, men free themselves from God” (Whittaker Chambers, Witness, xxxvii).

As will be discussed later, the plague of abortion – modern human sacrifice – has been promoted most fervently by the Marxists. But in a broader sense, abortionism, hedonism, feminism, and all other selfish, me-centered ideologies, are a result of man’s rejection of God. This amalgam of Devilish philosophies is a complete repudiation of reality and nature. It is a rebellion against the very notion of eternal law and order!

Abortionism is a rejection of God and, with Him, a rejection of moral laws. The creed deifies man – though not unborn humans, apparently. It negates all just laws and the decrees of the Constitution. It abolishes the notion promulgated in the Declaration of Independence that we have certain natural rights from our Creator, such as the right to life. It completely dismisses the basis of Western civilization as incorrect and instead embraces the might-makes-right barbarism of the past.

I cannot emphasize this too strongly. And so at the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me restate these points. As Americans, it is particularly crucial that we understand that abortionism strikes at the heart of everything that made our Republic great and that those who promote it are inherently anti-American. Abortionism is not merely another lifestyle – it is alien and hostile to Americanism. It is incompatible with our traditional culture and societal system. The United States was founded on the idea of eternal law. Our nation’s first law, first creed, and first public declaration proclaims that we are all “endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It is to “secure these rights, [that] Governments are instituted among Men.” The U.S. government was brought into being to protect life and all that a free existence entails!

Americanism, at its core, is based on the concept that there is a God, that the universe is governed by immutable laws, that human beings are bound by those laws, and that the primary purpose of individuals forming civil societies and erecting governments is to better secure those rights and defend against those who would destroy them. Abortionists, by default, are at open war with the first of all rights, the right of life, and with our Constitution which guarantees this right. The malicious destruction of innocent human life, therefore, is an attack upon God’s laws, Christian culture, the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Americanist philosophy.

In another editorial, Al Lemmo wrote the following about this vile death cult and further explained why it is incompatible with the American Freedom philosophy, rule of law, and Christian civilization:

“Abortionism is the world’s oldest and most destructive cult. Its central dogma, unchanged through millennia, has held that the fundamental and inalienable rights to life, liberty and property are not rights at all but conditional grants that may be terminated or aborted at any time on the basis of whatever criteria those who have the power to do the aborting choose to recognize. Any portion of the human community may be summarily excluded from recognition and even destroyed based on these criteria. The criteria may include race, color, creed, national origin, class, sex, abilities and birth.

“The Abortionite dogma is totally opposed to that of the originally established “religion” of America which was an inclusive philosophy of unconditional and intrinsic human rights. The only criterion for inclusion was to be a living member of the human species, born or unborn. I choose to call this philosophy “Intrinsicism”. The Abortionite dogma is then an extreme subset of a philosophy that can be called “Extrinsicism”, or the belief that fundamental human rights derive from extrinsic human sources rather than being inherent with each individual.

“The extremism of the Abortionite lies in his willingness to destroy (or abort) the fundamental human rights of those he has refused to grant recognition or personhood. . . .

“Regardless of exclusionary criterion, the central dogma and guiding philosophy of Abortionism – that rights are granted to powerless people by powerful people rather than intrinsic with every individual – remains intact from one sect to the next. The reverence for power, especially the power to decide whose lives and liberties may be destroyed, has always been the common thread among all Abortionites. . . .

“The first objective of any Abortionite campaign has been to breach the wall of separation between freedom and oppression (or civilization and barbarianism) which is the philosophical foundation of a free or civilized society. This wall is the philosophy of Intrinsicism. Once the wall is breached by compromising the integrity of the philosophy that protects life and liberty, all the criteria of the various Abortionite sects then compete on an equal basis because they are justified in principle.

“Abortionism is humanity’s original false religion . . . Eternal vigilance is the price of keeping Abortionism in check, yet it has such an amazing capacity to evade detection, mutate and adapt itself to any culture, that it has continued to plague humanity, even infecting a society as dedicated to human rights as our own in epidemic proportions.”

We can debate some of Lemmo’s definitions perhaps, but there is no debating the fact that the death cult of abortionism is hostile to everything America has traditionally stood for – Faith, Families, and Freedom. It is inimical to the rights declared in our founding documents. It is antithetical to the Christian norms that have undergirded our society for centuries. It is an offensive, perverse, murderous ideology born in and suckled on blood. The voices of millions of infants cry out to the God who gave them life against this ritualized slaughter.

The Lord anciently said “all they that hate me love death” (Proverbs 8:36). It is an eternally true proverb. Those in rebellion against the Lord’s laws in our day are part of a massive death cult. Communism is the ultimate murder cult and all those who support and tolerate the socialist/communist ideology – which advocates abortion as a “human right” – hate the Lord and love death.

In 1971, the great religious leader Spencer W. Kimball took to the pulpit to admonish society for adopting hedonistic practices. He spoke of the lax sexual norms that lead to ideologies like abortionism and how these trends destroy families and will eventually upend our entire society. He stated:

“Men and women are “lovers of their own selves.” They boast in their accomplishment. They curse. They blaspheme. Another sin is disobedience of children to parents and parents’ disobedience to law. Many are without the natural affection, which seems to be eroding family life as they seek to satisfy their own selfish wants.

“There are said to be millions of perverts who have relinquished their natural affection and bypassed courtship and normal marriage relationships. This practice is spreading like a prairie fire and changing our world. They are without “natural affection” for God, for spouses, and even for children.

“Paul speaks of continencea word almost forgotten by our world. Still in the dictionary, it means self-restraint, in sexual activities especially. Many good people, being influenced by the bold spirit of the times, are now seeking surgery for the wife or the husband so they may avoid pregnancies and comply with the strident voice demanding a reduction of children. It was never easy to bear and rear children, but easy things do not make for growth and development. But loud, blatant voices today shout “fewer children” and offer the Pill, drugs, surgery, and even ugly abortion to accomplish that. Strange, the proponents of depopulating the world seem never to have thought of continence!

“Libraries are loaded with books with shocking pictures, showing people how to totally satisfy their animal natures, but few books are found on the self-control of continence. With a theory that “life is for sex,” every imagination of the minds of men devises ways to more completely get what they call “sexual fulfillment,” which they demand at the expense of all elsefamily, home, eternal life. There should be from press and lecture platform and pulpit deep and resounding voices urging man to rise above the carnal and rest his mind on things clean and sacred” (President Spencer W. Kimball, “Voices of the Past, of the Present, of the Future,” General Conference, April, 1971).

Yes, society is wrapped up in self-love to the detriment of everything holy and good. People want the benefits of sex without marriage, of intimacy without responsibility, and of pleasure without “burdens” like children. They use devices, pills, and procedures to ensure that they won’t fulfill the highest purpose of sexual intimacy – having children. But of course they’ll happily receive the sexual benefits formerly reserved for marriage! They are so self-absorbed and care only about themselves and their own convenience and pleasure to such an extreme degree that they’re willing to murder their offspring.

Let’s make no bones about it. Abortion is infanticide! It is de facto murder. It is the premeditated destruction of another human being – a little child with fingers, eyes, and a heartbeat. Mortal life begins at conception. In spite of all the propaganda to the contrary, science has conclusively proven this to be the case. With this in mind, we can positively state that elective abortion – which accounts for 99% of all abortions whereas exceptions for rape victims account for less than one percent of procedures – is the willing, deliberate, and unnecessary taking of life and has no place in a free and ordered society.

Feminists and their ilk say “my body, my choice.” But this is not true. It is such an intellectually flimsy argument that every honest person can see through it. In a 2008 sermon, the world-renowned heart surgeon and current president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Russell M. Nelson, spoke of abortion and the “my body, my choice” myth. He said:

“This war called abortion is a war on the defenseless and the voiceless. It is a war on the unborn. This war is being waged globally. Ironically, civilized societies that have generally placed safeguards on human life have now passed laws that sanction this practice. . . .

“. . . Most abortions are performed on demand to deal with unwanted pregnancies. These abortions are simply a form of birth control.

“Elective abortion has been legalized in many countries on the premise that a woman is free to choose what she does with her own body. To an extent this is true for each of us, male or female. We are free to think. We are free to plan. And we are free to do. But once an action has been taken, we are never free from its consequences. . . .

“Yes, a woman is free to choose what she will do with her body. Whether her choice leads to an astronaut’s mission or to a baby, her choice to begin the journey binds her to the consequences of that choice. She cannot “unchoose.”

“When the controversies about abortion are debated, “individual right of choice” is invoked as though it were the one supreme virtue. That could only be true if but one person were involved. The rights of any one individual do not allow the rights of another individual to be abused. In or out of marriage, abortion is not solely an individual matter. Terminating the life of a developing baby involves two individuals with separate bodies, brains, and hearts. A woman’s choice for her own body does not include the right to deprive her baby of lifeand a lifetime of choices that her child would make. . . .

“Life is precious! No one can cuddle an innocent infant, look into those beautiful eyes, feel the little fingers, and kiss that baby’s cheek without a deepening reverence for life and for our Creator. Life comes from life. It is no accident. It is a gift from God. Innocent life is not sent by Him to be destroyed. It is given by Him and is naturally to be taken by Him alone” (President Russell M. Nelson, “Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless,” General Conference, October, 2008).

Life is precious, indeed! Babies are cherished gems trusted into our care. A baby is a “reward” from our Father in Heaven (Psalm 127:3-5). No one has a right to snuff out an innocent life – and especially not for mere convenience sake. No one has a right to destroy another body while erroneously claiming it is their own body. No one has a right to deny nature or escape the consequences of their choices – including the beautiful gift that is a human child. And no unrepentant soul will escape the harsh judgment reserved for those who destroy innocent children.

Yet, despite these seminal truths, the selfish mindset of abortionism is spreading. It is so bad that some spiritually sick women are now getting pregnant just so they can abort their babies in what is nothing more than ritual murder! Despite recent pro-life legal victories, our culture is becoming continuously saturated with the death cult mentality. Life is little valued. The weakest among us are scarcely protected. And far too many otherwise good people are silent, thus becoming complicit in the criminality.

No civilized society, no society that is just, no society that values the rule of law, can allow abortion. It is a plague like slavery. As slavery did, it is tearing our society apart. And what Thomas Jefferson said of slavery applies to abortion:

“And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever” (Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII).

I tremble for America when I think that since the infamous Roe v. Wade decision – an affront to the Bill of Rights’ guarantee of the right of life – over 70 million innocent, defenseless infants have been slaughtered. For context, this is a higher death toll than that accrued at the hands of the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union! It is many times more than all the deaths of American service men in all of our nation’s wars combined! How truly sad it is that more Americans have been killed by their own mothers than at the hands of all our enemies!

One final point should be discussed. Perhaps my readers tire of me mentioning the communists, but out of fidelity to truth, I must do so. In modern times, abortion has been popularized and normalized by the Marxists. Yes, the feminists have been at the forefront of promoting this infanticide as a woman’s “right,” but feminism itself is only part of cultural Marxism and the leading feminists were usually card-carrying members of the Communist Party (and, frequently, anti-Christian Jews). The LGBT movement which also promotes hedonism and abortion was started by a homosexual man named Harry Hay who was, you guessed it, also a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA (he originally married a fellow communist Jewess before divorcing her to pursue his homosexual fantasies). And the Soviet Union was the first nation to legalize abortion-on-demand (as well as no-fault divorce). All of this was introduced to fulfill The Communist Manifesto’s dream of “abolishing the family” and subverting Christian society to make way for global domination by the Marxist state.

It should be startling to Americans do know that we are following in the footsteps of the Soviet Union and adopting the avowed principles of Marxism – the world’s most murderous ideology. Not only did communism slaughter between 100-150 million people in Russia and China alone, but it has the blood of dozens of millions more on its hands through the wars its has started and the practice of abortion is popularized. I sincerely believe we will never win our fight against abortionism as an emerging religion if we do not identify it as a branch of the communism conspiracy. And we will never win that fight unless we acknowledge that communism is Satanism and that Satan is a real being who leads the forces of darkness in the fight against the Son of God. If we are to throw off the shroud of darkness that hangs over us, we must do so with the light of Christ – for only light expels darkness.

We battle, as Paul said, “against powers, against the rulers darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12). What wickedness could be greater than the deliberate mass slaughter of infants? What can be called “darkness” if not the genocide of unborn children being perpetrated in abortion clinics worldwide? What, if not abortionism’s assault on life, can possibly rouse us to stand up in defense of our God-given rights?

We have an option as a society. We can stand up and say, “No more” to those who advocate killing the next generation of Americans or we can continue to allow the slaughter of our infants until the act of killing for convenience so saturates our culture that we begin killing the elderly, the diseased, and others we think encumber our lives. Don’t fool yourself – history cries out that this is exactly where this genocidal road leads.

And so, what will you do? Will you sit silently, making yourself an accessory to this great crime of infant slaughter? Or will you exercise all your avenues for speaking out, swaying minds, and warning your neighbor? And what of President Trump? What is he doing? Does he not understand that when he swore his oath to uphold the Constitution that he also swore to protect our rights, including our right to life, regardless of what a rogue Supreme Court said nearly fifty years ago? Do we, as a People, not understand that Roe v. Wade was an unconstitutional, and, thus, void, opinion by an activist court that abused its authority? Do we, the American People, not understand that no ruling, no law, no decree from any leader is valid and enforceable unless it conforms to the Constitution – a document which defends life? Or do we simply not have the courage to hold our elected representatives accountable for fulfilling their oaths?

I make a plea for everyone to reject the scourge of abortion, to combat the cultish dogma of abortionism, and to only support men for office who will take their oaths to the Constitution seriously and defend our God-given rights. Stand firm against the onslaught of popular opinion – for we are on the Lord’s errand in defending His precious sons and daughters. He gives life not to be destroyed, but to be cherished and protected. As Americans, do your duty and rise in defense of those ideals which made ours the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Defend our Faith, Families, and Freedom against the demonic assault of the Marxist abortionists!

©2020 Zack Strong. All rights reserved.

Americanism vs. Communism

America is being ripped apart by two diametrically opposed worldviews – Americanism and communism. These contending forces are locked in a savage death match. They are so incontrovertibly incompatible that they cannot peacefully coexist. At the end of the day, only one flag will wave over the United States. It’s our duty and mission as freemen to determine which side will prevail.

The American Founding Fathers gave the world a Freedom philosophy unique in human history. No other nation enjoys the heritage of Freedom we enjoy. No other country has the same institutions for securing the blessings of Liberty that we have. No other People centered their society upon the idea of protecting God-given rights like our forefathers here in America. Our Republic, with its unparalleled power, wealth, influence, success, and Freedom, was born with this immortal declaration from the pen of Thomas Jefferson:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”

These simple words declare our People’s commitment to God, to Liberty, and to our mutual Union. Out of their burning desire to secure their God-given rights, our Founding Fathers declared Independence, waged a war against British tyranny, and created the Constitution. However imperfectly we may have implemented these profoundly powerful principles, they have been our guiding light.

After touring the United States nearly a century ago, the famed philosopher G.K. Chesterton made a keen observation:

“The American Constitution . . . is founded on a creed. America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence; perhaps the only piece of practical politics that is also theoretical politics and also great literature. It enunciates that all men are equal in their claim to justice, that governments exist to give them that justice, and that their authority is for that reason just. It certainly does condemn anarchism, and it does also by inference condemn atheism, since it clearly names the Creator as the ultimate authority from whom these equal rights are derived” (G.K. Chesterton, What I Saw in America, 7).

Our American Republic is founded on a creed. To be sure, this creed is political, social, and cultural, but it is also highly religious in nature. Thomas Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration of Independence in fact did not use the term “unalienable Rights.” Rather, it called our rights “sacred and undeniable.” Life, Liberty, property, individual stewardship, and all the things that make life worth living, are indeed sacred.

Significantly, Americans have traditionally viewed their rights as endowments from Almighty God – not as mere privileges granted by government. Alexander Hamilton, for instance, stated:

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power” (Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, February 23, 1775).

Thomas Jefferson confirmed Hamilton’s position when he wrote:

“The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them” (Thomas Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America, 1774).

And John Adams expressed the idea this way:

“I say RIGHTS, for such [the People] have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government, — Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws — Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe.” (John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, 1765).

This fervent belief that rights did not come from government, but from God, formed the basis of the American political and cultural system. Biblical principles, including prominent parts of the civil law revealed to Moses, are tightly interwoven into our federal, state, and local structures of law and justice. In his book The Ten Commandments & their Influence on American Law, William J. Federer detailed the ubiquitous blending of politics and religion during colonial times and throughout most of U.S. history. He noted:

“The belief in a monotheistic God is so basic to America that it is almost unnecessary to discuss. We have to look no further than our National Coinage, National Currency, National Motto, National Anthem, Pledge of Allegiance, Inaugural Addresses, State Constitutions, the wall above the chair of the Speaker of the House, National Monuments, National Day of Thanksgiving Proclamations, etc., to see examples” (William J. Federer, The Ten Commandments & their Influence on American Law: A Study in History, 43).

Out of our ancestors’ reverence for their God-given rights grew a movement to codify Liberty in written documents and to restrain the hand of tyranny by a strict and limited national Constitution. The American People knew that they held all political power and that government is their servant. The Declaration of Independence had made that abundantly clear. Moreover, they knew that they were accountable to God, not to the state, and therefore endeavored to remove government from their lives to the fullest extent possible while still maintaining a civil society with enough strength to secure their collective Freedom.

To fulfill these hopes, the finest American minds came together in Philadelphia in 1787. Carefully, they crafted an instrument capable of preventing usurpation by despots, delegating limited power for specific purposes to government, and retaining to the People and the states the lion’s share of social duties and daily governmental functions. The Constitution which they produced contained a short list of powers that would be delegated by the People to the federal government for particular purposes, such as to repel invasion, put down insurrection, maintain state militias, build postal roads, and to coin money. Beyond this, the government could not go.

The Bill of Rights was later added to safeguard specific fundamental rights, such as the rights of self-defense, peaceable assembly, speech, discrimination, privacy, habeas corpus, due process, and religion. The Bill of Rights serves as a list of “thou shalt nots” to government. The right to keep and bear arms for self-defense against criminals and tyrants, for instance, “shall not” be infringed. Our patriot forefathers loved their Liberty too much to leave anything to chance.

The purpose of the Constitution, as stated in the Preamble, is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” It is the Constitution which activated our forefathers’ hopes and dreams. It is this wise document, so beautifully constructed with checks and balances, a brilliant division of powers, and an almost perfectly limited scope of operations when correctly followed, that truly launched the Republic to greatness. James Madison in fact referred to the Constitution as “the cement of the Union” (James Madison, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1809).

Former British Prime Minister William Gladstone famously called the Constitution “the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man” (Thomas W. Hanford, ed., William Ewart Gladstone: Life and Public Services, 323). It was such a brilliant feat because it was created by honorable men who understood that their rights came from their Creator, that government’s duty was to secure those rights, and that the People justly held all political power and were capable of governing themselves.

These were also men who knew that “Freedom hath been hunted around the globe” and that America was to be Liberty’s final “asylum” (Thomas Paine, Common Sense, February 14, 1776). Not only did early Americans see God as their national Benefactor, but they viewed themselves as chosen instruments in His hands to set the ball of Freedom rolling. For instance, President George Washington remarked:

“[T]he preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people” (George Washington, First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789).

In harmony with their convictions, the patriots of 1776 fought zealously for their rights as if on a holy crusade. They revered George Washington and his fellow Founders nearly as highly as prophets. And the Declaration of Independence and Constitution held a place of sanctity akin to scripture in the American mind. Taken altogether, this Freedom philosophy and the sense of prophetic national destiny that emerged in early America has sometimes been termed the “American Gospel.”

When we speak of “Americanism,” therefore, it is this constitutionally-guaranteed Freedom philosophy, undergirded by formal belief in God and a sense of our People’s special destiny, to which we refer. The “American Gospel” is our true heritage. It is our mission as a People to carry forward the sacred fire of Liberty and protect it from the tumultuous torrents of tyranny.

Unfortunately, we have lost touch with our Founding Fathers’ vision for this great Republic. Their vision of an “Empire of liberty” (Thomas Jefferson to George Rogers Clark, December 25, 1780) has not been taught in schools, heralded by the media, celebrated in the movies, or uttered in the halls of government for generations. Parents have failed to convey a proper love of our Republic to their children. And churches, once the guardians of the sacred flame of Freedom, have become mere mouthpieces for the mantra “obey government.”

As a People, we have let the Constitution collect dust while allowing our public servants to glorify themselves at our expense. We’ve sat silently as our political power has been usurped and our precious rights have been trampled. We’ve allowed the memory of our national heroes – men such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Robert E. Lee – to be denigrated and twisted into something horrid and repulsive while anti-American agitators are held up as icons worthy of emulation. We’ve let a rabid minority of activists foist perversions upon us and our children in the form of the LGBT movement, feminism, and so forth.

Our society has been so thoroughly indoctrinated that it recoils at the terms “American exceptionalism” and “Manifest Destiny.” We become offended by those things which make us characteristically American and which made America great. Our language has been hijacked and the free speech of those who defend traditional values is viciously attacked. Our noble history has been transformed into something “oppressive” and “shameful.” Our culture has become corrupted inside and out. Political correctness taints everything.

Who is responsible for this campaign of mass brainwashing and societal transformation – transformation that causes us to turn inward and condemn our history, belittle our ancestors, hate our institutions, and, ultimately, devour ourselves in tribalistic hostility? The origin of the term “brainwashing” points us in the right direction. In his book Brain-Washing in Red China, Edward Hunter explained:

“The plain people of China have coined several revealing colloquialisms for the whole indoctrination process. With their natural facility for succinct, graphic expressions, they have referred to it as “brain washing” and “brain-changing.”

“Brain-washing became the principal activity on the Chinese mainland when the Communists took over. Unrevealed tens of thousands of men, women, and children had their brains washed. They ranged from students to instructors and professors, from army officers and municipal officials to reporters and printers, and from criminals to church deacons. There were no exceptions as to profession or creed. Before anyone could be considered trustworthy, he was subjected to brain washing in order to qualify for a job in the “new democracy.” Only then did the authorities consider that he could be depended upon, as the official expression is worded, to “lean to one side” (Soviet Russia’s) in all matters, and that he would react with instinctive obedience to every call made upon him by the Communist Party through whatever twists, turns, or leaps policy might take, no matter what the sacrifice. He must fight by all possible means and be ready, too, with the right answer for every contradiction and evasion in Party statements. . . .

“. . . Man has learned not only some of the theoretical processes that go on in a man’s head but also how to direct his thoughts, and to do this in a “democratic group discussion,” in a “self-criticism meeting,” on the operating table, or in the hypnotist’s chamber. The whole field of psychology has broadened to embrace everything that influences thought and attitude, from the first crude publicity put out for a movie actress to Ivy Lee and psychological warfare, and the whole wide range of activities that lies within – in effect, our entire field of modem communications media, from public opinion surveys to aptitude testing. . . .

“The politicians of the world have been quick to seize upon these discoveries in the realm of the brain in order to advance their own objectives. Initially, they worked primitively in the field of propaganda. Then the vast possibilities of psychological warfare, what we call a cold war, dawned upon them. Cold war as a term is unfortunate in one respect. It sets up a line between cold and hot war that exists only on the writing table, not on the field of battle. What actually is meant by cold war is warfare with unorthodox weapons, with silent weapons such as a leaflet, a hypnotist’s lulling instructions, or a self-criticism meeting in Red China” (Edward Hunter, Brain-Washing in Red China, 4, 11-12).

Modern brainwashing is communist in origin. While variations of their tactics have been used throughout time, it was the communists who perfected the art, combined it with modern technology, science, and medicine, and employed it on a global scale. In particular, the unholy alliance between Marxism, psychiatry, and the drug industry threatens to upend our civilization and reduce us to bedlam.

This insidious program of mental and moral transformation – our version of Mao’s Cultural Revolution – is not native to our fertile American soil. Rather, it was imported to the United States by Soviet agents, covertly engrafted upon us, and cunningly cultivated. They first brought political correctness, of which the Encyclopaedia Britannica has noted:

“The term [political correctness] first appeared in Marxist-Leninist vocabulary following the Russian Revolution of 1917. At that time it was used to describe adherence to the policies and principles of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (that is, the party line).”

Brainwashing techniques arrived on our shores soon after political correctness. The purpose of these twin tactics of subversion was and is to convince people to toe the communist line and embrace socialism. Of course, they didn’t refer to it as “the Communist Party line” – they used other terms to disguise their true motives. They preached about “democracy” and “equality,” heaped praise on “diversity,” force fed us the vice of “tolerance” (i.e. toleration of criminality, corruption, and communism), deceptively referred to themselves as “Progressives,” “liberals,” and “social democrats,” and did everything they could to project the failures and abuses that they were guilty of onto America, her People, and her constitutional system, thus inverting reality and confusing our citizenry.

In order to push political correctness and wash Americans’ brains, the social engineers went about convincing us that our history was “shameful,” that our heroes were “villains,” that our principles were “hateful,” that our institutions were “oppressive,” and that our Republic was founded by “bigots.” The current rash of monument-destroying and the ghastly effusion of self-hated and “white guilt” is the long-cultivated fruit of the communist effort to demoralize and indoctrinate our People.

Let’s make something very clear: Communism is not American. It is a hostile, alien ideology that seeks to destroy and then supplant our Amercanist Freedom philosophy. The great statesman J. Reuben Clark, Jr. observed:

“This influence is in leadership largely alien, – in birth, or in tradition, or in training and experience, or possessing alien concepts and alien philosophies. With them are some American-born rebel conspirators. These all form a vast army . . . all ready, able, and willing to take over if their opportunity shall come, or be made” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., October, 7, 1943).

This alien conspiracy is wholly anti-American. It is a parasitical force sapping the lifeblood of our nation. Its values are the opposite of those codified in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. Its principles were forcefully rejected by our ancestors. Its aim is to convert the United States of America into the United States of Soviet America. All their study, planning, and work is aimed at transforming us from Freedom to high-tech feudalism.

In a 1951 article, David O. McKay warned of the attempt to use sophisticated, long-range methods to subvert our country. He wrote:

“More destructive to the spreading of Christian principles in the minds, particularly of the youth, than battleships, submarines, or even bombs, is the sowing of false ideals by the enemy. . . .

“Misrepresentation, false propaganda, innuendos soon sprout into poisonous weeds, and before long the people find themselves victims of a pollution that has robbed them of their individual liberty and enslaved them to a group of political gangsters” (David O. McKay, Salt Lake Telegram, April 26, 1951).

For a very long time, our People have been asleep. We were lulled into a hypnotic trance. We’ve been so beguiled that we didn’t listen when Charles Lindbergh, Henry Ford, Huey Long, Senator Joseph McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, W. Cleon Skousen, Fred Schwarz, Antony C. Sutton, Robert W. Welch, Jr., Bella Dodd, Whittaker Chambers, Louis Budenz, Yuri Bezmenov, and hosts of others in and out of government, attempted to alert us to the creeping dangers of socialism here in America. We failed to pay attention when the FBI, the U.S. House Un-American Activities Committee, and the Reece and Cox Committees, churned out material exposing the communist conspiracy and its backers on Wall Street, in banking, in academia, in Hollywood, in the news media, and in Washington, D.C.

Perhaps some did listen to the warnings, but never acted on them either out of fear or out of being labeled a “conspiracy theorist” or “intolerant” or one of the other smears the communists love to use. The esteemed Ezra Taft Benson made this relevant observation. He said:

“The communists bring to the nations they infiltrate a message and a philosophy that affects human life in its entirety . . . Communists are willing to be revolutionary; to take a stand for this and against that. They challenge what they do not believe in – customs – practices – ideas – traditions. They believe heatedly in their philosophy.

“But our civilization and our people here in America are seemingly afraid to be revolutionary. We are too “broadminded” to challenge what we do not believe in. We are afraid of being thought intolerant – uncouth – ungentlemanly. We have become lukewarm in our beliefs. . . .

“This is a sad commentary on a civilization which has given to mankind the greatest achievements and progress ever known. But it is even a sadder commentary on those of us who call ourselves Christians, who thus betray the ideals given to us by the Son of God Himself. I ask, are we going to permit atheistic communist masters, fellow travelers and dupes to deceive us any longer?” (Ezra Taft Benson, The Red Carpet: Socialism – the Royal Road to Communism, 53-54)

Though written decades ago, Benson’s question is one we must ask today. We must decide how much longer will we allow ourselves to be deceived, lied to, and abused before we stand up, speak out, and take back our country. Can we afford not to be “revolutionary” in the cause of our Freedom? Is it wrong to be radical for Liberty when the alternative is socialist slavery? Was it wrong when the Sons of Liberty became extremists against British tyranny in 1776?

Americans have generally believed that the threats we face are those hiding in the shimmering sands of Arabia or the sweltering jungles of the Pacific. We don’t like to think that the enemy is here, in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in court houses, in our Congress. Yet, that’s precisely where he is! Over a long period of time, as we’ve sat apathetic and distracted by TV, hedonism, political correctness, party politics, and pride, a ruthless cadre of criminals has helped one another rise to fill key positions in our government, media, justice system, military, medicine, universities, and so forth.

This group of gangsters may be called many names, from the “deep state” to the “swamp” to the “globalists.” I simply call them communists, however, because the thing they share in common, regardless of where you find them, whatever outward differences they may have, and whatever sinister organizations they belong to, is their communist ideology. They are committed to internationalism, one-world government, legalized plunder, centralization and collectivization, economic monopolies, humanism, loose morals, political correctness, and so on. In short, the adherents of this global cabal all support the core planks of The Communist Manifesto.

Some try to draw distinctions between the various isms. In particular, they endeavor to separate socialism and communism. Ezra Taft Benson explained the fallacy in their attempts:

“It is high time that we recognize creeping socialism for what it really is – a Red Carpet providing a royal road to communism. . . .

“This is a most important lesson for all of us to learn, namely, that the communists use the socialists to pave the way for them wherever possible. This is why communists and socialists are often found supporting each other, collaborating together and fighting for the same goals.

“The paramount issue today is freedom against creeping socialism. . . .

“. . . the worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have himself openly identified with the work of the communists who are generally feared and despised. . . .

“We must ever keep in mind that collectivized socialism is part of the communist strategy. Communism is fundamentally socialism. We will never win our fight against communism by making concessions to socialism. Communism and socialism, closely related, must be defeated on principle” (Ezra Taft Benson, The Red Carpet: Socialism – the Royal Road to Communism, 65, 69, 75).

The blunt reality is that socialism is communism with a smiley face. Karl Marx was instrumental in launching the First International, forerunner of today’s world-wide Socialist International (SI). George Bernard Shaw and the others who created Fabian Socialism, which has utterly devastated our nation, were ardent followers of Marx. Red China openly promotes socialism. Russia, after the fake “fall” of the USSR, proclaimed it was instituting more socialism and getting back to its Leninist roots. And so it goes, with communists invariably supporting socialism, and socialism invariably leading to communism.

When you compare the principles and inevitable outcomes of socialism, communism, social democracy, democratic socialism, Maoism, Marxism-Leninism, or the more vague “statism,” “globalism,” and “collectivism,” you realize that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them. They all lead to the destruction of Faith, Families, and Freedom and to the establishment of state domination over human beings. Socialism and communism must be seen as two wings of the same ravenous bird of prey and defeated by any means necessary.

America is long overdue for another great awakening. Thankfully, the blatant attacks on our rights using the Coronavirus sham as a pretext, as well as the violent rioting in our cities with its bestial destruction of our national monuments, has awakened many to the awful situation we find ourselves in. Many more need to awaken, however, if we are to tip the scales back in favor of Freedom.

In order to accomplish this great awakening, one thing we can do is to point the finger of blame in the right direction. No longer should we point to Jihadists in Afghanistan or to vaguely-defined “terrorists” as our primary enemy. Rather, the finger of blame must be pointed inward. And not merely to the Democrats, but to people of any party or persuasion who fail to uphold the Constitution, who excuse and justify the violence on our streets, who promote cultural corrosion, who advocate greater government centralization, who denounce the godly principles America was founded upon, or who promote any form of socialism.

Dr. John Coleman encouraged us to cut out the cancer within our society above and beyond all else. He wrote:

“The greatest danger arises from the mass of traitors in our midst. Our Constitution warns us to be watchful of the enemy within our gates . . . The UNITED STATES is where we MUST begin our fight to turn back the tide threatening to engulf us, and where we must meet, and defeat these internal conspirators” (John Coleman, Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, 30).

From Black Lives Matter agitators to Antifa thugs to turncoats on the Supreme Court to LGBT activists to oath-breakers at all levels of government, it’s time to fight the enemy within. We can’t long endure a situation where 97 members of congress belong to the openly Marxist Congressional Progressive Caucus – the largest single faction in the government. We can’t long endure a situation where governors allow communist revolutionaries to take over city buildings, police precincts, and residential areas, declaring them autonomous zones where U.S. law doesn’t apply. We can’t survive if we allow thugs to vandalize and destroy memorials to our fallen soldiers and monuments to our past heroes with impunity. We can’t last when we empty our prisons of hardened criminals while arresting mothers playing in the park with their children or people who rightly refuse to wear a face mask. We can’t endure in an atmosphere where anything you say that doesn’t agree with the communist agenda is labeled “racist” and “hateful” by the media. None of this is sustainable if our goal is to be free.

Until we wake up and realize the stakes of this war we’re engaged in, we don’t have a prayer of winning. Until we point the finger of blame in the right direction and square off against the traitors among us, we will forever lose ground. We would do well to recall words written during the height of the Cold War:

“Let’s get one thing straight at the very beginning. International communism is the self-avowed enemy of every loyal American. It has declared war against us and fully intends to win. The war in which we are engaged is total. Although its main battlefields are psychological, political and economic, it also encompasses revolution, violence, terror and limited military skirmishes. If we should lose this war, the conquering enemy’s wrath against our people and our institutions will result in one of the greatest blood-baths in all history. Call it a “cold war” if it makes you feel better, but our freedom and our very lives are the stakes of this contest” (Ezra Taft Benson, An Enemy Hath Done This, 165).

As precarious as our situation is, we haven’t lost yet. We have a choice. We can choose Americanism with its Freedom philosophy and reliance on God or we can side with communism and its unparalleled system of Satanic oppression. We can uphold the Constitution or we can sustain The Communist Manifesto. We can throw our lot in with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson or we can fly to the standard of Marx and Lenin. There’s no middle ground; neutrality is not an option.

With all her flaws and internal spasms, America is still the greatest nation on earth. We are still the hope of the world. We are the only thing holding back the full tsunami of communistic tyranny from sweeping over the globe. We have the potential to yet realize our forefathers’ vision of America as a shining city on a hill – an asylum for Liberty. I hope and pray that we will do the right thing, utterly purge communism from our society, and reclaim our heritage as Americans.

© 2020 Zack Strong – All Rights Reserved

MUST WATCH: Devastating anti-Biden ad titled “Abolished”

Team Trump posted the following comments and video titled “Abolished” on Twitter:

Joe Biden’s allies are doing everything they can to Defund the Police.

If you call 911, who will answer the phone?

You won’t be safe in Joe Biden’s America.

©All rights reserved.