Libera Voce

The title of this post is actually better known as the “Hippocratic Oath”, the foremost ethical mandate of the medical profession as first proscribed in Hippocrates’s work “Of the Epidemics”; the clear and unequivocal meaning of the oath is that in the practice of medical service there can be no physical, psychological, or societal injury to patients.

While Anthony Fauci faces increased scrutiny of his actions as they relate to the “Covid Pandemic”, we get narratives, but little clarity on either the source of the virus or the efficacy of the vaccines we were coerced to get based on little more than assurances from those sworn to protect us. While our politicians, health organizations and the medical industry continue to this day to assure us that all is well, and that there are no reasons to be concerned about the long-term effects of the covid vaccines and accuse those that question otherwise of misinformation if not disinformation, the disclosure of Fauci’s “journal” contradicts that narrative.

It’s amazing that a man who was supposedly the world’s covid champion could be so arrogantly open about his malfeasance as to record it on a government server, and then to claim the 5^th Amendment over a hundred times during recent Senate hearings, a tactic admission of guilt; it’s hard to understand such arrogance when combined with blatant insolence. Add to this that he was protected by a preemptive presidential pardon, and the obvious screams of corruption…but then again so does government involvement that consistently obscured transparency.

There were and are a lot of claims about the experimental technology with which the vaccine was developed, including those that researched and developed mRNA, principally Dr. Robert Malone, who early on cautioned that it was not yet ready for the development of vaccines, and certainly not for human consumption; while he was accused of just about everything for doing so, what we didn’t get, other than those same repeated assurances, were anything clarifying the concern about the lack of data in testing. The universally recognized paradigm for scientific research is the scientific method, a rigorous process for developing empirical proof for a hypothesis based on data from controlled and repeatable testing.

We were told by the World Health Organization (WHO) that COVID-19 vaccines had been tested for decades, which was disingenuous propaganda as the existence of Covid 19 was only first identified in December of 2019; it is true that mRNA technology had been researched for decades as a potential development in cancer research and treatment. Then we were told that Pfizer received “…emergency validation…” in December of 2020 based on clinical trials; when that claim was challenged based on simple timeline considerations, it was dismissed because there was a lack of sufficient time to do so, a tacit admission of short circuiting the scientific method. That was the first indication that not all was disclosed to us about the origin of the virus, its potency, or the development and efficacy of the vaccine initially evaluated as 90-95%, which later proved to be more like 30-40%, about the average for the seasonal flu vaccine.

What also later came out was the lack of reliable data on the Covid 19 fatality rates, with huge variances attributed to “extreme data heterogeneity”, or in other words a lack of reliable data; depending on location, demographics and methods we have as little as 0.1% to as high as nearly 15%, a radical variance that renders such data nearly useless. The low side was attributed to a lack of testing, and the high side to the fact that anyone who died with a positive covid test regardless of the actual cause of morbidity was reported as a covid death; this was further complicated by the disclosure that the government underwrote a hospital’s costs in treating covid cases, i.e., make it covid and you make money.

In Europe much of the above was not the case, particularly in Sweden, where despite the lack of draconian protocols as in the US and some EU countries, they had the lowest rates of infection and mortality; given the increased reports of serious side effects from the vaccine, it’s curious how readily the medical establishment dismisses them. With all that background noted, it was disconcerting that late last year the European Society of Medicine (ESM), equivalent to our American Medical Association (AMA) reported in its Medical Research Archives following years of research, “Compound Impacts of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Convergence of Diverse Spikeopathies and Other Hybrid Harms” ; basically, it reported that this vaccine was as Dr. Malone initially cautioned as just not ready for human consumption as it was alarmed that by targeting proteins it had genetic ramifications that were far more dangerous than reported or even understood by the pharmaceutical industry or health organizations that were entrusted with safeguarding public health. 

Considering all the above, including the unethical policies of the US government and its proxies, the sacred oaths we rely on both medically and constitutionally were callously violated in favor of power and profit; the simple truth was we were lied to, and with an arrogance that maintained that the “…science was settled…”.

“Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things.” Isaac Newton

“I’m very depressed how in this country you can be told “That’s offensive!” as though those two words constitute an argument.” Christopher Hitchens

Recently I was told on a certain social platform that a post of mine “violated community standards” because it might be considered offensive by some people. I was informed that the post had been removed and that if “this continued”, I would be permanently barred. I was miraculously able to find a way to communicate with the gate keepers of that social platform (chat option, so who knows who or what I was “chatting” with) and asked why they found it so and what specific standard was violated; I was directed to what is commonly called the “Terms and Conditions of Use.”, which read like a sophomoric essay about avoiding expressing just about any idea based on reason and logic. I have not published on that platform since as I don’t do “woke” and admit I am addicted to the use of the forbidden reason and logic paradigm.

Years ago, I think it was 2022, I read an interview in “Reason” (very catching name for a publication, likely “triggered” some people) with the famous actor and comic satirist John Cleese discussing comedy and how modern culture was basically killing it; one of his remarks was that “Wokeness is people sitting around deliberately waiting for the thrill of being offended.” Every time I hear some particularly stupid woke idea, I also hear Cleese’s definitive summary of this mental disorder.

During the 2024 presidential election campaign, I was asked by both Democratic and Republican friends who I would vote for; they all knew I was a libertarian who would vote for neither major party and didn’t subscribe to the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization. This was a replay of the same situation in 2016, but this time I mischievously played them and said if there were no alternatives I would vote for Trump. Most were shocked knowing that I really didn’t like this guy, and even more so when I espoused the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization because I detested the support of the rampant “wokeness” in the Democratic Party. In some cases, friends pointed out my long-standing aversion to the “lesser-of-two-evils” rationalization because by definition it could only provide evil; some lectured me as to where the word “woke” came from, which we all know was from African American culture cautioning awareness of danger, a reality for blacks in the Jim Crow South. 

I had played this game to see what the reactions would be; invariably Republicans encouragingly supported my decision as if it were a religious conversion, while Democrats were appalled and also dismissed the “wokeness” claim as just a Republican narrative. I eventually confessed my mischief, which in both cases predictably produced similar reactions as neither accepted or in some cases even understood libertarianism. However, the one thing that had similar reactions was their disclaimer about “wokeness”, which I also think neither really understood. Imagine if I had told them that they both in dissimilar but ultimately fatal means and methods supported socialism, a sacred mantra of the woke.

Other than basic existential principles, everything changes over time, and wokeness is no exception; unfortunately, it always gets worse. Take for instance the growing antisemitism coupled with anti-Islamophobia promoted among progressives, socialists (redundant, right?) and of course Muslims; actually, that’s an example of “strange bedfellows” if there ever was one. Imagine a scenario where advocates for LGBTQ found themselves in a Muslim country were they would be thrown off roofs, or even worse. They might try arguing with their newfound friends that silencing an argument is not the same thing as winning one…as they find themselves experiencing the reality of gravity.  In a way, they are all part of the “Wokerati”, who on the one hand deflect criticism by claiming that there’s all this misunderstanding about who and what they represent, which happens when you’re bold face liars.

Being “Woke” became all the rage in 2014 with the BLM movement and the crusade for social justice, a concept that represented the classical “basic fallacy of assumptions”, i.e., beliefs that have no factual basis; this used to be called “begging the question” where the premise of the argument is presented as a conclusion, a fact without evidence. In the George Floyd case, the facts were that the police officer was sentenced to over 20 years in prison for murder and civil rights violations; justice was served but this case was used as a justification for what became known as the “Summer of Love”, a prolonged national “peaceful protest” that was in reality a rampant orgy of arson, vandalism and violence destroying the property and businesses of many innocent victims, none of whom had anything to do with the Floyd case. The justification for such criminality was rage against systemic racism, but where was the justice for the victims of the destruction that followed? Well, there was none because that did not fit into the progressive narrative.

What followed was a disjointed outpouring of grievances and victimhood, mostly having nothing to do with the Floyd case. Suddenly we had victims of just about every transgression imaginable, many we never even knew existed, and usually didn’t. Most philosophers considered such behavior “sophistry” meaning providing false arguments as a deception; the question we should ask is what purpose does that serve, but should you ask, you are now considered racist, fascist, misogynist, and a whole pantheon of evil labels to shame you. There are “Trigger Warnings” “Microaggressions”, “Oppressor Politics”, “Transphobia” “Ableism” …and an endless list of transgressions you could be guilty of without even knowing what they are; neither do the accusers.  

“It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them. Using this kind of reasoning, you can believe or not believe anything about anything, without having to bother to deal with facts or logic.” Thomas Sowell

“I thought the left was a mental problem, but it’s actually a disease of the soul. It’s built on envy, hatred, resentment, and unequal treatment under the law. When they run out of arguments, they resort to violence.” Javier Milei

The fact that the author of the above quote is still alive amazes me, but unfortunately I fear it could be just a matter of time; there is so much misinformation/disinformation about Milei, but more threatening is the realization by many supporting factions that they knew so little about him or the libertarian principles he represents, which are contrary to their interests. The reason why I think Milei is still alive now, in a country whose history does not support political stability, is that his policies have actually worked, and just as importantly the people see and understand that; however, for that very reason I fear that those factions, many Peronist, could eventually politically and/or physically attempt to kill him or they will lose whatever power they have left. Fascism is socialism, and libertarians are not welcome.

Argentina was previously politically similar to the US, and in fact further along the socialist path. Trump is by no means a libertarian, whereas Milei is all in. Trump is not a friend of free trade, whereas Milei is. Trump is a spender whereas Milei is not. Milei is an economic realist, whereas Trump is a narcissistic grifter. Trump has world power in hand whereas Milei has only facts. Despite all this, Trump and Milei are friendly, and both profess disdain for socialism; however, it’s Milei who just doesn’t talk about it, but acts against it, and that’s where the difference lies. Trump’s insatiable lust for power is really not different from his opponents, who lately spend more time criticizing him than providing viable alternatives; however, after considering borders/immigration and gender identity, we have little to differentiate Republicans from Democrats.

The US has a midterm election coming, which of course in the age of Trump means some level of violence from his detractors and possibly even his supporters; this is what radical partisanship means folks, so get used to it. In a recent poll, nearly 40% of Democrats support a coup to remove Trump, some even an assassination; at the very least, assuming the Democrats win the House, an impeachment…here we go again! As a libertarian I see the predicted midterm election results as a self-inflicted wound by the Republicans given Trump’s failure to keep a critical campaign promise not to engage in another war, which in the case with Iran caused an energy crisis and higher cost of living; add tariffs and you have three strikes with one pitch, leaving the bases loaded. The Democrats, despite their own self-inflicted wounds with support for socialism and lack of support for women’s rights, plus growing antisemitism, seemingly gave Republicans a chance to avoid the historical shift in Congress against the incumbents; while the economy is better under Trump than Biden, it’s not where he promised we would be.

Milei on the other hand exceeded his campaign promises, cutting inflation, spending, regulations and big government, creating growth Argentina has not seen in a long time, and the people love him for it. Up until the Great Depression, Argentina was one of the wealthiest countries in the world, so much so that the phrase “Rich as an Argentine” described the high per capita wealth of the country. Enter Juan Peron in the mid 1940’s with his authoritarian and socialist regimes that left Argentina impoverished; enter Milei and the road to recovery has been spectacular in contrast to the country’s prior regimes, which shows how free market economics benefits the people, and not the crony power elites.

The contrast between Trump and Milei should be a lesson to Americans that the two party cabal that has ruled this country have slowly but surely brought us excruciating debt, deficits, wars, societal and cultural decline; neither of these two political parties are willing to address the root problems that underpin the crises we seem to find ourselves in time and again for fear that the solutions will make them unpopular. While they sling slogans and derogatory labels at each other, Milei attacks the problems with policies that work. While both Republicans and Democrats kick the can down the road, Milei kicks bureaucrats out of office. While both Trump and Milei are known for their flamboyant personalities and strong media presence, Trump spouts superlatives, mostly inaccurate, about what he has done, while Milei incites Argentines to seize the freedoms that make a people succeed. Milei knew that he needed to communicate with the people what they needed to do to make Argentina great again; Trump tried the same thing, got elected, and then forgot about his promises.

“I didn’t come here to lead lambs, but to awaken lions.” Javier Milei

“A man is not dead until he is forgotten.” Unknown Soldier

How ironic that it was someone who is unknown, which means whoever he was, is credited with this quote regardless of the fact that his name is now forgotten; despite this, his soul is still with those he loved and who loved him. There are friends of mine who, knowing that I’m an atheist, are amazed that I even think there is such a thing as a soul; to their surprise I tell them that it’s the soul that makes us human, we are born with it, but we die without our soul as it now passes to those we loved and loved us. They will always remember us, and that is our immortality.

The idea of the soul is culturally embedded in every society that developed a culture. People can look alike, but there are no two souls alike, even twins. Soul, or the spirit of a person includes character, personality, intelligence, emotions, beliefs, and social awareness, all combining in an infinite variety. When you “…get to know someone…”, you begin to get a sense of what “…makes them tick…” or whatever common phrase that expresses what your common sense tells you about someone that their looks don’t. One of the oldest proverbs from ancient philosophy …yes, author unknown…is “The eyes are the windows of the soul.” This is why eye contact is so essential if people are genuinely interested in getting to know one another; avoidance indicates a “… troubled soul” …ok, yet another common phrase, as common as common sense.

I always wonder at all the people who walk around us who look everywhere except at the people around them, sometimes at their “smart phones” (worst ever), or the sky, but are unaware of who is around them; it’s robotic behavior, a habit of modern times where communication skills are sorely lacking. If you were to look into their eyes, they would look away; if you engage in conversation with such people, they may feel “triggered”. Why are there so many troubled souls? Now here’s where people with common sense, those who look around where they are, who can look a person straight in the face (their eyes of course), be able to engage in civil communication, have an edge on those that don’t…it’s called being human precisely because humans by nature are social animals.

I think many of those troubled souls are victims of catastrophizing, which has been defined succinctly in Psychology Today as a “…cognitive distortion that prompts people to jump to the worst possible conclusion, usually with very limited information or objective reason to despair. When a situation is upsetting, but not necessarily catastrophic, they still feel like they are in the midst of a crisis.” While we lament the fact that generation whatever lacks what it takes to act like rational adults, we ignore the fact that current education lacks the ability to provide the necessary skills to do so; instead, it provides an endless supply of catastrophizing indoctrination whether that be population, climate, and now “Artificial Intelligence”.

According to any of these “artificial” crises, the human species should have been eradicated decades ago, or will be soon, and yet…well, here we are; tricky thing about the soul is that it lives in the living well after a human dies, making what it’s made of immortal. While we are being catastrophized about artificial intelligence, it is little more that an attempt to have computers mimic the way the human brain works; given that the soul of humans are of infinite variety, there is no intelligence in existence, artificial or organic, that can account for infinity because the nature of infinity precludes by definition any calculation, i.e., by definition the results are infinite.

The ethos of humanity is summed up by its soul, and that ethos is love of humanity. This is such a rational conclusion that the father of logic, reason and of the laws of identity defined both love and the soul in what must be a very “…soul searching” (couldn’t resist) definition of both:

“Love is composed of a single soul inhabiting two bodies.” Aristotle

“When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.” William Blake

As I listened to the 9/11 Ceremony this morning, and the hauntingly mournful Sarabande by Bach played by renowned cellist Yo-Yo Ma, I began to realize that the depth of the tragedy of that day was not just about that event, but the extent of the evil behind it both in time and intent. I am not afraid of being labeled Islamophobic for understanding and despising a barbaric culture of hate and death masquerading as a religion known as Islam; I am more afraid of being what Edmund Burke described as “One that confounds good and evil is an enemy to good.”

History tells us, if we are open minded to its lessons, that Islam has always been about violence and domination. True, the Crusades and the Christianity that incited it was more about conquest, wealth, power and land than protecting pilgrims; ultimately it lost, and Islam went on to conquer most of Africa, a lot of Asia, and at one point Spain, and parts of Eastern Europe. It was not until after the Great War that the Ottoman Empire collapsed, but in its place, we got the chaos out of which grew what we call today Radical Islam and the rebirth of Jihad.

For the true believers of Islam, the West is, and has always been, the enemy, not just because it’s mostly Christian, but because it evolved culturally through the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the enterprise of its people to provide a level of prosperity and freedom not seen in most of the world, despite its own record of wars and authoritarian regimes. However, as we can see today, the West also carried in much of its societies a fatal flaw contrary to its professed love of freedom called collectivism as represented by socialist factions such as Fascism, Nazism, Communism, and a growing tolerance for such horrible ideologies, especially within the very institutions that are supposedly the guardians of “Western Civilization”.

It is apparent given the celebrations among the Muslim communities in the US during the horrors of 9/11, and then again following the 10/07/23 Hamas massacres in Israel, that we should not be surprised about people like Hassan Piker, Graham Platner, Ilhan Omar, Lateefah Simon, Rashida Tlaib and others, some of whom serve in our House of Representatives, supporting Jihadist terror; these people, who profess to be fellow Americans, are not our friends. Even worse, we see the protests in our universities in support of such obvious evils and yet many Americans refuse to see it for what it is. This is not some random series of events or spontaneous empathetic concern for the “oppressed” but a continuation of Islam’s goal for world domination.

The fact that countries like Saudi Arabia who financed the 9/11 attacks, Iran who finances Hamas and Hezbollah, Qatar who finances American and other Western universities may seem diverse in nature but not in intent; through violence and systemic corruption of our institutions we have the existential threat to every human being who refuses to bow to Islam and adhere to Sharia law. We should know this not only by their actions but their own words that even their migrations to Western countries are part of Jihad. About one third of the world is Christian, a quarter Muslim, and the rest Hindi, etc.; it’s curious that 85% of the world’s refugees are Muslim, yet not one of 56 Muslim countries, 11 of which are the richest in the world, are taking in refugees.

So where is the tribute to the victims of 9/11 in all this? Well, it’s not just that we will never forget because that’s not good enough. It’s not that we now have laws such as the “The Patriot Act” that undermine the very essence of our constitutional liberty. It’s not that we invaded the wrong countries in retribution. It’s not that we have had endless wars that accomplished nothing. It’s not our mindless empathy for the very enemies who want to destroy us. So where then is the tribute to those who have suffered these and other horrible events; what do we as Americans do to honor our fellow citizens who died for the mere crime of being Americans?

Well to start, we need to become again real patriots, not some flag waving hyped up crowd drunk on nationalistic fervor, but true patriots who love, support and defend this country, not some foreign land who our government tells us represents our national security; that means we have a deep emotional connection to the people, land, culture and principles that constitute American society. What we do not need is a misguided aggressive ideology of national supremacy as a world power.

Patriotism has nothing to do with political parties or government, and everything to do with the simple common sense that in order to remain free we must preserve and protect our devotion to liberty. It also requires a willingness to respect the rights of others in order to foster a sense of community. This is a societal issue, not a political one which has more to do with allegiance to government than to founding principles. Our tribute to the victims of 9/11 should be that we will unite in true patriotism against those who want to destroy us and not devolve into toxic partisanship.

“The best way to get along is never to forgive an enemy or forget a friend.” Walter Winchell

“Raising children is, in a sense, the reason the society exists in the first place. It’s the most important thing that happens, and it’s the culmination of all the tools and language and social structure that has evolved.” Michael Crichton

The above quote by one of America’s great science fiction writers resonates because it sums up in unequivocal terms the existential purpose of society, i.e., the propagation of the human species. The evolution of humankind has been toward a societal level of existence that created an environment of mutual security, safety, and cooperation without which humans may never have reached a civilizational level. Historically, when societies devolve into chaos, as has often happened, the results are anything but civil, hardly a healthy environment for raising children.

One of the essential elements of a society is its culture, its DNA, which carries the essential characteristics for its successful functioning and development; the more a culture represents civility and mutual respect, the more benevolent a society and its polity. What we are experiencing in today’s world is clearly a state of chaos as society has devolved into two distinct and existentially opposite groups as Robert A. Heinlein observed when he said, “The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” This division within society is not unique to any one country or even any historical period. It occurs when a society’s cultural DNA develops a genetic flaw.

It should be obvious to most people given the chaos among our children as they rampage through public spaces assaulting, vandalizing and stealing, that as a society we have a problem; add to this the rise in mental illness, obesity and scholastic failure, and clearly you have enough issues to realize that somewhere along the way we lost, or worse discarded the ability to raise children successfully. The generational gap separating “Boomers” from their alphabetically designated offspring represents the starting point of a cultural disconnect; the Boomers were closely aligned culturally with their parents, who many historians refer to as “The Greatest Generation” for having not only survived what surely were very chaotic times, but thriving in the years that followed.

What changed in the aftermath of those chaotic times was the largest political alignment since then; it became East versus West, socialism/communism versus freedom and its free markets. What was created we called the Cold War, although it definitely had its hot moments; what was also created were important cultural shifts particularly in the US, i.e., the Civil Rights Movement, the growth of the Federal government, the growing influence of corporations, and the growth of the middle class. That’s a lot of stuff for any society to cope with culturally, although the economic environment, while still having its boom-and-bust periods, was relatively good.

What was also happening culturally was a change in how we raised children; the Boomers retained much of the cultural norms of “The Greatest Generation” regarding this, but with a more permissive attitude. The primary lesson for parents to teach their children is that with freedom comes responsibility for your actions and their consequences, and to achieve a positive consequence requires critical thinking, also referred to as common sense, an essential DNA element of our culture. If parents believe that instilling this discipline in their children is somehow misguided and punitive, they are missing the point that children need this structure to learn how to make good decisions. There is no guarantee that they will always make good decisions because as Mark Twain famously said, “Good decisions come from experience. Experience comes from making bad decisions.” 

Another cultural change began in education. Boomer parents expanded on the prior generations’ focus on education and pushed their kids to get good grades in order to go to college; on the one hand this is a positive cultural trait, but education is not a one size fits all thing, nor does it guarantee a positive consequence. The educational establishment grew exponentially while producing high school graduates with below grade levels in reading and mathematics, and pushed kids on to college without the basic tools required; at the same time teachers’ unions became more powerful often instituting policies through their cronyism with big government that were beneficial for them, but not so much for students; as with many unions this politicalization provided the more radicalized members the opportunity to effect changes in curriculum that became more indoctrination than education.

This cultural change in raising children and in their education has resulted in a degradation of those values and mores that form the mutual bond within society; it has created a genetic flaw in the DNA of our culture unraveling the fabric of our society evidenced by the self-destructive policies and violent actions we see around us. The tradition of common sense, civility and objectivity, self-reliance and individualism has been replaced among the younger generations with the dependencies inherent in collectivism, and the mobocracies that result.  Added to this phenomenon we still have inflation, more wars (perhaps not endless but definitely mindless), tariffs and trade wars, climate catastrophizing, growing antisemitism, extreme partisan politics, uncontrollable migrations, rampant fraud, crushing debt, growing homelessness, declining birth rates…. little wonder we have so much chaos.

While it is easy to become depressed about this situation, we must realize that all of the above happened before, creating the environment that resulted in the Great War and the Great Depression, (why do we title these obscene things as “Great”?!); we should know this as we have the empirical evidence known as history to make us understand that if we are to avoid the consequences of the actions we are causing, then we have to change what we are doing. Political action will take us just so far, but that is like taking drugs to address symptoms while failing to address the societal changes necessary to effect a cure. Chaos will always occur to some degree; baseball is predicated on chaos as anything can happen and usually does, like no-hitters and walk-off wins. It is predicated on the long view with 162 game seasons. No one game matters while every game matters. It is quintessentially American, and in the end, there is always a winner, because in our cultural DNA we have the means to not just survive but to thrive.

“Reading can seriously damage your ignorance.” Anonymous

The above anonymous but humorous quote is a play on warning labels found on food and drug products; while there’s humor in it, there is also an underlying serious issue about the relationship between the decline of reading skills and the resulting ignorance. The failure of US education in basic skills like reading, mathematics and science is more a national security issue than trade. About 90% of American students per the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), are enrolled in public education K-12; clearly, government has a monopoly on education, but despite this obvious quantitative dominance, private education has four times more graduates getting college degrees.

It’s students and their parents who suffer from the corollary of this reality, and that is that taxpayer money for education has failed to educate; consider the fact that the US spends more money per student than any other country, yet many graduate without developing basic reading and writing skills. The refusal to recognize the reality of the failure of government education is a betrayal to our children, grandchildren, and our country; the most logical reaction is that people don’t trust the education of their children to politicians and bureaucrats. There are two alternatives to public education, and they are private school or home schooling; in either case, reading is the most vital intellectual skill to provide for children because it makes all the others possible.

One of the essential skills that come from reading is thinking; as Edmund Burke put it, “Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.” There is another skill needed for reading to lead to thinking and that’s reading comprehension; there’s no way to think about what you read if you don’t understand it. The failure to teach basic reading skills seriously inhibits the student’s comprehension of the one universal language of humanity known as mathematics, which is the essence of all science; the word science itself derives from the Latin “scientia”, meaning knowledge or understanding. Reading also has the psychological effect of enabling students to better understand the world around them, an awareness that reduces confusion and instills curiosity.

Of course this post promotes reading as without it there would be no point in writing it, which leads to the issue of what we read now as adults, assuming we were fortunate as children to have learned this basic life skill; this depends a lot on who we are, and what we do and that is as unique as people and therefore infinitely variable as we may be reading professional journals, recipes, mechanical instructions, shop drawings, newspapers or Marvel comics. The most common reading medium used to be newspapers and magazines, but recent generations have turned to social media, which seldom consists of any meaningful or in-depth discussion of an issue and few answers to important questions, just an endless stream of narratives and slogans.

While TV, movies, podcasts, etc., require audio, visual and language skills, they are not the same as reading but more like listening; reading improves brain function by incorporating various levels of perception, strengthens memory, increases focus, expands vocabulary, and reduces stress, while at the same time informs the reader with perspectives otherwise not apparent; this can be the case with both fiction and non-fiction depending on the talent and depth of the author. At one time not so long ago, books were the main if not only form of disseminating knowledge, which at times created conflicts between the secular and religious elements of society; at various times in history books were banned or even burned as knowledge was the enemy of whomever viewed it as a threat to their power.

It was inevitable that along with the poor level of reading skills in education, we now have among adults a decline across the last two decades of over 40% participation in reading books; fewer than half American adults read at least one book a year. This major shift in a post-literate digital world is not limited to any age, ethnic or racial demographic or educational background, but constitutes a troubling societal atrophying of essential cognitive skills; this has been attributed by various scholars to digital distractions with technology, “programming” our brains to rely on instant stimulation rather than the long-term focus required in reading. One of the cultural manifestations of Western Civilization was its emphasis on literacy; if you want to preserve that culture, then start reading again.

“You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.” Ray Bradbury

“The object of waging a war is always to be in a better position in which to wage another war.” George Orwell, 1984 

One of Trump’s major campaign promises was that there would be no more “Forever Wars”. It was a potent motivation for many who supported him as the country was both exhausted and depressed after years in Iraq and Afghanistan with no difference in the outcome had we not been involved, similar to the Viet Nam War. The waste of resources, both human and financial, was staggering for all these wars, and were followed by periods of weak economies; none of them were constitutional or had clear reasons or coherent goals.

Despite Trump’s promises, and his denial that the Iran War will be forever, here we are again in a war that was supposed to be over months ago; it has no constitutional legitimacy, but it does have a valid claim to a clear and present danger, with very specific goals. However, as much as we are “winning” militarily, we don’t seem to be getting anywhere; it seems stuck in a cycle of war on and off, on and off… with endless peace negotiations in between that also don’t seem to be getting anywhere. As Will Rogers once observed, “Every war has been preceded by a peace conference. That’s what always starts the next war.”

In the meantime, The Russo-Ukrainian war began in February 2014 and rages on now for more than twelve years. Despite reports that Ukraine has now gotten the upper hand, the fact is that Russia is in effect at war with NATO who has been the main support for Ukraine, which in a way makes Ukraine their proxy. This support has no legitimate basis as Ukraine is not a member of NATO, but rest on the claim of defending democracy against an authoritarian regime, despite the fact that Ukraine is actually ruled by an oligarchy of Neo-Nazis who refuse to hold elections and who control all the media. As Aleksander Solzhenitsyn insightfully observed, “A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny.” Further, does anyone really expect Ukraine to ever be able to repay its supporters?

Some clarifications need to be considered, namely The War Powers Resolution of 1973 and the clear and present danger regarding Iran. The former was actually proposed as a way to limit the executive branch’s war powers when in effect it provided a work around for it to do so; there is no constitutional amendment altering the mandate for congressional approval for war. The latter is based on intelligence that Iran was close to acquiring nuclear weapons which it would use against Israel and the West; given Iran’s historical insatiable lust for destruction, we should give that position credibility.

What is lost in all the above is the fact that Americans have yet to recognize that the political narrative of the US as the world’s policeman due to its status as a superpower, a narrative that is bipartisan, is essentially flawed. Here are the words of one of America’s most famous leaders in WWII, General Douglas McArthur: “Talk of imminent threat to our national security through the application of external force is pure nonsense. Indeed, it is a part of the general patterns of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear. While such an economy may produce a sense of seeming prosperity for the moment, it rests on an illusionary foundation of complete unreliability and renders among our political leaders almost a greater fear of peace than is their fear of war.”

Many people were shocked at McArthur’s statement given his military background and together with other differences he had with Truman, were assumed to be the basis for his dismissal. What should be remembered by this episode and Eisenhower’s warnings regarding the “Military Industrial Complex” are borne out by the fact that both men saw the basis for what we now call “Forever Wars”. The United States has foreign military bases in more than 160 countries, i.e., war is a racket supported by fears created by politicians causing the US to get involved with geopolitical feuds between nations all over the world, few if any of which require the United States to choose sides.

It is an historical fact that many wars are preceded by periods of protectionism with their trade disputes, tariffs, and sanctions; this coupled with some vague moralizing narratives like saving democracy, have led the US to policies contrary to the original American tradition of foreign non-intervention. Whatever we call America’s interests should be defined only as they represent protecting American lives and sovereignty; anything else represents the failed policies that have given us endless wars and a debt greater now than our GDP. We’ve been doing this same thing over and over again and expecting a different result like Einstein’s definition of insanity. Interestingly, while the US regards China as the greatest threat to peace, following our normalized relations with China in 1979, the US has been involved in forever wars while China has not.

In Garet Garrett’s “Hallmarks of Empire”, he lists as the fourth one “a system of satellite nations” with which “for any one of them to involve us in war it is necessary only for the Executive Power in Washington to decide that its defense is somehow essential to the security of the United States.” What is necessary to address these false narratives is for Americans to understand that they are propaganda in service to special interests. What ultimately pays for these wars are taxes, but as Thomas Paine once observed “Taxes are not raised to carry on wars, but that wars are raised to carry on taxes.” However, those taxes are often hidden in the manipulations of central banking, and in the US that’s the Federal Reserve, which usually results in inflation as the war debt is monetized. Where does this all lead is not certain, but we will certainly pay the price.

“War involves in its progress such a train of unforeseen circumstances that no human wisdom can calculate the end; it has but one thing certain, and that is to increase taxes.” Thomas Paine

“Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.” Robert A. Heinlein

In following the investigations into Anthony Fauci’s handling of the Covid Pandemic, what strikes me the most is the man’s apparent self-deception that he was acting in the best interest of the American people and not himself. Today’s Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing should have been Fauci’s opportunity to, at the very least, provide some level of credible explanations for the chaos, confusion and harm his actions, advice and behavior caused during that critical period.

Instead, his evocation of the 5^th Amendment 111 times in response to questions about documented evidence, despite the blanket pardon provided by President Biden, projected an image of both contempt and deceit. With few exceptions, at a Federal level there’s no legal claim for the 5^th  Amendment if one has such immunity; apparently, the Senate committee will be deliberating that very issue in considering contempt charges against Fauci.

Regardless of the outcomes from these Senate hearings, the pretentious claims of altruistic intentions by not only Fauci, but by all involved with the deceptions and egregious policies enforced during that time, constitute a blatant betrayal of actual science, constitutional rights, and common sense; this destruction of public trust will remain with us as synonymous with the Covid Pandemic itself.

One of the worst practices by the government during this period was the treatment, particularly by Fauci himself, discrediting other scientists and medical professionals who disagreed with them, ignorantly claiming that the “…science is settled!”, which is contrary to the very concept of what science is; it was Thomas Sowell who expressed so well that, “If you are not allowed to question an idea, it is not science but ideology.”

The worst part of Fauci’s deception, and the most damaging documented evidence was his funding of the gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite the fact that during the Obama administration such research was banned for the obvious reasons; further, I would think the fact that he manipulated such funding through proxies should constitute a criminal activity, but again he has this blanket pardon. Considering the fact that this laboratory is operated by the military of the CCP, there is the issue of whether or not such funding is treasonous.

Among the excuses offered by the media and those who were part of the administration of that time was that this pandemic was something extraordinary in history; the Bubonic Plague hit humanity at least a dozen known times, the HIV/AIDS epidemic is still with us, the Spanish Flu had far greater mortality, as does EBOLA, and the Antonine Plague (Smallpox and Measles) wiped out a third of the Roman Empire’s population…clearly epidemic diseases are not new to the human race. What’s also not new is the politics of taking advantage of a crisis, what James Madison called “…the rallying cry of the tyrant.”

Another excuse offered about the onerous and failed policies of the administration during COVID was that it created a very complex problem; complexity is one of the primary excuses of failed policies, especially ones that lack sufficient information about the problem itself in order to construct a policy. This was clearly the case with COVID given the fact that even its origins were denied by those that created them, who were also the same people that suppressed information from others who called them out about that, Fauci chief among them. Hopefully, the American people will remember that the critical lesson learned with this sorry episode of our history is in whom to trust.

“One of the common failings among honorable people is a failure to appreciate how thoroughly dishonorable some other people can be and how dangerous it is to trust them.” Thomas Sowell

“We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

The simple truth about economics that many people just don’t get is that it’s independent from the observer, but to ignore the observation will leave you ignorant of reality. Rand was a disciple of Aristotle, and the opening quote is an example of his empiricism that knowledge ultimately derives from perception, which is the source of the concepts that enable the understanding of reality, i.e., perception is not the same as knowledge but ultimately its source.

The fact that socialism has historically been such an abject failure provides empirical knowledge that repeating its implementation but expecting different results is insanity, willful ignorance, or worse, a means to power; expectations are what socialist think and say will happen, reality is what actually does, and when this disparity occurs it usually leads them to less civil if not violent behavior. It is a delusional condition to hold false beliefs about reality despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, and delusions are what drives the greed for power.

While the Democratic Party reels from the rise of socialism within it, we should not ignore some of the socialist policies of the Republican Party, such as Trump’s use of tariff’s, which are nothing more than a tax on the American people, and in this case taxation without representation; I believe there was a revolution about that. This reality is dismissed with the narrative that other countries are taking advantage of the US with their unfair trade practices; this ignores the economic reality of comparative advantage and division of labor, and the obvious harm to Americans by artificially causing higher prices.

The reality is that trade is “The Wealth of Nations” as Adam Smith so clearly illustrated, and free trade creates the most wealth; trade balances are a myth as the less we export and more we import, the more stuff we get for trading less stuff – it’s a “stuff surplus” we need to understand, money is only the medium of exchange, not an end in itself. Whatever we export, we can’t use for ourselves, and that goes for whomever we import from. All countries export whatever they produce in surplus based on some comparative advantage; this varies from country to country, creating a division of labor which provides the efficiency of production that creates wealth; that specialization is what has made human progress possible, and that’s why trade wars are economic killers.

Another example of Republican socialism is the Iranian War; by side stepping the constitution with another use of the War Powers Act, Trump joins the presidential parade with Wilson, FDR, Bush, Obama, and Biden, guilty of the socialistic tendency to expand executive power. I absolutely agree that the Iranian regime is the worst state sponsor of terrorism of our time and should be annihilated, but the issue is how and by whom? We should not allow ourselves the delusions created by narrative addicts rewriting reality just because the lie feels good; truth matters even when it’s inconvenient.

Given the missteps by the Republicans, the Democrats should win the House in the midterms, and perhaps the Senate too, but considering the chaotic, and at times toxic primaries they have had, betting on the outcome is very risky. While it serves various Democratic narratives about how some of the radical and extreme elements of their party do not represent the traditional core “moderate” or “centrist” democrats, the perception by most people who think independently is that the narratives speak to distinctions but not differences. Likewise, we have Republican narratives that tariffs and wars are really for the benefit of the American people, as if we haven’t had enough of death and taxes.

I am not alone in my perception that the left/right spectrum as the paradigm of political parties is poorly conceived and totally inaccurate as to defining policy or concept. The labels are all wrong too. “Liberal” as in the “Enlightenment” of the 18^thC meant liberty in all aspects of life, whereas in current times “Liberal” and “Progressive” really means some variant of socialist thinking and therefore poorly designated. As far as “Conservatives” go, they too believe in coercion when it suits them, but let them all have their self-described titles as they can’t change the perception that it’s all about power, not liberty.

With liberty, you get to choose what you do and say, and that all requires thinking; when you do it objectively, you do it with an open mind, considering the facts rather than your personal feelings or influences from narratives; you rely on your own observations and analysis in order to understand not only the reality of what a given situation is, but what that means in your life. Unfortunately, we are all subjected to the relentless and repetitive droning from politicians and their proxies in media because the motive of power seekers is the promotion of falsehoods as often familiarity is not easily distinguished from the truth; that makes getting to reality harder, but ignoring it still has consequences.

“Some people are puzzled by the fact that so much that is said and done by politicians seems remote. But reality is not what gets politicians elected. Appearances, rhetoric and emotions are what get them elected. Reality is what the voters and taxpayers are left to deal with, as a result of electing them.” Thomas Sowell