Posts

Can Socialist Monopoly compete with Capitalist Monopoly?

We all know how the game of Capitalist Monopoly works: one player wins and the rest lose, at least until the next round. But what if you are a permanent loser? That is unfair. The most obvious solution to this crisis is to remake the rules in your favor.

Brilliant minds among the loser community have made repeated attempts to make new rules that would allow them to become winners. They mostly ended up with appointing one of the players to be a dictator (usually themselves), who promises to redistribute everything on the board equally so that everyone wins. The dictator appoints assistants and together they become the government. For this plan to work, the government must forcibly take over all the property on the game board. Thus the government becomes a monopolist and the sole big winner. All the others become perpetual lesser winners: equal among themselves, but not equal to the government and its officials. Let’s broadly describe it as Socialist Monopoly.

But not all the state-run rental properties on the board are equal, so the game goes on. Now the selection of winners becomes wholly dependent on a player’s personal relationship with the government. Those who are not the relatives or good friends with the government, become losers. The latter can still stay in the game by participating in an intricate system of bribes, kickbacks, and exchange of favors. Those unwilling to play by these rules become the ultimate losers and are despised by everybody. Usually they are the people who would previously win in Capitalist Monopoly.

When all the redistribution has been completed, Socialist Monopoly becomes a really boring and tedious game. The government deflects the growing dissatisfaction by adding a new rule: all players must blame the former winners of Capitalist Monopoly for sabotage and obstructionism. After all the said former winners quit and leave the table, the interest in the game is sustained with the help of cheap vodka, which also helps to suppress mutual resentment and hatred. The game ends when all players, including the government, lose all motivation to go on, or fall under the table into a puddle of their own vomit, whichever comes first.

The most common explanation for the failures of Socialist Monopoly is that the brilliant minds of the loser community simply haven’t got it right yet. This gives everyone hope that someday there will appear a sharper, more brilliant loser who will get it right.

And so the dream lives on, about a game where everyone can be an equal winner while still being able to enjoy the game without ending up hating everyone else, sending the most successful players to jail, and falling under the table in a drunken stupor.

Thus, the efforts to reinvent Capitalist Monopoly never stop. Below are just some failed examples. Will you take the challenge and create a game of Socialist Monopoly that actually works?

Progressive Monopoly

Monopoly_Socialist.jpg
Communist Monopoly

Monopoly_Communist.jpg
Socialist Monopoly with lines – Polish style

Monopoly_Communist_Poland.jpgAnd so on…

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire originally appeared on The Peoples Cube.

Bolshevic Bernie Sanders beats Hillary Clinton 42-4 among Texas Gamers

SAN ANTONIO, Texas /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — NAVGTR CORP. — Young voters turned out in droves to support Bernie Sanders in San Antonio.  A mock Iowa caucus was held at the Penny Arcade Expo South (PAXS), a gaming festival drawing tens of thousands.

The caucus event was titled, “Decision 2016: Vote on Game ‘War of Awards’ or Donald Trump,” organized by the National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers (NAVGTR) for the Official PAXS panel schedule.

A 450-seat room was packed with 332 caucus-goers, clearly dominated by Democratic voters with only 24 self-declared Republican voters.  “All night there was a clear enthusiasm gap between those who were willing to climb over people in their rows of seats and those who chose to sit and watch impartially,” said academy president Thomas Allen.  “The plan was to clear half the room of chairs to have a large open space, but time was working against us.”

Among the caucus-goers, about 73 people voted publicly for the presidential candidates.  Forty-two Bernie Sanders supporters flooded the voting floor, while four and three people stood for Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley, respectively.

Among Republicans, Ted Cruz won with 8 votes.  Rand Paul was a close second with 7 votes.  Marco Rubio held in the top three with 5 votes.  Jeb Bush received two votes.  Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump received 1 vote each.

Game players also expressed who they thought should win the industry D.I.C.E. and Game Developers Choice Awards.  The crowd established fan-favorite front-runners such as “The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt” for Achievement in Character (DICE), “Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain” for Game Design (GDC), “Undertale” for Innovation (GDC), and “Ori and the Blind Forest” developer Moon Studios for Best Debut (GDC).

In the final vote, “Fallout 4” won Game of the Year with an estimated 32 votes.  Even among gamers, supporters were therefore more able to consolidate top-tier votes behind Bernie Sanders than any one video game:

Presenters included Larry Asberry Jr., Vanessa Fernandez, Colby Sites, Justen Andrews, Geoff Mendicino, and George Wood.

The National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers announces its own nominations February 9.  Entries have been extended to a February 1 deadline.  NAVGTR will caucus again at South by Southwest (SXSW) and the International Game Developers Association (IGDA) Networking Event on March 15, 2016.  Subscribe at navgtr.org for updates.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Four Types of Socialists

VIDEO: INFILTRATION — Thousands of young Communists have infiltrated Catholic seminaries

TRANSCRIPT:

During the early years of Communism in the 1920s and 30s, the evil was being spread worldwide as the Blessed Mother had predicted at Fatima in 1917. Communist parties were being formed in various European countries and in American cities as well. They were already attempting to upset the political and cultural order.

alice_von_hildebrand-255x362

Alice von Hildebrand

But what only a very small number of people knew was that the top dogs of Communism had already released the hounds on the Church. The carefully organized plan was to recruit young men who were loyal Communists and get them placed in seminaries. This was carried out by various agents during the 1920s and 30s.

Fast forward 30 years to the 1960s, and the fruits were beginning to be seen. Learned, dedicated, faithful men and women in the Church were looking around and fretting, not sure from what framework they should understand the demolition of the Faith they were witnessing. At one point, Pope Paul VI even said that it appeared the Church was in auto-demolition.

One of those deeply distressed was a refugee from Hitler’s Germany, the brilliant theologian Dietrich von Hildebrand. He and his wife Alice were sitting down one day with a friend, a woman by the name of Bella Dodd. Bella Dodd had been received back into the Catholic Church by Abp. Fulton Sheen in April of 1952.

This particular day, von Hildebrand was lamenting the state of affairs in the Church and said “It seems like the Church has been infiltrated.” To the shock of both Dietrich and Alice, Bella Dodd, former Communist agent, confessed that it had been infiltrated — and she had been one of the Communists ordered to organize it.

Read more.

Please watch this excerpt of the interview with Dr. Alice von Hildebrand:

RELATED ARTICLE: Politics and Pope Francis: What is the role of the Catholic Church and the State?

EDITORS NOTE: The Vortex has more of their interview with Dr. von Hildebrand available for Premium viewers. They are offering a 15-day free trial. Please consider signing, up at no cost, and watch the whole von Hildebrand interview. You may also explore all the other programs — hundreds of hours.

Notorious Pro-Bernie Sanders PAC Strikes Back with Political Satire Comic Series

bernie sanders comic book coverWASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire/ – Hands down Democratic Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders is leading in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls, which may have Hillary Clinton’s team on the edge of their seat. Nonetheless, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) remains abundant with support from a political committee Americans Socially United that started this time a year ago before he announced his official candidacy for the presidential race.

Americans Socially United Director Cary Lee Peterson talks with PoliWatch about 2016 PAC activities leading to Primary Election.

The pro-Sanders PAC had scrutiny for its stance in September from a political journalist, which led to a convoluted state of opinion about the PAC and why it chose to support Bernie Sanders’ run for presidency. They’ve since restructured and are aiming back at the media with a political satire comic placed on a digital billboard in New York Times Square, a secondary jab since their first media billboard blitz in New York Times Square last April.

Americans Socially United chief director Cary Lee Peterson comments, “We were there this time a year ago. We’re still here now. You don’t like it, go start your own PAC or join a campaign committee of another candidate; we’re here and going nowhere.”

The billboard ad displays a character that portrays Bernie Sanders as a super hero flying into the scene amongst other 2016 presidential candidates with a caption that says ‘I see through you’. Ironically this billboard ad holds a handful of hidden messages that only the creators can describe.

PoliWatch spoke with pro-Bernie Sanders billboard comic artist Harrison Wood (41), currently a Las Vegas radio personality and freelancer of independent comic book series Thunder Frogs, who stated “I like what he [Bernie Sanders] stands for and I am happy to contribute to the 2016 presidential election campaigns. Every candidate out there deserves an opportunity to prove themselves and I’m glad I can use my talent to be involved in some way.”

ASU director Cary Peterson tells PoliWatch that the comic billboard ad is only the beginning of a series of political satire stokes at 2016 U.S. presidential candidates. At the end of the day the art of the pen is mightier than the sword.

When North Korea Tests a Nuke, Assume It’s Iran’s as Well

North Korea briefly reclaimed the global press’ attention again by claiming to have tested a hydrogen bomb. While coverage focused on whether that was an exaggeration, the press missed a much more important question: Was this test only for Kim Jong-Un or was it also for the Iranian regime?

The North Korean and Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile programs should be seen as a single entity, as should be their shared cyber warfare programs. The advance of one is an advance of the other. Differences in their activity should be seen as a common-sense division of labor. Gordon Chang, a prominent expert on Asian affairs, has written about the likelihood that this is the case.

Last May, an Iranian opposition group that has accurately identified hidden nuclear sites in the past reported that it had specific intelligence about North Korean nuclear and missile experts secretly visiting Iran. Intelligence analyst Ilana Freedman said in January 2014 that her sources said a relocation of major parts of Iran’s nuclear program to North Korea began as early as December 2012.

For Iran, it is best to let the North Koreans put the finishing touches on the most provocative nuclear and missile work. Whereas the Iranian regime does suffer from sanctions and must always keep the 2009 Green Revolution in the back of its mind, North Korea thrives off isolation and international provocation.

North Korea has nothing to lose and can only gain by such an arrangement. Kim Jong-Un’s regime has already crossed the nuclear pariah threshold, so it might as well let its Iranian allies take the lucrative deal offered by the West. It has been content to spend $1.1-$3.2 billion each year on it. Plus, the deal puts Iran in a moreadvantageous position  and its economic improvements can help it invest more in North Korea’s activity.

The good news is that this latest test—North Korea’s fourth— does not appear to be more powerful than its last one, indicating no significant advance in technology. RAND Corporation analyst Bruce Bennett says North Korea is still working on the “basics” of a nuclear fission bomb.

It is hard for some to accept that an Islamist theocracy like that in Iran would work with a cultish communist dictatorship like North Korea, but there is nothing in either one’s ideology that would prevent such cooperation. In fact, North Korea’s success in building a nuclear arsenal actually encourages Iran to see nuclear weapons as a key lesson for the Islamic Revolution.

“The entire world may well consider North Korea a failed state, but from the view point of [Iran], North Korea is a success story and a role model: A state which remains true to its revolutionary beliefs and defies the Global Arrogance,” Ali Alfoneh, an expert on the Iranian regime, told the Washington Free Beacon.

Given the spotty record of U.S. intelligence assessments (to say the least), the West must operate under the assumption that there isn’t an Iranian WMD problem and a North Korean WMD problem, but an Iranian-North Korean WMD problem.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran Captures and Releases US Sailors: the Back Story

Pakistan Cautiously Backs Saudi Arabia

Iran Arrests Poet as Part of Crackdown on Dissenters

No More Shadow Boxing – It’s for Real now

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a previous nuclear Test made by North Korea. Photo: Video screenshot.

What is the Predominant Refugee Group in your State?

Oregon Live has produced this very cool map.  Please read the story to learn more.

For all of our new readers, go here, to see the federal list of refugee contractors working near you.  You should also see our Frequently Asked Questions.

 

map with predominant refugee group in your state

 

RELATED ARTICLES:

You Only Think You Know How Many Illegal Immigrants Live in the U.S.

New UN High Commissioner for Refugees has been chosen

‘Capitalism’ Is the Wrong Word by Steven Horwitz

We Shouldn’t Use a Term Coined by the System’s Enemies!

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could simply invent new terms to replace the words that seem to cause more heat than light? For example, I have written before of my qualms about using the word capitalism to describe the free-market economy. The word was coined by capitalism’s enemies to describe the system that they rejected.

Red Plenty, a marvelous book by Francis Spufford, offers an important perspective on our discussion of terms. The book is a must-read for fans of free markets. It combines elements from the actual history of the use of mathematics to try to plan the Soviet economy, fictional dialogue and some fictional characters, and Spufford’s excellent understanding of the economics of capitalism and socialism to create an incredibly readable account of the attempt to engineer a world of abundance in the former Soviet Union.

In the senior seminar I teach, we recently read a section of the book that deals with how the Soviet planning process actually worked. That section got me thinking about the terms capitalism and socialism again. The term capitalism suggests a system built around capital and its interests, while the word socialism suggests one built around society and its interests. Notice how these connotations beg some questions from the start.

Is it really true, for example, that capitalism is centered around capital and its interests? Is it really capitalists who benefit the most from capitalism? And on the other side: have existing socialist economies ever served the interests of society as a whole? Could socialism, in theory, do so? Do both of these names make assumptions about each of the two types of economies that reflect the biases of capitalism’s critics and socialism’s defenders?

Of course, capital does play a crucial role in capitalism. The private ownership of capital (the means of production) is a defining characteristic of a free-market economy, especially in comparison to socialism. And the ability to engage in economic calculation provided by the money prices of the market is crucial for the owners of capital to know how best to deploy it. So in those senses, capitalism is about capital.

But notice that nowhere in the previous paragraph is it claimed that the primary beneficiaries of capitalism are the capitalists! What is missing is an answer to the question of why the capitalists continually have to figure out how best to deploy their capital. The answer is because they are constantly trying to provide what consumers want using the least valuable resources possible.

Sure, the capitalists reap profits by doing so. But those profits result from the mutually beneficial exchanges capitalists have with consumers.

The main beneficiaries from capitalism are not the capitalists, but all of us in our role as consumers. Competition among the owners of private capital is all about responding to consumers’ wants. And consumers benefit from this arrangement through more, better, and cheaper goods. If we want a name for the free-market economy that indicates who its primary beneficiaries are, we should reappropriate the term consumerism.

But “consumerism” is only half of the story. It’s easy enough to show through the standard arguments that socialism doesn’t work for the benefit of society as a whole. We know from the socialist-calculation debate that eliminating the market altogether in favor of planning can’t work. But what about all of those countries, like the Soviet Union, that claimed to be planning their economies?

As we see in Red Plenty, the truth was that central planning served as a kind of myth around which economic activity could be oriented. Everyone acted as if there were a plan, but the actual way resources got allocated and shuffled around was much more complicated. In Red Plenty, we meet two characters who help us see this.

First is Cherkuskin, the middleman who trades on relationships and friendships to help producers get the goods they need to meet their centrally planned targets. Cherkuskin is the personification of what Ayn Rand called “the aristocracy of pull.” His power comes from whom he knows and what he can get them to do for you. When producers don’t have enough to fulfill their quotas because of the inability of the plan to allocate rationally or to respond to unexpected change, the Cherkuskins come into play and move resources around to help them — and to profit handsomely in the process. Underneath “the plan” was the black market that did a great deal to ensure that Soviet-style economies were minimally functional.

The other character is Maksim Maksimovich Mokhov, a high-ranking bureaucrat in the planning agency. Faced with the news of the destruction of a crucial machine, Mokhov has to figure out how to rebalance the plan given that one factory will either need a new machine or fail to produce the output that other factories need. Spufford gives us terrific imagery of Mokhov sliding around on his wheeled chair, abacus in hand, going from file to file using technology primitive by even the 1962 standard of that chapter of the book, attempting to reallocate resources with the flick of an eraser and the scratch of a pencil.

Both Cherkuskin and Mokhov are, functionally, substitutes for what the price system does under capitalism, and inferior substitutes at that.

But what’s most interesting is that neither of them cares one whit about the consumer. Cherkuskin is all about making sure that producers get what they need to fulfill the plan, never pausing to consider what the costs were for consumers. Mokhov describes consumers as a “shortage sink” because they are the end of the line, and if they don’t get what they want, no one else relies on them for further output. It was more important to balance out production than to worry if consumers got exactly what they needed.

What Spufford so nicely illustrates here is how real-world socialism, and not capitalism, put the needs of “capital” first and the wants of consumers last. In a world where producing more stuff, regardless of its value, was the path to plenty, ensuring that production continued according to the plan and that producers got what they needed were the central tasks. And the black market middlemen like Cherkuskin could make a real ruble or two doing so.

But unlike the profits of market capitalists, Cherkuskin’s rubles came at the expense of the consumer rather than reflecting mutual benefit. A system where consumers are just the folks who are expected to absorb the errors of the plan is hardly one geared to the interests of society as a whole. And a system where capital is ultimately the servant of consumers is misleadingly named if we call it capitalism.

It’s a difficult battle to get people to change the names they’ve long used for free markets and (supposedly) planned economies. Even if we don’t win that battle, it’s still important for us to point out how the terms capitalism and socialism really do give a false impression of how markets and planning work. If we want to know who really benefits from markets, a quick look around the abundance that is the typical American household will answer that question quite clearly.

Steven HorwitzSteven Horwitz

Steven Horwitz is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Economics at St. Lawrence University and the author of Hayek’s Modern Family: Classical Liberalism and the Evolution of Social Institutions.

He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.

The Alinsky Affect Taking Hold in America

It can be pretty depressing to witness more and more Americans protesting in favor of oppression and against liberty.  Yes indeed, increasing numbers of Sovereign citizens want the government boot-heel on their necks or the lash on their backsides.  A primary root of this trend can be traced directly to the mega, one size fits all, government school system.  For over fifty years, government school educators have been used to fundamentally change America. This has been accomplished by systematically lowering some standards and eliminating others altogether.

American history courses have been degenerated to nothing more than anti United States of America propaganda dogma.  The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and Federalist Papers are mere mentions without credible or in depth study.  The education system or more appropriately, the dens of indoctrination are wasting an average of $15 thousand dollars per student in cities like Detroit, where at least a forty percent literacy rate is not uncommon at many schools.

So now, America is lumbering along with at least two generations of students who believe that the communist inspired concept of the common good trumping individual rights or rational self-interest is the way to go.  That is why bigoted progressive political marxists like Hillary Clinton openly state that “they’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

Another indication of Americans preferring in this case indirect oppression over liberty, whether self-induced or directly from the government, was a recent episode of Late Night hosted by progressive host Stephen Colbert.  His guest that particular Friday night was Ohio governor John Kasich.  He is a moderately conservative republican who has overseen the Buckeye States successful economic recovery.  He also eliminated the Ohio budgetary deficit and increased economic activity has fostered a two or three billion dollar surplus.

But the major focus of Colbert’s interest was presenting nagging questions about the voters of Ohio choosing not to approve the legalization of marijuana for medicinal or recreational use.  That is indicative of the progressive elitist democrats and some rino republicans want Americans to have.  In other words, they would prefer that we light up and not focus on concrete issues like illegal immigration, or higher gasoline taxes coming in 2017 for Michigan residents.  The progressives don’t want us to remember that president Obama has not made one concrete decision that would benefit America economically, morally, militarily, constitutionally, environmentally, or educationally.

When one reads the numerous quotes of the founding fathers, it is quite apparent that they were concerned about the possibility of the United States evolving from the land of the free and home of the brave, into the land of the dominated and home of the cowardly.  Neither you or I can accurately tell how many times we have heard that according to certain pols, Americans support gun control and gender neutral bathrooms for example.  Many other such wedge issues on the progressive agenda ae promoting illegal immigration, false allegations of racism and supposedly hating the poor.

Those wedge issues have a certain prominence because people have been dumbed down to a lower level of thinking politically, morally and economically.  If Americans were properly schooled on the benefits of our constitution and economics, along with virtue, I seriously doubt that the federal government would be so bloated and working to implode our nation on behalf of the United Nations and muslims.

Properly informed or schooled Americans would not entertain the fool-hearty concept that one is xenophobic because they simply want people to obey our laws and immigrate into the United States legally.  Also, perhaps American voters would not have twice elected an individual who literally wants to bring tens of thousands of American hating muslims into our country to try and change our American culture into a bastion of rights inhibiting sharia law.

In order to rescue the United States from utter ruin, we must make genuine efforts to teach Christian virtues, real United States history, critical thinking, real math, etc. to the up and coming generations.  If not, our beloved republic will simply end up slip, slipping away.  Despite the current troubles and travails throughout the land I am still optimistic that America the beautiful will be truly great again.  Our cities will once again be undimmed by human tears.  She will of course soon reestablish a closer walk with the one who shed His grace upon her and benefit from His Providential guidance.

Do you believe?

Florida: Pensacola Yacht Club Embraces former Cuban Communist Naval Officer

This week the Communist sympathizers from the Pensacola Yacht Club set sail from Pensacola, Florida (imagine that) to meet up with Commodore Jose M. Diaz Escrich, a former member of Fidel Castro’s Communist Navy and  leader in his Communist Maritime forces.

The Pensacola News Journal on writing about this wonderful send off did not include the former Communist Navy Captains last name, but that’s okay nobody hides from the Senior Chief……I found it.

Escrich, one of Fidel Castro’ s closest military friends, was born on December 21, 1946 in the port city of Santiago de Cuba.  He entered into the formerly free Naval Academy of Cuba when he was 16 and worked for more than 25 years in the Communist Cuban Navy.

His duties included tracking down and arresting people trying to flee to Key West, Miami and other Florida cities to free themselves from the chains and bondage of Communism.

When the sailors from the Pensacola Yacht Club Show up in Havana Cuba the Castro – Communist Cuban Ministry of Tourism, will be on hand to recognize the participants’ efforts with gifts of flowers flown in from North Korea.

As of October  31st 2015 the number of political prisoners held in Cuba without due process or trial has climbed to 114, the opposition Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation (CCDHRN) noted.

I wish the Pensacola Yacht Club leadership much success with their mission to bring American dollars to the Communist Island to aid and assist in the continued efforts of Fidel and Raul Castro to oppress their people.

If you would like to contact the Cuban Ministry of Tourism and ask about all the tourists that have disappeared over the years the contact information is listed below. I called them up and they got irritated when I asked if I could speak to Fidel.

I am now on the Cuban Communist Party leadership most wanted list of not welcome with a potential shot at becoming a political prisoner for free speech.

Happy Trails…… The Pensacola Yacht Club is not too happy with me either but they can kiss my free, red blooded, American, flag waving, hamburger eating, apple pie filled you know what.

For those readers wishing to contact the Cuban Ministry you may do so using these links;

National Tourism Organization HAVANACUBA

Plaza de la Revolucion Calle 3ra. N? 6 entre G y F. El vedado HAVANA,CUBA

Tel.: 0053 7 8327535, 8345283, 8365269

UPDATE: Who sponsored the Pensacola Yacht Club sail boat race to Communist Cuba?

The Pensacola Yacht Club have almost concluded their sail boat race to the port of Havana in the Communist controlled island of Cuba.

The trophies will be presented to the winner’s of this race by Commodore José Miguel Díaz Escrich of the Communist Cuban Navy (retired) .

Commodore Escrich worked his way up through the ranks to Commander in Castro’s Communist Navy working with anti-submarine ships and maritime legal issues…. rounding up dissidents trying to flee Cuba to freedom.

The Commodore then returned to the classroom in Cuba, first as a professor at the Communist Naval academy, then as a master’s degree student-candidate at the highest level in the naval academy of the former Soviet Union. How sweet is that ?

Returning to Cuba after four years, he worked in Naval Base Operations on the General Staff, focusing on international maritime and legal issues otherwise known as “Arresting and hunting down Cubans trying to flee the country”.

After 25 years in the Communist Cuban Navy, Commander Escrich then created the Club Náutico Internacional Hemingway de Cuba (Hemingway International Yacht Club of Cuba)

The Pensacola Yacht Clubs latest port of call.

Fidel Castro and Ernest Hemingway met and fished together in a 1960 Hemingway game fishing tournament, celebrated at the Barlovento Tourist Residence, later named Marina Hemingway. Thus the name of the Marina.

This is also where the American – Communist and author Hemingway presented the Communist Cuban dictator with several trophies. Three photographs of Ernest Hemingway hang in the yacht club’s office today, including one of Hemingway and his boat, Pilar, dated 27 May 1950.

Perhaps the Pensacola Yacht Club sailors will get a tour and pose for pictures also with the new crowd of Communists running the marina.

So the Pensacola Yacht Club have sanctioned, embraced and met with a former member of Castro’s Communist maritime forces whose job it was to capture and arrest fellow Cubans fleeing to safety in Florida. They are soon meeting this Communist to receive trophies and break bread with people that have to date arrested and imprisoned 114 political prisoners for wanting only to be free.

To ensure this event was a success (excluding the bad storm that blew in the following start of the sail boat race) the following companies are listed as sponsors to the Pensacola Yacht Club’s sail boat race to Communist Cuba:

  1. Frontier Motors Pensacola
  2. Technology Associates
  3. Zern Rigging Pensacola
  4. Schurr Sails Pensacola
  5. Weather Routing Inc.

There are currently 114 political prisoners held in Cuban prisons for speaking out against oppression and servitude. Some of which are in jail because of the Cuban naval forces led by Commodore Escrish the new friend of the Pensacola Yacht Club and its leadership.

Perhaps the companies I listed above would now like to offer sponsorship to the political prisoners held in Castro’s gulags next time around and now disassociate itself from the Pensacola Yacht Club, a team that affords hospitality and salutations to a member of Fidel Castro’s Communist Naval forces to satisfy what ? Who knows the answer to that…perhaps they can figure it out.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of CookImages.com.

A letter to the U.S. Congress

The Hon. James M. Inhofe
205 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510

The Hon. James Lankford
316 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510

The Hon. Markwayne Mullin
1113 Longworth House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515

Gentlemen:

As a concerned constituent, I would like to express my concern over the apparent unconcern of the Congress for what is perhaps the greatest danger our nation has ever faced.  I refer, of course, to the dangers posed by the ever-increasing “invasion” of radical Islamists into our country.

Although there are approximately 1.4 billion Muslims on Earth, we are told that we should not be overly concerned because only about 5% of them are radicalized, hell-bent on killing as many non-Muslims… me and you and our families… as possible.  Of course, 5% of 1.4 billion comes to roughly 70 million terrorists and suicide bombers.  During World War II, the combined military forces of Germany, Japan, and Italy numbered only 34.1 million combatants.

In the years immediately following World War II, our principal internal security threat came from the international communist conspiracy, represented domestically by the Communist Party, USA.  It was the stated purpose of the communist conspiracy to seek the destruction of our constitutional republic through any means necessary, including force and violence.  In response, the U.S. Congress took appropriate steps to eradicate the clear and present danger posed by the communist conspiracy through passage of the Communist Control Act of 1954, outlawing communism in the United States.

But now, in the closing years of the 20th century and the early years of the 21st century, we find ourselves endangered internally by an enemy far more numerous and far more deadly than was posed by the presence of communists in our midst.  Yet, it appears as if the Congress prefers to take the politically correct approach to radical Islam, treating radical Islamists as if they are just another religious sect with First Amendment rights and privileges.

Islam is not a “religious denomination” in the generally accepted sense of the term.  Instead, it is a complete social, economic, legal, political, and military entity with a religious component.  As such, it does not merit First Amendment protections under the U.S. Constitution, and it cannot be allowed to impose itself as a protected political and religious institution within our borders.

As we see endless streams of Muslim “asylum seekers” crossing the Mediterranean from North Africa into Italy and Spain, and as we see hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of Muslims from Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and other Middle Eastern nations flooding across Eurasia, overrunning police and military forces of the invaded countries on their way to sanctuary in Western Europe, we know that we are witnessing the greatest human migration in history… a transmigration of cultures that is certain to devour Christianity, Judaism, and the richness of Western culture.  Unless we take steps to return the waves of Islamists, who kill and rape their way across civilized nations, to their own section of the Earth, none of what we have known as western civilization will exist a decade or two from now.  Just imagine the world that our children and grandchildren will inherit if we fail to take appropriate action now, while we still can.

What I suggest is that the Congress rewrite sections of the Communist Control Act of 1954, a statute that has not been overturned by the courts and is still in force, to read as follows:

SEC. 1. PURPOSE.  The Congress hereby finds and declares that certain organizations exist within our borders which, although purporting to be political or religious in nature, are in fact instrumentalities of foreign political or religious entities or ideologies whose purpose it is to overthrow the Government of the United States by any available means, including force and violence.  Such organizations operate as authoritarian dictatorships within our borders, demanding for themselves the rights and privileges generally accorded to all political parties and religious denominations, but denying to all others the liberties guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution. 

SEC. 2. PROSCRIBED ORGANIZATIONS.  Any political or religious organization as described herein, or any successors or affiliates of such organizations, regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose it is to overthrow the government of the United States, or to force the political or religious conversion of its people by force or violence, or threats thereof, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or its political subdivisions; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities heretofore granted to said religious or political organizations, or any subsidiary or affiliate organizations, by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are hereby rescinded:  Provided that nothing in this section shall be construed as amending the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended.

My question is this:  If we could find the courage in 1954 to outlaw an ideology that sought only to convert us through political subversion, why can we not find the courage in 2015 to outlaw a foreign ideology that offers us only a choice between religious subservience and death… the ultimate Hobson’s Choice.  I would appreciate having your specific reactions to my concerns.  I would prefer not to have generic boilerplate responses prepared by staff members.

Respectfully,

Paul R. Hollrah

Why Is the Vatican Pushing Communist Goals? by Michael Hichborn

This coming November, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Science is holding a workshop intended to figure out how to indoctrinate your children in the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs]. This comes on the heels of the Vatican nuncio to the United Nations announcing “verbatim” support for the SDGs, and after Catholic Relief Services president Dr. Carolyn Woo echoed Pope Francis’ call for support for the SDGs as well.

So, what are the Sustainable Development Goals?

They’re a United Nations plan for the creation of a global socialist utopia thinly disguised as a poverty reduction program. In short, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are the first step in achieving several of the goals laid out in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. In truth, these goals are Communist goals, through and through. Here’s a snapshot of how specific portions of the SDGs line up with identified Communist goals:

Sustainable Development Goals:

  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
    • Communists have always used the plight of the poor as justification for the implementation of their nefarious schemes
  • Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
    • Plank 7 of the Communist Manifesto calls for a top-down approach to industry and agriculture
  • Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
    • A 1938 issue of a Communist publication concluded that “only through the final victory of world socialism can the vast stores of available scientific knowledge really be put to work for the full benefit of humanity. ‘Socialized medicine’ is a meaningless phrase except in a socialized society.”
  • Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
    • Plank 10 of the Communist Manifesto is “free education for all children in public schools.”
  • Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
    • Communism has pushed for working women since the beginning of the Revolution in Russia.
  • Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
    • Plank 8 of the Communist Manifesto: Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  • Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
    • Plank 9 of the Communist Manifesto: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
    • This is an echo of Karl Marx’s mandate, “From each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”
  • Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
    • This is pure global governance orchestrated by an entity with authority above national sovereignty.

This summary is not intended to be exhaustive, but should provide enough information to alarm even the most lukewarm of patriots and faithful Christians. But the Catholic Church, which has issued full and unqualified condemnations of Communism and Socialism should have nothing to do with the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals … and yet, “Catholic” social justice organizations and its leaders have hijacked key positions in the Vatican and are using their influence and authority to fast-track programs to get the faithful to fully support and work for the implementation of the SDGs. This is extremely dangerous and must be forcefully resisted by all faithful Catholics. What follows is a general overview of some of the more egregious of the SDGs in their audacious push for global Communist governance.

Read the rest at http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/.

Hichborn_headshot300ABOUT MICHAEL HICHBORN

Michael Hichborn is the president of the Lepanto Insitute. Formerly, Michael spent nearly eight years as American Life League’s Director of the Defend the Faith project. He has researched and produced countless articles and reports on the funding of abortion, birth control, homosexuality and Marxism by Catholic Relief Servies and the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). Michael holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Christendom College in Political Science and Economics and a Master’s degree in Education from American Intercontinental University. Michael lives in Virginia with his wife, Alyssa, and their five children.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pope’s climate push at odds with U.S. Catholic oil investments

Vatican Representative Endorses UN Sustainable Development Goals, “Verbatim”

405,000 people, 104 bishops sign petition to Pope Francis asking for ‘clarification’ on marriage

Judicial Watch obtains FBI Investigative Files On Valerie Jarrett’s Family

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files obtained by Judicial Watch reveal that the dad, maternal grandpa and father-in-law of President Obama’s trusted senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government.

Jarrett’s dad, pathologist and geneticist Dr. James Bowman, had extensive ties to Communist associations and individuals, his lengthy FBI file shows. In 1950 Bowman was in communication with a paid Soviet agent named Alfred Stern, who fled to Prague after getting charged with espionage. Bowman was also a member of a Communist-sympathizing group called the Association of Internes and Medical Students. After his discharge from the Army Medical Corps in 1955, Bowman moved to Iran to work, the FBI records show.

According to Bowman’s government file the Association of Internes and Medical Students is an organization that “has long been a faithful follower of the Communist Party line” and engages in un-American activities. Bowman was born in Washington D.C. and had deep ties to Chicago, where he often collaborated with fellow Communists. JW also obtained documents on Bowman from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) showing that the FBI was brought into investigate him for his membership in a group that “follows the communist party line.” The Jarrett family Communist ties also include a business partnership between Jarrett’s maternal grandpa, Robert Rochon Taylor, and Stern, the Soviet agent associated with her dad.

Jarrett’s father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, was also another big-time Chicago Communist, according to separate FBI files obtained by JW as part of a probe into the Jarrett family’s Communist ties. For a period of time Vernon Jarrett appeared on the FBI’s Security Index and was considered a potential Communist saboteur who was to be arrested in the event of a conflict with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). His FBI file reveals that he was assigned to write propaganda for a Communist Party front group in Chicago that would “disseminate the Communist Party line among…the middle class.”

THERE IS A LOT MORE HERE, KEEP READING:

FBI Files Show Valerie Jarrett’s Hardcore Communist Family

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenWestRepublic.com.

Team Left vs Team Right

Here’s a quick run down on the two opposing forces in the USA.

Ayn Rand wrote a short nineteen page paper asking: What is the basic issue facing the world today? Rand, in her paper makes the case that, “The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism.” Rand defines these two principles as follows:

  • Individualism – Each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
  • Collectivism – Each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.

Speaking Truth to Power Real Heroes: Jimmy Lai by LAWRENCE W. REED

For years, a bust of John James Cowperthwaite sat prominently in the foyer of Jimmy Lai’s Next Media office in Hong Kong, along with others of economists F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman. If that’s all you ever knew about Jimmy Lai, you could at least surmise that he loves liberty and free markets.

Cowperthwaite had been the architect of Hong Kong’s free market miracle. He started with a destitute rock and turned it into one of the world’s freest and most prosperous economies. (Indeed, I’ve suggested that he deserves to be recognized annually and everywhere with a Cowperthwaite Day on the anniversary of his birth date, April 25.) Jimmy Lai is precisely the sort of individual that Cowperthwaite had in mind when he decided that entrepreneurs, not central planners, should drive an economy. Because of what Cowperthwaite had done, Jimmy Lai found a hero himself. And Lai, too, would go on to do great things.

Of the characteristics most often identified with successful entrepreneurship, Jimmy Lai possesses them all in abundance. He is a self-starter who takes initiative (and risk) with enthusiasm. He’s creative and intuitive. He’s passionate and tenacious. Where others see problems, he sees opportunity. He’s a visionary, both in business endeavors and for society at large. He doesn’t hesitate to defy conventional wisdom when it points to a dead end. Whatever he undertakes, he musters the courage to act. He puts his all — money, time, and energy — where his mouth is (and where his convictions are).

On paper, Lai’s early life would seem unlikely to produce a “real hero.” He was born in China the year before it fell under Mao Zedong’s dictatorial rule. Lai was smuggled out of the country and into Hong Kong at age 12. In the absence of child-labor laws, which would have ensured his deprivation there, too, Lai went to work in a garment factory for $8 a month. Fifteen years later, he bought his own garment factory and built it into the giant known as Giordano, now a leading international retailer. Lai’s boundless entrepreneurial zeal, free to operate within Hong Kong’s laissez-faire business environment, yielded jobs for thousands and consumer goods for millions.

But in 1989, Beijing’s infamous Tiananmen Square massacre set Jimmy Lai on a new course. With Hong Kong scheduled to be transferred from British to Chinese rule in just eight years, Lai knew that maintaining traditional freedoms under Beijing’s rule would be a challenge. So he ventured into media, creating what soon became the territory’s largest-circulation magazines,Sudden Weekly and Next. In spite of Beijing’s coercion of advertisers, Jimmy Lai’s tabloid-style newspaper, Apple Daily, is still the premier voice in Asia for the freedoms of speech, press, and enterprise.

Jimmy Lai does not shrink from controversy. The Communist Party of China, he wrote in a 1994 column, is “a monopoly that charges a premium for a lousy service.” He defended the student demonstrators when they went into the streets by the hundreds of thousands in late 2014 in defense of democracy. He routinely exposed corruption in both government and business, including the especially toxic brand of corruption that arises when the two get in bed together. He sold Giordano, the apparel firm he founded, to save it from Beijing’s intense pressure, but he refuses to this day to renounce his principles.

In December 2014, he revealed that he was stepping down as publisher of Apple Daily and chairman of Next Media to devote more time to family and personal interests. A month later, and for the second time, unknown assailants firebombed his home. He remains under intense scrutiny from Beijing, which regularly employs ugly rumors, threats of litigation, and other nefarious means to undermine his influence.

Earlier this year, Lai told the New York Times that he never planned to make his media empire into a family dynasty. His six children (ages 8 to 37) are not in line as heirs to that business or its leadership positions. “I don’t think I should ask my kids to inherit my business, because they can’t start where I did,” he said. “I was from the street. I’m a very different make of person. I’ve been a fighter all my life.”

Whatever the future holds for Jimmy Lai, friends of liberty everywhere can count him as one very brave man.

For additional information:

In the Freeman:

Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. (“Larry”) Reed became president of FEE in 2008 after serving as chairman of its board of trustees in the 1990s and both writing and speaking for FEE since the late 1970s.

EDITORS NOTE: 

The Foundation for Economic Education is pleased to present a weekly feature every Friday by our president, Lawrence W. Reed, commencing April 24, 2015. Real Heroes is expected to run for approximately one year. Each week, Mr. Reed will briefly relate the stories of people whose choices and actions make them heroes.

Mr. Reed has personally met many heroes himself. In a 2007 essay on one of them, Sir Nicholas Winton, he wrote, “The truest hero does not think of himself as one, never advertises himself as such, and does not perform the acts that make him a hero for either fame or fortune. He does not wait for government to act if he senses an opportunity to fix a problem himself.

The people Reed will write about will not be the well-known, usual suspects. Often, they will be men and women you’ve never heard of, from the distant past to the present day. In every case, they will be individuals who deserve notice and appreciation. They will exemplify one or more of the character traits Reed wrote about in his short book, Are We Good Enough for Liberty?— traits he regards as critical to the flourishing of a free society.

Each week, a new essay will be added to the table of contents. When the series runs its course, the collection will all be published in multiple digital-book formats.

The Prison Called Cuba

mandela-obama-castro

President Obama’s handshake with Cuban President Raul Castro, at a memorial service for former South African President Nelson Mandela in 2013. REUTERS TV/REUTERS

We are told we need to feel sympathy for the Cuban people who have suffered from a U.S. embargo and lack of diplomatic recognition. That ignores a long history of oppression in Cuba no matter who was in charge.

Prior to Fidel Castro, Cubans were in the grip of Flugencio Batista who overthrew the existing government in September 1933 and then dominated Cuban politics for the next 25 years until Castro’s revolutionary movement took control of the capitol in January 1959.

Fifty-six years ago in 1959, I was about to graduate from the University of Miami and among my friends were young Cubans sent there to get a degree. I have often wondered which among them returned to Cuba and which, like those who could afford it, were joined by their family who fled Cuba.

The U.S. had been involved with Cuba from the end of the Spanish-American War in 1898 when Spain ceded Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam for $20 million. We stayed in Cuba until it was granted independence in 1902 as the Republic of Cuba. Its first president faced an armed revolt in 1906 so we returned to briefly occupy Cuba to restore some stability, but they never really got the hand of being a democratic self-governing nation.

How much better it would have been for the Cubans if the U.S. had decided to make the island a territory like Puerto Rico. Then we could have let the island prosper without having to end up with becoming a Communist nation closely allied, first with the Soviet Union and after its collapse in 1991, with others like China and Venezuela.

The lesson we might be expected to draw from this is that Communism does not work. It is an utterly failed economic and social system that can only stay in power by jailing or executing anyone who resists. That is exactly what the brothers, Fidel and Raul Castro, have done since seizing power. One consistency of the past five decades has been the anti-America policies they have pursued.

The reason given by Obama was that U.S. policies toward Cuba “have not worked” and that it is time for a change. There is some truth in this and it should be noted that Canada has long had good relations with Cuba as have European and, of course, Latin and South American nations.

Even so, what are we to conclude from the report that Russia plans to join military drills with Cuba and North Korea that may also include Vietnam and Brazil? Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has left it sanctioned and isolated, so the military drills send a message that it still has nations friendly to it, but what nations!

Cuba was caught not long ago when it attempted to ship weapons to North Korea, so we are talking about two dedicated Communist nations. Over the years, it has more than demonstrated its anti-American hostility.

Generally, there is little to be gained by exchanging embassies or relieving Cuba. Lifting our embargo and other sanctions leaves the U.S. with even less leverage, if any.

What has been largely overlooked since Obama’s announcement is the fact that Cuba is still ruled by a Castro and is likely to remain so because Raul’s son, Alejandro Castro Espin, a colonel in Cuba’s intelligence apparatus is likely being groomed to take over after becoming a general and a member of the Communist Party Politburo, Cuba’s ruling body. As noted in an article in The Atlantic, it is the Cuban military not only that plays a major role in the Politburo, it also controls at least sixty percent of the island nation’s economy.

I have no doubt that reaching out to Cuba ranks just below reaching out to Iran as Obama contemplates his “legacy.” Both are notorious enemies of the U.S. Nor would it surprise me if Obama would try to unilaterally shut down Guantanamo. Failing that, he will do everything he can to empty it by the time he leaves office.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Cuba has had to struggle to survive economically. Its earlier behavior got it banned from the Organization of American States that was not lifted until 2009, but which did not confer full membership until it was deemed to be “in conformity with the practices, purposes, and principles of the OAS.” At the time, Fidel said he was not interested in joining.

Not much has changed in terms of the enmity the Castro brothers have expressed toward the U.S. but practical considerations to keep unrest among elements of Cuba’s population under control require them to ease some of the earlier control over being able to travel and likely who Cubans can do business with would improve whatever commerce will be permitted.

At this point, the only “winner” is Cuba.

© Alan Caruba, 2015