Trevor Loudon: America’s ‘Unfolding Socialist Revolution’ & Connections to China’s Communist Party

America is in the midst of an “unfolding socialist revolution,” argues anti-communist activist, researcher, and filmmaker Trevor Loudon. And a number of the individuals and groups involved in this effort have connections to the Chinese Communist Party. This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

Tragic First-Person Accounts of the Effects of COVID-19 School Closures on Children

BY STACEY LENNOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2021/02/04/tragic-first-person-accounts-of-the-effects-of-covid-19-school-closures-on-children-n1422925;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

For reasons unknown, there are still raging debates over whether or not to reopen schools. Simultaneously, schools in states like Georgia and Florida have been open since the fall and managed to keep the children whose parents want them to attend school in person open most of the time. Where they have not been prohibited, private schools opened nationwide. Multiple studies in the U.S. have shown that transmission of COVID-19 is minimal in the school setting, supported by data across the globe.

Even the CDC has recognized this data, citing “scant” transmission in the classroom. Yet nationwide, children are still learning remotely. Most often, continued closures involve irrational demands from teachers’ unions and teachers’ associations. This debate is raging in several counties in Virginia, where it is up to the individual school districts to decide how to provide instruction. One mother, Yael Levin-Sheldon, has had enough.

She has been coordinating a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to collect data on the negative impact these closures have had on children. Today, she released the data summary for emergency room visits for self-harm and suicide for children between 10 and 19 in her Central Virginia health region. The incidence of emergency room visits in this age group per 100,000 has gone up year-over-year in every single one of the seven counties. Some of the increases are startling.

In Henrico County, Levin-Sheldon’s home county, the rate went from 34.6 per 100,000 in 2019 to 180.8 per 100,000 in 2020. She was motivated to begin collecting data after advocating for schools in her district in June. In the process of her advocacy, she has been called a teacher-killer and a racist in public meetings and online forums. Levin-Sheldon said she is frustrated because all of the private schools in her area are open. Watching her own children’s behavior changes has been devastating.

Her two children were thriving students who loved school and received good grades. Now, she re-teaches them each evening after their remote learning classes to help them to maintain their grades. However, she has needed to seek professional help for both children. Her older child is exhibiting symptoms of OCD and has developed several compulsive habits, including obsessive handwashing. Her younger child has become emotionally labile, showing a wide range of behavior in short periods, from severe anger outbursts to inconsolable tears in minutes.

Levin-Sheldon says there is a school board meeting on Thursday, but the public is not allowed to attend. She expects no progress as the last teachers’ association demand was to fully vaccinate the teachers a month apart and wait the two weeks for effectiveness. The CDC director said today that that was not required. At any rate, it will not happen in Henrico County until the end of March in the best-case scenario. That is right before spring break, and at best, children may get a few weeks of in-person classes before school is out. Levin-Sheldon said:

I know a number of teachers and don’t blame them. Several are ready to return to school and are afraid to speak up. They are being bullied by the Henricho Education Association. I blame a lack of leadership from the school board and by Superintendent Dr. Amy Cashwell.

In Chesterfield County, Kristin Gladstone has similar frustrations. She has a special-needs high school student who is back to school in-person, only because of the small class size. These students are alone in the building, and the student is missing his regular classroom experience outside of the special education program.

Her freshman has attended school for precisely four days since the original shutdown. When they immediately went back to distance learning, her child looked at her and said, “Mom, I’m just losing hope.” This honors student struggled to get average grades last semester and ended up with two Ds. Now, the child is talking about dropping out of school and suffering from decreased appetite, insomnia, and wild mood swings.

Gladstone is functioning as a mother, teacher, and caregiver, taking care of her terminally-ill mother. It is a daily battle to get her freshman to log into remote class and attempt to complete his work — and hers. She is seeking therapy for her child but firmly believes a return to school would have prevented all of this. Just attending for four days in November started to improve her child’s appetite.

School closures have had devastating impacts outside Virginia, as well. On Tucker Carlson Tonight, attorney Laura Grochocki appeared to share the stories she has collected from clients and her community. She represents Lisa Moore, whose son Travis Till committed suicide during the school closure orders from Illinois Governor  J.B. Pritzker. Grochocki is receiving death threats for taking on this case through her small not-for-profit Remember America Action organization. In the interview, she says Moore’s story is just one of the many she has heard, and the foundation cannot take all of the cases her team would like to:

[There is an] outpouring of people calling us and begging us for help. And parents calling us and asking for someone to help them. And the stories of these parents and their kids. Some kids, not just Trevor Till, but at least ten other cases in Illinois that I am aware of kids committing suicide. And eating disorders and hospitalizations over depression. And thousands and thousands of kids from low-income, diverse and rural communities not able to go to college because they are not going to be eligible for scholarships because they didn’t get scouted their junior year…….The crisis is out of control and no one wants to talk about it.

Grochocki said Remember America Action would have filed hundreds of lawsuits across the county if her team had the resources to do it. She said this case was a simple Equal Protection case because Governor Pritzker allowed professional and college teams to play but teen athletes have been crushed by the restrictions.

It is long past time for our national and local leaders to end this madness. Not all private schools have invested millions in new ventilation systems and plexiglass. Most of the studies have used commonsense hygiene measures and cloth masks with additional cleaning requirements. The need for more federal spending is a ridiculous excuse at this point.

The disadvantages that children, even in good schools and without learning disabilities, will have compared to their peers in places where schools are open is unconscionable at this point. There is no way to know how long the gap will exist or the long-term effects of the mental health crisis. It is high time someone pulls a Ronald Reagan with the air-traffic controllers and tells these teachers’ unions and associations their members can be replaced in short order or they will start docking their pay. The future of too many children depends on it.

WATCH the full segment on Tucker Carlson Tonight. A call is played during the segment where obvious profanity is beeped out.

 

New York Times Calls for Biden to Create a “Truth Commission”; Appoint a “Reality Czar”

BY JAMES MURPHY

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/new-york-times-calls-for-biden-to-create-a-truth-commission-appoint-a-reality-czar;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Apparently unhappy with their tenuous grasp of the American public’s attention and trust when it comes to who to believe when it comes to the news, the New York Times is calling for President Joe Biden to take drastic measures against free speech in the United States. Technology columnist Kevin Roose amplified calls by left-wing ideologues for the president to address what he called the “hoaxes, lies and collective delusions” of some Americans by creating a “truth commission” and appointing a “reality czar” to his administration.

It’s all in the name of “national unity,” according to Roose: “How do you unite a country in which millions of people have chosen to create their own version of reality?” Roose lamented.

“I’ve spent the last several years reporting on our national reality crisis,” Roose wrote. “I worry that unless the Biden administration treats conspiracy theories and disinformation as the urgent threats they are, our parallel universes will only drift further apart, and the potential for violent unrest and civic dysfunction will only grow.”

In search of an answer, Roose consulted his own handpicked “experts” to explore a solution to this dire situation in which people have their own opinions. It’s a cliche to say that the solutions Roose’s experts came up with are Orwellian — cliché, but also quite true.

Joan Donovan of Harvard called for the president to create a “truth commission,” similar to the 9/11 Commission, whose job would be to do an in-depth search of the causes, planning, and excecution of the so-called siege that took place at the Capitol on January 6.

“There must be accountability for these actions,” Donovan said. “My fear is that we will get distracted as a society and focus too much on giving voice to the fringe groups that came out in droves for Trump.”

Nothing Orwellian about that at all.

This “truth commission,” Roose noted, should also meet regularly with Big Tech platforms such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter to assist those entities with policing of their platforms. Roose also suggests that such platforms receive “safe harbor exemptions” from the federal government, which would allow the tech sector to share data with the government without breaking any privacy laws.

Sure, because Big Tech in America is not protected enough under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Roose and his experts also suggested that the algorithms of Big Tech platforms be audited regularly to find out how and where conspiracy-minded people find each other. This will give the folks at the Southern Poverty Law Center and other such groups the tools they need to expose right-wing movements before it’s too late.

“We must open the hood on social media so that civil rights lawyers and real watchdog organizations can investigate human rights abuses enabled or amplified by technology,” Donovan said.

Such a “truth commission” would need to be careful about who they labeled domestic terrorists and who are just cranks that bear watching, according to Roose.

“A paranoid retiree who spends all day reading Qanon forums isn’t the same as an armed militia leader, and we should delineate one from the other,” Roose pointed out. Both are problems, of course, but the armed militia leader is a more immediate problem.

Roose failed to mention either Antifa or Black Lives Matter, two groups that contributed greatly to the violent riots that occurred throughout 2020.

Also needed, according to Roose, would be a Cabinet-level position, which he refers to as a “reality czar.” The reality czar would be responsible for centralizing the federal government’s response to “disinformation and domestic extremism,” which Roose termed “haphazard and spread across several agencies.”

So, the “reality czar” would presumably hold wide discretion across federal agencies to determine what is reality and what is conspiracy. It sounds like a big job for one person — determining the entire nation’s reality.

Free speech and political discourse no longer matter to the Left in America. Such things only cause trouble, and authoritarian governments don’t like trouble — they smash it. The real fear is that the executive order-crazy Biden administration — whoever is in charge of it — might actually consider ideas such as these. They can’t have people thinking freely, after all.

Former CIA top dog Robert Grenier: We should hunt down pro-Trump Americans as we hunted down al-Qaeda members

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/02/former-cia-top-dog-robert-grenier-we-should-hunt-down-trump-supporting-americans-as-we-hunted-down-al-qaeda-members;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“Yes. And that is that, you know, even at the seeming height of the crisis immediately after 9/11, there really weren’t that many members of al-Qaida in Afghanistan. And the thrust of our campaign there was, yes, to hunt down al-Qaida, but primarily to remove the supportive environment in which they were able to live and to flourish.”

That means Grenier doesn’t just want to destroy Trump (as he explains in the section not reproduced below) and hunt down those who actually committed crimes at the Capitol. He wants to crush legitimate political dissent and hunt down Americans who oppose the far-Left agenda as if they were terrorists. This has been a long time coming. But only now is it being repeated at the highest levels by people with power and influence.

“Former CIA Officer: Treat Domestic Extremism As An Insurgency,” by Mary Louise Kelly, NPR, February 2, 2021:

When it comes to domestic extremists such as those who stormed the Capitol, a longtime CIA officer argues that the U.S. should treat them as an insurgency.

That means using counterinsurgency tactics — similar in some ways to those used in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Robert Grenier served as the CIA’s station chief for Pakistan and Afghanistan in 2001. He went on to become the CIA’s Iraq mission manager and then director of the CIA Counterterrorism Center from 2004 to 2006.

“We may be witnessing the dawn of a sustained wave of violent insurgency within our own country, perpetrated by our own countrymen,” Grenier wrote in The New York Times last week. And without national action, he argues, “extremists who seek a social apocalypse … are capable of producing endemic political violence of a sort not seen in this country since Reconstruction.”

In an interview with All Things Considered, Grenier discusses what that national action would mean.

As someone who has watched many violent insurgencies unfold in various countries around the world, what felt the same to you? What felt different?

I don’t want to be one to suggest that somehow the United States is going to in any way resemble Iraq or Afghanistan at the height of violence. But what I think is useful is to have some way of thinking about the problem and thinking through the elements of the solution. So I think as in any insurgency situation, you have committed insurgents who are typically a relatively small proportion of the affected population. But what enables them to carry forward their program is a large number of people from whom they can draw tacit support. And that’s what I’m primarily concerned with here. I think what is most important is that we drive a wedge between those violent individuals and the people who may otherwise see them as reflecting their interests and fighting on their behalf….

You were station chief in Islamabad on 9/11, which meant it suddenly became your problem to find and kill or capture Osama bin Laden and other senior al-Qaida leaders. Without comparing American citizens to al-Qaida, are there lessons that you take from that?

Yes. And that is that, you know, even at the seeming height of the crisis immediately after 9/11, there really weren’t that many members of al-Qaida in Afghanistan. And the thrust of our campaign there was, yes, to hunt down al-Qaida, but primarily to remove the supportive environment in which they were able to live and to flourish. And that meant fighting the Taliban. And I think that is the heart of what we need to deal with here. Hunting down people who are criminals, that is something that which U.S. law enforcement is very well capable of doing and doing while preserving fundamental civil rights. That’s in some ways the easiest part of the problem. The difficult part of the problem is affecting the environment within which violent elements otherwise would be able to thrive.

BARBARA LOE FISHER: Vaccination and Censorship~The Truth Will Set Us Free

The co-founder and president of the 39-year old non-profit charity National Vaccine Information Center founded announces the opening of the October 2020 Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination: Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century for free viewing online. She responds to the publishing of false and misleading information about the conference, which features video presentations by 51 speakers from the US and other countries. The written commentary is anchored with more than 90 references and can be read at nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/January-2021/vaccination-and-censorship.aspx

SEE: https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/January-2021/vaccination-and-censorship.aspx;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On December 22, 2020, a non-profit limited company based in Great Britain that calls itself the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) published a report entitled The Anti-Vaxx Playbook. It contains false and misleading information about the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination, which was sponsored by the 39-year old U.S. non-profit educational charity the National Vaccine Information Center, and held online in October 2020. Promotion of the CCDH report resulted in the spreading of fake news and misinformation by mainline media outlets in Great Britain and the U.S.
NVIC’s pay-for-view digital conference was transparently open to the public and featured presentations by 51 speakers from the U.S. and other countries discussing vaccine science, public health policy and law, informed consent and civil liberties. Dedicated to “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century,” the conference was made available on Feb. 2, 2021 for free viewing online.
Read the rest of this referenced commentary, watch the video or make a comment here.
Read NVIC’s Feb. 2, 2021 press release here.

 

Pope Calls for Unity of All Religions

POPE FRANCIS WANTS A ONE WORLD CHURCH WITH HIM AS ITS HEAD

SEE: http://www.proclaimingthegospel.org;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The first Pope Video of 2021 was released with a message of global unity: Pope Francis asked that we open ourselves to each other and unite, as human beings and as brothers and sisters, “with those who pray according to other cultures, other traditions and other beliefs. Religions, in particular, cannot renounce the urgent task of building bridges between peoples and cultures." Read more here.
Mike's Comment: If the pope understood God's Word, he would realize that all unbelievers are already united in a common bond as brothers and sisters. Those who have not been made alive in Christ are children of the devil and sons of disobedience (Eph. 2:1-2). The apostle John wrote: “It is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God" (1 John 3:10). The Lord Jesus made this clear when He rebuked a group of apostate religious leaders saying, “You are of your father the devil” (John 8:44).
The pope's push for a one-world religion will meet little resistance after the rapture of the church when the Lord Jesus returns to take all born-again Christians home to heaven (1 Thes. 4:16-17). The people left behind will be those described by the pope: "brothers and sisters who pray according to other cultures, other traditions and other beliefs." The global religion will include all who dwell on the earth and they will worship a false Christ (Rev. 13:8).
_______________________________________________________________________
How Do You Spell Hypocrisy?
Pope Francis extended his “cordial good wishes and the assurance of my prayers” to pro-abortion U.S. President Joe Biden, a man who claims to be Catholic while backing pro-abortion, anti-family, and pro-LGBT policies. Biden supports abortion “under any circumstance". He marked the 48th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion with a pledge to make sure that “everyone” who wants it has access to killing their preborn children.
The Pope prayed that Biden’s decisions “will be guided by a concern for building a society marked by authentic justice and freedom, together with unfailing respect for the rights and dignity of every person, especially the poor, the vulnerable and those who have no voice.” At no point did the Pope call upon Biden to show concern for the hundreds of thousands of preborn babies who are killed by abortion each year in America. (CONTINUED BELOW)

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Pope’s message (read full message below) comes after the Vatican ordered the U.S. bishops’ conference (USCCB) to hold back a statement that was to have been released this morning that called attention to Biden’s pledge to pursue policies that would advance “moral evils” in the areas of “abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender.”

Sources in the Vatican told The Pillar that the statement was, in the words of The Pillar, “spiked after intervention from the Vatican Secretariat of State, hours before it was due to be released.”

That statement is, however, now available on the USCCB website, although it is not listed among the regular news articles.

The “Statement on the Inauguration of Joseph R. Biden” was penned by conference president Archbishop José Gomez. Noting that Biden is the country’s “first president in 60 years to profess the Catholic faith,” Gomez pointed out that the incoming president’s agenda does not square with Catholic teaching.

“So, I must point out that our new President has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender. Of deep concern is the liberty of the Church and the freedom of believers to live according to their consciences,” he wrote.

Gomez stressed in the statement that abortion will remain the “preeminent priority” for American bishops during the Biden administration.

“For the nation’s bishops, the continued injustice of abortion remains the ‘preeminent priority.’ Preeminent does not mean ‘only.’ We have deep concerns about many threats to human life and dignity in our society. But as Pope Francis teaches, we cannot stay silent when nearly a million unborn lives are being cast aside in our country year after year through abortion,” he wrote.

According to The Pillar, sources familiar with the situation said there was, in the words of The Pillar,  “concern in the Vatican that a statement from Gomez seen as critical of the Biden administration might seem to force the pope’s hand in his own dealings with Biden.”

While Pope Francis has been a vocal critic of former U.S. President Donald Trump and his policies (see for example herehere, and here), he appears to have a more accommodating relationship with Biden, a man who claims to be Catholic while supporting unrestricted abortion.

Biden related last month how he and the Pope had talked on the phone after the November 3 presidential election and how the Holy Father had extended “blessings and congratulations.” In a short press statement released on the Biden-Harris transition website, Biden “thanked His Holiness for extending blessings and congratulations and noted his appreciation for His Holiness’ leadership in promoting peace, reconciliation, and the common bonds of humanity around the world.”

Last month, the Pope included in a tweet the words “build back better,” a phrase that is central to Joe Biden’s plan to remake America in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

***

Honorable Joseph R. Biden

President of the United States of America

The White House

Washington, DC

“On the occasion of your inauguration as the forty-sixth President of the United States of America, I extend cordial good wishes and the assurance of my prayers that Almighty God will grant you wisdom and strength in the exercise of your high office. Under your leadership, may the American people continue to draw strength from the lofty political, ethical and religious values that have inspired the nation since its founding. At a time when the grave crises facing our human family call for farsighted and united responses, I pray that your decisions will be guided by a concern for building a society marked by authentic justice and freedom, together with unfailing respect for the rights and dignity of every person, especially the poor, the vulnerable and those who have no voice. I likewise ask God, the source of all wisdom and truth, to guide your efforts to foster understanding, reconciliation and peace within the United States and among the nations of the world in order to advance the universal common good. With these sentiments, I willingly invoke upon you and your family and the beloved American people an abundance of blessings.”

Pope Francis

 

 

‘JOIN THE CORONA CULT: TRAUMATIZE YOUR CHILDREN AND REAP THE ADMIRING LOOKS OF FELLOW CORONAZIS’ (VIDEO)

BY AMY MEK

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/join-the-corona-cult-traumatize-your-children-and-reap-the-admiring-looks-of-fellow-coronazis-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Gunnar Kaiser, a German writer and political blogger, released a satirical video addressing the many extreme reactions toward the coronavirus. Sometimes humor can offer people a small break from the horrifying realities of having their freedoms and rights stripped from them under the guise of doing what’s best for them.

Germans have long known that Chancellor Angela Merkel has totalitarian instincts. Many Germans fear that if given the chance, Merkel will try to establish total control over society. Unfortunately, many of their fears are now coming to fruition. The controversial leader seems to be using the virus to set the foundation for a totalitarian dictatorship.

Watch the following video by Gunnar Kaiser exclusively translated by RAIR Foundation USA. As stated in his video description,

“From the makers ‘of all cults in history comes a product that finally puts an end to your disgust for skepticism and criticism: CORONA CULT! Use common sense and join now! What are you waiting for?”

POPULATION CONTROL GROUP CHEERS AS BIDEN FORCES TAXPAYERS TO FUND OVERSEAS ABORTIONS

BY RENEE NAL

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/population-control-group-cheers-as-biden-forces-taxpayers-to-fund-overseas-abortions/

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Thanks to a Biden Executive Order, American citizens are forced to pay for abortions outside the United States, once again satisfying the leftist population control obsession. The group “Population Connection,” once known as the Zero Population Growth movement or ZPG, is cheering the move.

“With the Global Gag Rule lifted, communities in countries from Guatemala to Kenya to Nepal will be one step closer to getting the reproductive health care they deserve,” a Press Release from the Population Connection gushed. “Family planning” is and has always been about population control.

President Trump stopped taxpayer funding from going to foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that conduct abortions or promote abortions in foreign countries after Obama reinstated the funds during his reign. It will be no surprise to RAIR readers that George Soros’ Open Society Foundations gave funding to pro-abortion groups abroad in an attempt to fight President Trump.

Known as the “Global Gag Rule,” or the “Mexico City Policy,” President Ronald Reagan first stopped funds from being distributed to pro-abortion organizations in 1984.

Founded by Paul Ehrlich in 1968, the Population Connection was based on the notoriously failed predictions of massive overpopulation and global catastrophe from his book, The Population Bomb. At the time, Ehrichs’s book was a wild success that “triggered a wave of repression around the world.” Despite the fact that Ehrlich’s dire predictions never materialized, the Population Connection endures and gives plenty of money to democrats to promote their population control agenda.

The Global Her Act

One of those Democrats, former Rep. Nita Lowey, introduced the “Global Her Act,” which “would prevent a future president from unilaterally reinstating the Global Gag Rule,” according to the Population Connection. The bill has 196 sponsors, all democrats.

“With majorities in both chambers and a president on the record in favor of the bill,” Stacie Murphy, Director of Congressional Relations at the Population Connection declares on their website, “there’s no reason we can’t pass it this year. But it’s only going to happen if we’re willing to fight for it.”

To be clear, they are “fighting” for Americans to pay for abortion in foreign countries.

The Global Her Act is a perfect example of a radical group writing legislation, and then bribing elected officials to promote it, as discussed at RAIR.

It is about Population Control

The Population Connection Action Fund is not shy about their mission, which “educates and advocates progressive action to stabilize the human population.” They seek to achieve this “stabilization” through abortion, as well as sterilization. In the 70’s, according to their website, ZPG even “opened vasectomy clinics.”

According to their 2019 990 form, the Population Connection “‘deepened partnerships with international NGOs’ such as Conservation Through Public Health and Wings Guatemala, which performed 2,147 tubal ligations, 286 vasectomies, 893 IUDs and 2,836 subdermal hormonal implants.”

Population Connection even has a curriculum for k-12 students they claim is used by “[T]ens of thousands of teachers” in America. While pro-abortion activists cheer, elected Republicans are silent.

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/

____________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

The Media's Oh-So-Devout Catholic Joe Biden Has Run Into a Little Trouble With the Bishops...

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2021/01/30/medias-biden-is-the-greatest-catholic-since-francis-of-assisi-line-is-not-going-well-n1419619

INSIDE GERMANY’S MAXIMUM SECURITY CORONA JAIL FOR QUARANTINE VIOLATORS (VIDEOS)

Regenwolken ziehen über die Jugendarrestanstalt Moltsfelde

BREAKING: Inside Germany’s Maximum Security Corona Jail For Quarantine Violators (Videos)

BY AMY MEK

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/breaking-inside-germanys-maximum-security-corona-jail-for-quarantine-violators-videos/

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Germans in the Northern state of Schleswig-Holstein, who do not adhere to the Chinese coronavirus state-mandated quarantine will end up behind bars. The corona prison which has been set up in the former Mortsfelde youth detention center, will be policed by retired law enforcement officers and prison wardens.

The retasked prison should be ready to open tomorrow, February 1, 2021, and will house some of the state’s most dangerous corona sinners. “We needed another possibility to keep people under control who are endangering themselves and others” claims the state.

Individuals will be locked up for such things as refusing to quarantine after engaging in travel, coming in contact with high-risk individuals or receiving a positive test result. The choice is simple according to the state, “you stay in a narrow cell or, as an alternative, your own home.”

The facility is able to accommodate up to six prisoners. 12 to 15 employees will watch the prisoners around the clock to ensure the convicts do not leave their twelve square meter tiled cell. In addition, 30 former police and correctional officers volunteered for this task.

Barbed wire and a security fence surround the facility. Prisoners live with metal bars on their window, a hard mattress, and are fed through a food flap in their doors. The cells are sparsely furnished, there is hardly any freedom of movement. However, television and mobile phones are allowed in the cells. To protect against infection, the prison reports each cell has its own bathroom.

This ratio alone of guards to prisoners suggests that the left-wing government is not concerned with fighting the pandemic efficiently, but rather with control, intimidation and repression. As previously reported by RAIR Foundation USA, many other German states are building prisons for violators who refuse to adhere to the mandatory measures.

It is unclear how many quarantine objectors there are in the state reported attorney Sönke E. Schulz, the managing director of the Schleswig-Holstein County Council. Schulz, the leader of the council explained that he hopes that the sinners will gain insight through these tough measures. Those who behave well and have learned their lesson, should be able to return home after a “normal quarantine period”,

IIf the person can credibly affirm, that they will stick to the order [of quarantine] in the future, and do not leave their own home, then it is also made possible that the person can return there.

Watch the following German news reports on the opening of coronavirus jails,

Infection Protection Act (IfSG)

As previously reported at RAIR, Germany’s controversial Infection Protection Act (IfSG). allows the state to isolate citizens in prison facilities.

Amendments made to the IfSG during what may be a false flag of coronavirus have stripped citizens of basic civil liberties and given Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government dictatorial powers.

Under the IfSG, the state announced a multitude of measures such as; confiscating children and placing them in ‘forced Isolation coronavirus facilities, compulsory coronavirus vaccinations, to mandating masks, imposing curfews, limits on gatherings as well as closing businesses.

German citizens have been particularly brutalized during the coronavirus pandemic, despite the extremely low mortality rate. Merkel seems to be using the virus to prepare the ground for a totalitarian dictatorship. Will Germans who refuse to take the gene-altering mRNA injection mislabelled as a “vaccination” be imprisoned next?

See a list below of the RAIR articles addressing coronavirus tyranny in Germany.

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/

Read the following RAIR articles on Coronavirus tyranny in Germany

Biden’s Pentagon to offer covid vaccines to 9/11 jihadis at Guantánamo before many Americans have access to them

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/01/bidens-pentagon-to-offer-covid-vaccines-to-9-11-jihadis-at-guantanamo-before-many-americans-have-access-to-them;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Priorities, priorities. But you see, they’ve got to have them so that they can resume “war crimes hearings at the base’s Camp Justice compound.” That raises another question: why are there still hearings being conducted regarding these men? Way back in 2009 they essentially confessed by publishing a lengthy Islamic defense of their actions. Why are they still waiting to be tried so many years later? Who is protecting them?

“Prisoners at Guantánamo Bay will be offered vaccination, the Pentagon says,” by Carol Rosenberg, New York Times, January 28, 2021:

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has decided to offer coronavirus vaccines to detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, possibly starting next week, according to a prosecutor in the case against five prisoners accused of conspiring in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The prosecutor, Clayton G. Trivett Jr., wrote to defense lawyers on Thursday “that an official in the Pentagon has just signed a memo approving the delivery of the Covid-19 vaccine to the detainee population in Guantánamo.”…

Lack of vaccinations has been a major obstacle to resuming war crimes hearings at the base’s Camp Justice compound. It was not immediately known whether the defendants in the Sept. 11 case, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, would consent to be vaccinated….

________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE:

GOP Slams Biden on Vaccinating Gitmo Detainees; Pentagon Pauses Plan

SEE: https://www.newsmax.com/us/covid-vaccine-biden-gitmo/2021/01/30/id/1007921

sarah corriher: 10 Years in Prison for a Meme?

The Department of Justice is showing that it has become a political weapon in the earliest days of the Biden Presidency. The F.B.I. has arrested a pro-Trump meme maker (artist), who now faces a 10-year sentence for posting a comical image four years earlier. They are outright beginning to arrest people for political speech. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/

Blue-Check Lib FREE, While Meme Poster Faces PRISON Time!

Florida Man Arrested and Charged for Posting 2016 Hillary Clinton Meme, DOJ Calls it 'Disinformation Campaign'

BY NICK KANGADIS

SEE: https://www.mrctv.org/blog/florida-man-arrested-and-charged-posting-2016-hillary-clinton-meme-doj-calls-it-disinformation;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

It’s amazing to watch the federal government devolve into authoritarian levels of censorship that we typically see from places like the U.K. and China. But when the federal government begins arresting people because of “memes,” it’s time to take notice because “tyranny” is here. Essentially, the feds are moving ahead with punishing the American public in different ways because their pre-approved presidential candidate didn’t win in 2016.

Florida resident and “conservative journalist” Douglass Mackey, 31, was arrested and charged with “conspiring with others in advance of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election to use various social media platforms to disseminate misinformation designed to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote,” according to a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release.

The simple response is that Mackey didn’t deprive anyone of anything.

Here’s what the DOJ is reporting about Mackey:

As alleged in the complaint, between September 2016 and November 2016, in the lead up to the Nov. 8, 2016, U.S. Presidential Election, Mackey conspired with others to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages designed to encourage supporters of one of the presidential candidates (the “Candidate”) to “vote” via text message or social media, a legally invalid method of voting.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image that featured an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for [the Candidate]” sign.  The image included the following text: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘[Candidate’s first name]’ to 59925[.] Vote for [the Candidate] and be a part of history.”  The fine print at the bottom of the image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by [Candidate] for President 2016.”

The tweet included the typed hashtags “#Go [Candidate]” and another slogan frequently used by the Candidate. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “[Candidate’s first name]” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which was used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by the defendant and his co-conspirators.

The DOJ did everything they could in this press release to make Mackey sound super scary, but it leaves a couple of questions. So Mackey was arrested because people were stupid enough to believe a meme that told them to text their vote? How is that his fault? Mackey didn’t “deprive” anyone of anything.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. You know why they’re really going after Mackey? Because the “Candidate” whose name was redacted by the DOJ was non-other than failed presidential nominee, former senator and former First Lady Hillary Clinton.

As Fox News host Tucker Carlson said in a segment concerning Mackey on Wednesday evening, “Mockery online is now illegal when it’s aimed at the wrong people. Doug Mackey hurt their feelings, so they put him in jail.”

Bingo! Everything the current federal government is instructed to do and will continue to do is based on identity politics and to see who can virtue signal the most. Remember those "lists" the left kept talking about after the 2020 presidential election.

This should scare you, folks. It shouldn’t scare you to the point that you should watch what you say, it should scare you to the point that you have no choice but to keep speaking.

________________________________________________________________________

JUDGE BRUCE REINHART: 

Judgereinhartfromcourtblog300x400

Biden Justice Department arrests and charges man for anti-Hillary social media posts from 2016 election

SEE: https://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2021/01/biden-justice-department-arrests-and-charges-man-for-anti-hillary-social-media-posts-from-2016-elect.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Arrested and charged for "amusing or interesting items through social media".

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

 

A Florida man was arrested this morning on charges of conspiring with others in advance of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election to use various social media platforms to disseminate misinformation designed to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.

Douglass Mackey, aka Ricky Vaughn, 31, of West Palm Beach, was charged by criminal complaint in the Eastern District of New York. He was taken into custody this morning in West Palm Beach and made his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart of the Southern District of Florida.

“According to the allegations in the complaint, the defendant exploited a social media platform to infringe one the of most basic and sacred rights guaranteed by the Constitution: the right to vote,” said Nicholas L. McQuaid, Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This complaint underscores the department’s commitment to investigating and prosecuting those who would undermine citizens’ voting rights.”

“There is no place in public discourse for lies and misinformation to defraud citizens of their right to vote,” said Seth D. DuCharme, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. “With Mackey’s arrest, we serve notice that those who would subvert the democratic process in this manner cannot rely on the cloak of Internet anonymity to evade responsibility for their crimes. They will be investigated, caught and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”

“Protecting every American citizen’s right to cast a legitimate vote is a key to the success of our republic,” said William F. Sweeney Jr., Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s New York Field Office. “What Mackey allegedly did to interfere with this process – by soliciting voters to cast their ballots via text – amounted to nothing short of vote theft. It is illegal behavior and contributes to the erosion of the public’s trust in our electoral processes. He may have been a powerful social media influencer at the time, but a quick Internet search of his name today will reveal an entirely different story.”

The complaint alleges that in 2016, Mackey established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Election, ranking his account above outlets and individuals such as NBC News (#114), Stephen Colbert (#119) and Newt Gingrich (#141).

As alleged in the complaint, between September 2016 and November 2016, in the lead up to the Nov. 8, 2016, U.S. Presidential Election, Mackey conspired with others to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages designed to encourage supporters of one of the presidential candidates (the “Candidate”) to “vote” via text message or social media, a legally invalid method of voting.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image that featured an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for [the Candidate]” sign.  The image included the following text: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘[Candidate’s first name]’ to 59925[.] Vote for [the Candidate] and be a part of history.”  The fine print at the bottom of the image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by [Candidate] for President 2016.”

The tweet included the typed hashtags “#Go [Candidate]” and another slogan frequently used by the Candidate. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “[Candidate’s first name]” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which was used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by the defendant and his co-conspirators.

The charges in the complaint are allegations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Erik Paulsen and Nathan Reilly of the Eastern District of New York, and Trial Attorney James Mann of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case.

ENDS

 

2021.01.22 Mackey Complaint... by Michael Smith

Unite and Heal With Show Trials and Fascist Purges~Enjoy unity at gunpoint in the Bidenist banana republic.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/unite-and-heal-show-trials-and-fascist-purges-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

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

Joe Biden has called for “unity” and “healing”. And nobody knows as much about healing as Joe whose wife has a doctorate in education from the university that hosts his Biden Institute and the Beau Biden Foundation which was charging $3K for lessons on preventing online child sex grooming even as Hunter’s laptop with the Foundation’s sticker allegedly showed him doing it.

Except maybe Joe’s brother who took out $650,000 in personal loans from a company that bankrupted local hospitals while trading on his brother’s name and connections to his campaign.

"I think it has to happen," Biden said, mandating the show impeachment trial of his predecessor.

Once upon a time, impeachments were rare things. These days, Democrats aren’t considered truly progressive if they don’t impeach a Republican president twice in one term. President Trump is back in Florida, but that won’t stop the Democrats from impeaching him anyway before they move on to impeaching the presidents like Washington and Lincoln whose statues their insurrectionist mobs were toppling all summer and fall back when insurrection was still cool.

When asked how he defines unity, Joe Biden, with the help of three teleprompters and a small staff communicating with him through his earpiece and a series of frantic signals and hoots, explained that, “If you pass a piece of legislation that breaks down on party lines but it gets passed, it doesn't mean there wasn't unity -- it just means it wasn't bipartisan.”

Like most ideas that travel the circuitous route between his handlers, his brain, and his mouth, it may be impossible to understand what Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. said, but it’s pretty clear what the senile hack ruling a city under the shadow of military occupation and political terror meant.

Unity is when Democrats get their way. Unity is when no one opposes them. Unity is when they terrorize their political opposition into submitting and keeping their mouths shut.

Or as Speaker Pelosi put it, “I don't think it's very unifying to say, 'Oh, let's just forget it and move on.' That's not how you unify."

How do you unify? The same way every great democratic people’s regime did from France to Russia to China to San Francisco -- with show trials and purges of the enemies of the people.

Nothing says unity like a city full of barbed wire and soldiers. Not to mention a one-party system that is obsessed with criminalizing its political opposition using a fake state of emergency.

"There can be no unity, federal or other, with liberal-labor politicians, with disruptors of the working-class movement, with those who defy the will of the majority," Vladimir Lenin wrote. "There can and must be unity among all consistent Marxists."

The only unity on display is the unity of “consistent Marxists” who claim to represent the will of the majority, or those parts of it willing to trade harvested ballots for a fruit basket and $25 gift cards, as they move to heal the country by eliminating women, suburbs, and the economy.

The show trial of President Trump and the city full of soldiers is just the opening act to the Great Purge of a domestic terrorism crackdown on anyone who ever retweeted the wrong meme.

Biden will embed a domestic terrorism office in the NSC, making the NSC's former abuses under Obama routine as a system meant to track foreign enemies is instead used to surveil domestic political opponents. Heading the effort will be Joshua Geltzman who had formerly falsely claimed, "No, Black Lives Matter is not a terrorist organization."

Inside of a month, Democrats had redefined riots and election challenges from the highest form of patriotism to an attack on democracy. And by “democracy”, they mean the Democrat Party.

Popular leaders don’t take their false oaths of office in a deserted city surrounded by barbed wire and military checkpoints manned by 25,000 troops. Nor do they engage in show trials of their predecessors or unroll massive efforts to surveil, arrest, and silence their opponents.

That’s not the stuff of healing, but it is how you unite a country at gunpoint under your rule.

After four years of vowing to remove President Trump by any means from massive riots to illegal eavesdropping to coups, the Democrats declared an emergency because a few Republicans had done 10% of the things they had been doing, but without dressing up as human genitalia.

Democrats had been collecting bail fund donations for mass arrests in post-election protests and even a “separate fund to raise money for the families of anyone killed in violence on or around Election Day.” And then they pivoted from prepping body bags to declaring that insurrection was a national emergency which will require the National Guard to sleep in parking lots where they won’t annoy Democrat House members until Biden sees his own shadow.

That or the show trials wrap up before they get around to mandating that all future elections take place at Democrat campaign offices preceded by poll tests about equity and white privilege.

Meanwhile, the Democrat media went from writing sympathetic pieces about BLM lawyers throwing molotov cocktails at the police to demanding a thorough purge of every single person who had ever questioned the idea that Joe Biden might not be the most popular politician ever.

"Marxist philosophy holds that the law of the unity of opposites is the fundamental law of the universe," Mao had argued. " Under this system, the people enjoy extensive democracy and freedom, but at the same time they have to keep within the bounds of socialist discipline."

The bounds of socialist discipline, like a black hole, sucks things in without letting them out.

Democrats aren’t proposing that Americans unite under the Constitution. There’s no room in the Constitution for criminalizing political opposition or impeaching presidents after they leave office.

The Democrats want to make sure we stay within the shrinking bounds of socialist discipline.

Unity just means bringing the opposition into the dialectic and then making sure that it plays by the new rules of the game even if they were invented last week by way of convenience.

The new rules of unity are that no one may question an election that the Democrats claim to have won, no one may say anything that Big Tech doesn’t like, and no one may suggest that Biden’s Assistant Health Secretary is a middle-aged man in a dress and a flowing blonde wig.

(Now there’s a man who knows a lot about healing. Just ask the 8,400 seniors who died in Pennsylvania nursing homes while Dr. Rick ‘Rachel’ Levine, Biden’s new Assistant Health Secretary, withdrew his mother, but forced facilities to accept infected coronavirus patients.)

Questioning an election has become incitement to insurrection. To suggest that there’s anything illegitimate about Biden is sedition. Unity means believing that Joe Biden legitimately won an election for which Democrats changed the rules beforehand, then declared a national emergency, and inaugurated him behind barbed wire and lines of soldiers authorized to shoot.

That and believing that his assistant health secretary is a woman.

Believing implausible things is the essence of party discipline. If you want to understand how hardened Communists could shout, “Long live Stalin” just before they were shot in the gulags, it’s because they had spent a generation being conditioned to believe whatever they were told.

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command,” George Orwell wrote in 1984.

When slavery is freedom, and ignorance is truth, then repression becomes healing. The dialectic unites opposites, turning lies into truth, and flattening all contradictions. The message of the party becomes a gnostic mystery whose paradoxes are overcome by political faith.

The evidence of our eyes and ears is more valuable than ever in an environment of lies.

And that ocular and aural testimony finds scant evidence of unity, but plenty of repression. Americans aren’t coming together, they’re being driven further apart under the guise of a manufactured emergency being declared by insurrectionist rioters suddenly turned patriots.

D.C. isn’t the epicenter of unity and healing, but of a wave of political purges targeting everyone from President Trump to ordinary Americans whose political views are being criminalized.

There’s no healing to be found in show trials and political purges. Only the unity that comes from eliminating the political opposition in your very own Bidenist banana republic.

SBC Leader Blames Trump Supporters for Destroying Church’s “Witness,” Calls on Joe Biden to Unify Christians~Moore wants illegal immigrants to be given amnesty; associated with & funded by George Soros

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/01/25/sbc-leader-blames-trump-supporters-for-destroying-churchs-witness-calls-on-joe-biden-to-unify-christians/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The hypocrisy of leftist Evangelicalism is like a column in the comic section of the New York Times, except it’s not. Top Southern Baptist leader, Russell Moore scolded Christians who supported Donald Trump and blamed them for destroying the Church’s witness. In an interview with Time Magazine, Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, blamed the recent riot at the nation’s capitol on “Trump-worshiping” Christians.

 “The biggest threat facing the American church right now is not secularism but cynicism. That’s why we have to recover the credibility of our witness,” he told Time. “I don’t know a single family that’s not been divided over President Trump, and politics generally. I don’t know a single church that hasn’t been.”

While there are certainly those who claimed to be Christians who acted poorly and should be dealt with harshly during the attack at the Capitol, to assume that these were Christians — or that the attack was instigated by Christians — is irresponsible. And to assert that these attacks were instigated by Donald Trump is also irresponsible.

What Moore, the former Democrat staffer, doesn’t understand is that the reason Donald Trump was so divisive is because he, unlike any other president in modern history, has actually governed like a conservative. Conservatism, in the eyes of leftists like Russell Moore, is taboo. Russell Moore is no conservative and the Time Magazine article appeared to acknowledge this.

“He says both he and his family have been the subject of threats and that people have tried to dig up information that would prove he is a liberal,” the article stated and followed up with a sarcastic, “Heaven forfend!”

But what should concern Christians the most is that Moore believes that Joe Biden — a man who has promised to codify Roe and increase access to abortion, to promote child sexual immorality in public schools, and to silence conservative religious viewpoints in every facet of society — will be the man to “unify” the Church and the nation.

After tweeting that he would be praying for Biden’s success, in a follow-up interview with the Christian Post, Moore state that he’d be praying for Joe Biden’s “ability to unify.”

Biden has shown he is “willing and eager to listen to people” who disagree with him, he told the Christian Post.

“I hope that that’s the way that he decides to be as president,” he continued. “And what that’s going to mean is saying, ‘There are going to be some things that would make my base happy if I said or if I did, and I’m going to have to take into account the whole country and maybe disappoint people who support me just like I will disappoint people who oppose me sometimes.’”

After spending five years denouncing Donald Trump and lampooning anyone who supported him — instead of Hillary Clinton — Russell Moore, the Southern Baptist Convention’s most influential leader, now calls on Christians to unify around the most radical administration the nation has ever seen in the presidency.

____________________________________________________________________________

Southern Baptist-Led Organization Praises Joe Biden For Giving Illegal Alien Felons Citizenship

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/01/22/southern-baptist-led-organization-praises-joe-biden-for-giving-illegal-alien-felons-citizenship/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Russell Moore is one of the heads of the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT), a front group for the George Soros-funded National Immigration Forum (NIF) which calls for open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens. The fact that the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission head, Russell Moore, has never had to explain his association with George Soros is telling of the direction the denomination has gone. The Southern Baptist Convention is now primarily an outlet to propagandize semi-conservative pew-sitters with left-wing politics.

The EIT recently gave glowing accolades to Joe Biden who has just ordered a cease on the construction of the Trump-era border wall. Matthew Soerens, one of the co-leaders of the EIT, told Christianity Today, “I see it as a positive sign, the new administration is leading on this issue as a day one priority.”

Joe Biden’s proposed policy will give all illegal aliens currently in the United States amnesty and an 8-year path to citizenship. The bill, dubbed the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, reads, in part:

The bill allows undocumented individuals to apply for temporary legal status, with the ability to apply for green cards after five years if they pass criminal and national security background checks and pay their taxes. Dreamers, TPS holders, and immigrant farmworkers who meet specific requirements are eligible for green cards immediately under the legislation. After three years, all green card holders who pass additional background checks and demonstrate knowledge of English and U.S. civics can apply to become citizens.

This bill, if passed, would give up to 20 million or more illegal aliens — which, is at the very least, a misdemeanor for a first offense and in many cases, a felony — currently in the United States amnesty and citizenship. It would also give them voting rights which, is well-known, that the vast majority of illegal immigrants into the United States support Democrats. This would solidify the Democrat majority for decades to come.

Last year, Russell Moore joined with George Soros to call on the United States to implement a “restitution-based” immigration plan — a plan that they say would allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country legally so long as they pay restitution to the government over a period of 7 years.

 

 

 

JILL BIDEN’S “APOLOGY” THAT WASN’T~THE “ROYAL FAMILY” APPRECIATES THE NATIONAL GUARD PROTECTING IT, WHILE LETTING THEM SLEEP IN A COLD PARKING GARAGE WITH MINIMAL TOILET FACILITIES

Mary Poppins

JOE SENT HIS WIFE FOR A PHOTO OPP BECAUSE HE DIDN'T WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THEIR BEING DRIVEN OUT OF THE CAPITOL AND IT WOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE HE WAS SUPPORTING THE MILITARY

THE QUEEN MARY POPPINS DROPS IN, NOT WITH A SPOONFUL OF SUGAR, BUT  WITH BASKETS OF CHOCOLATE COOKIES THAT WERE LIKELY TESTED BY KITCHEN STAFF FOR "REPUBLICAN POISON" LIKE THE REST OF WHAT THEY EAT~WHEN THE TROOPS DIDN'T DIE, JOE FEASTED ON THE REMAINS, LIKE ANY KING WOULD!

Like they were children and a light pat on the head will soothe the situation:

Jill Biden

SEE: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/jill-biden-thanks-guard-members-with-chocolate-chip-cookies-jill-biden-joe-biden-beau-biden-family-washington-b1791551.html

EXCERPTS:

New first lady Jill Biden took an unannounced detour to the U.S. Capitol on Friday to deliver a basket of chocolate chip cookies to National Guard members, thanking them “for keeping me and my family safe” during President Joe Biden s inauguration.

“I just want to say thank you from President Biden and the whole, the entire Biden family,” she told a group of Guard members at the Capitol. “The White House baked you some chocolate chip cookies," she said, before joking that she couldn't say she had baked them herself.

Joe Biden was sworn into office on Wednesday, exactly two weeks after Donald Trump supporters rioted at the Capitol in a futile attempt to keep Congress from certifying Biden as the winner of November's presidential election. Extensive security measures were then taken for the inauguration, which went off without any major incidents.

Jill Biden told the group that her late son, Beau, was a Delaware Army National Guard member who spent a year deployed in Iraq in 2008-09. Beau Biden died of brain cancer in 2015 at the age of 46.

“So I'm a National Guard mom,” she said, adding that the basket was a “small thank you” for leaving their home states and coming to the nation's capital. President Biden offered his thanks to the chief of the National Guard Bureau in a phone call Friday.

“I truly appreciate all that you do,” the first lady said. “The National Guard will always hold a special place in the heart of all the Bidens.”

Jill Biden's unannounced troop visit came after her first public outing as first lady.

___________________________________________________________________________

‘In the Strong Name of Our Collective Faith’? Closing of Inauguration Benediction, LACKING IN JESUS’ NAME, Refuted by Pastor

FUTILE PRAYERS AT THE INAUGURATION

GIVEN THE EXTENT OF BIDEN'S SINS, NO MAN CAN INTERCEDE FOR HIM THROUGH AN ARROGANT PRAYER THAT IGNORES JESUS, GLORIFIES COLLECTIVISM/COMMUNISM

CATHOLIC IN NAME ONLY BIDEN MINIMIZES JESUS, GLORIFIES MARY & SUBSTITUTES AN APOSTATE MINISTER TO APPROACH GOD IN VAIN

Matthew 24:10 - And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

Matthew 24:12 - And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

2 Timothy 3:1-5, “But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. 2 For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, 4 treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these,”

2 Timothy 4:3-4, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.”

John 14:13-14 and John 16:23-24 are some of the most powerful verses in all of scripture related to prayer. In fact, when most of us pray we conclude with the phrase, "in Jesus' name."

But what does it mean to pray in the name of Jesus? When we pray in Jesus' name

1. We are admitting the bankruptcy of our own name.

When I pray in Jesus' name I come boldly before God because of the power of his name. It would be like a bride coming from abject poverty to marry a wealthy husband. At that point the woman takes the name of her husband and all that entails. She no longer acts in her name, but in his.

2. We identify with the person of Jesus Christ.

Jesus has literally given us his name. When I use that name, I am confessing that he is mine and that I am his. It is like going to the bank of heaven, knowing I have nothing deposited. If I go in my name I will get absolutely nothing. But Jesus Christ has unlimited funds in heaven's bank, and he has granted me the privilege of going to the bank with his name on my checks.

3. We pray in his authority.

We are like the child who picked up a policeman's hat, wandered out onto a busy intersection and began to direct traffic. The people in the cars followed the child's direction because they respected his position of authority. To pray in his name is to ask by his authority; and to ask by his authority is to ask in accordance to his will as revealed in his word.

4. We submit to his will.

Jesus' authority rested with his submission to the Father, so our authority rests with our submission to him. To ask in his name is to ask according to his nature, and his nature is one of submission. This, by the way, is why prayers that ask for things contrary to the Word of God will never be answered.

5. We are representing him and his interests here on earth.

It is much the same as the legal arrangement known as the power of attorney. In such matters one person may represent another in his absence. They act in their behalf. Jesus has given every believer unlimited and general power of attorney in all matters and with the right to use his name in every situation.

6. We pray expectantly.

When we pray in Jesus' name, we may expect the answer in accord with the value of his name. So we can pray with great and excited expectation.

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2021/01/21/in-the-strong-name-of-our-collective-faith-closing-of-inauguration-benediction-refuted-by-pastor/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

WASHINGTON — “In the strong name of our collective faith, amen” was how Silvester Beaman of the Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Delaware ended his benediction on Wednesday during the Biden-Harris inauguration. His avoidance of using the name of Jesus in the prayer was noted by at least one pastor, who refuted Beaman’s choice of words online.

“It must be said: there is no such name,” wrote Mike Riccardi, the pastor of Local Outreach Ministries at John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California.

“And even if there were, that name would not be the only name under Heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12),” he noted. “It would not be the name above every name — the name to which every knee will bow and every tongue will swear allegiance (Phil 2:9-11). It would not be the name of Christ, in whom alone are the promises of God yes and amen (2 Cor 1:20).”

Beaman, a longtime friend of the Biden family who participated in the funeral for Beau Biden in 2015, had been asked by Joe Biden to close out the inauguration ceremony with prayer.

“Joe Biden is a man whose life experiences have taught him to seek the face of God,” Beaman told NBC News. “He’s had some dark times in his life. And he’s someone who is naturally a person of faith. He prays and listens to God.”

“We need a president who is after the heart of God,” he continued. “In these terrible times, if anybody can bring healing and reconciliation to a divided country, if we give him room to work, Joe Biden can be that person.”

On Wednesday, Beaman asked for God’s favor on Biden and Harris, controversial figures who were opposed by Christians in the election primarily because of their support for homosexuality, transgenderism and abortion “rights.”

“God, we gather under the beauty of your holiness and the holiness of your beauty. We seek Your face, Your smile, Your warm embrace,” he said. “We petition you once more in this celebration. We pray for divine favor upon our president, Joseph R. Biden, and our first lady, Dr. Jill Biden, and their family.”

“We further ask that you would extend the same favor upon our vice president, Kamala D. Harris, and our second gentleman, Doug Emhoff, and their family,” Beaman continued. “More than ever they and our nation need You.”

In keeping with the theme of unity, he spoke of realizing the common humanity, which compels one to have compassion for the sick, poor, elderly and oppressed. In brevity, Beaman also mentioned confessing sin and seeking forgiveness.

“In you, O God, we discover our humanity. And in our humanity, we discover our commonness, beyond the difference of color, creed, origin, political party, ideology, geography and personal preferences,” Beaman stated, remarking that men should “make friends of our enemies.”

He also touched on the nation’s stain of slavery, noting that slaves had been used to build the U.S. Capitol building.

“Let us all acknowledge from the indigenous Native American to those who recently received their citizenship, from the African American to those whose foreparents came from Europe and every corner of the globe, from the wealthy to those struggling to make it, for every human being — regardless of their choices, that this is our country,” he proclaimed.

“As such, teach us, O God, to live in it, love in it, be healed in it, and be reconciled to one another in it, lest we miss kingdom’s goal.”

Beaman then ended the prayer with, “To Your glory, majesty, dominion and power forever. Hallelujah. Glory, hallelujah,” the latter of which when literally translated means, “Praise Yahweh.”

But then he said, most likely to again incorporate the theme of unity, “In the strong name of our collective faith, amen.”

View Beaman’s benediction in full here or watch the video below.

Riccardi

Riccardi shared his thoughts about the prayer on social media Wednesday evening.

“We do not petition the Father in the name of our faith. Our faith is worthless apart from the object in which it trusts,” Riccardi wrote. “To come before God in the name of our faith is to come before God in our own name, which is blasphemous, idolatrous, and hopeless for those who do not possess the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God.”

He said that God accepts nothing less than coming to Him in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ.

“Instead, those who would hope to receive anything from the Father must come to Him in the name of Christ His Son, for all the promises of God are yes in Him alone,” Riccardi outlined. “And coming before God in the name of Christ — who has accomplished the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God — in union with Him we are heard for Christ’s sake.”

“Our prayers before the Father — the holiest of which are laced with enough sin to damn the entire human race for eternity — are thus sanctified in the sweet name of God’s dear Son, and received as a sweet-smelling aroma of the sacrifice of His own precious blood,” he said.

“Solus Christus.”

Read Riccardi’s post in full here.

1 Timothy 2:5 states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

Psalm 96:5 also teaches, “For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens.”

The late Anglican preacher J.C. Ryle also once said, “Live a courageous life. Confess Christ before men. Whatever station you occupy, in that station confess Christ. Why should you be ashamed of Him? He was not ashamed of you on the cross.”

“He is ready to confess you now before His Father in Heaven. Why should you be ashamed of Him? Be bold. Be very bold. The good soldier is not ashamed of his uniform. The true believer ought never be ashamed of Christ.”

 

__________________________________________________________________________

At the close of his prayer at the inauguration, Dr. Silvester Beaman concluded, “To your glory, majesty, dominion and power forever. Hallelujah. Glory, Hallelujah. In the strong name of our collective faith, amen.”

It must be said: there is no such name.

And even if there were, that name would not be the only name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12). It would not be the name above every name—the name to which every knee will bow and every tongue will swear allegiance (Phil 2:9-11). It would not be the name of Christ, in whom alone are the promises of God yes and amen (2 Cor 1:20).

We do not petition the Father in the name of our faith. Our faith is worthless apart from the object in which it trusts. If we came before the throne of God solely in the name our faith, we would be cast into hell, for our faith has nothing in it that is virtuous or meritorious before God.

To come before God in the name of our faith is to come before God in our own name, which is blasphemous, idolatrous, and hopeless for those who do not possess the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God.

Instead, those who would hope to receive anything from the Father must come to Him in the name of Christ His Son, for all the promises of God are yes in Him alone. And coming before God in the name of Christ—who has accomplished the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God—in union with Him we are heard for Christ’s sake. Our prayers before the Father—the holiest of which are laced with enough sin to damn the entire human race for eternity—are thus sanctified in the sweet name of God’s dear Son, and received as a sweet smelling aroma of the sacrifice of His own precious blood.

Solus Christus.

Little children, guard yourselves from idols (1 John 5:20).

 

Rep. Mary Miller on US Capitol Breach & Teaching Our Children Good & Evil-American Thought Leaders

In this episode, we sit down with newly elected Illinois Congresswoman Mary Miller, to discuss her experience of the events of January 6th, her response to criticism she received for a recent speech she gave to a mothers’ group, and her vision for America.

A Deep Dive Into “Critical Social Justice” & How It Took Over the Humanities-New Discourses

An American-born author, mathematician, and political commentator, Dr. James Lindsay has written six books spanning a range of subjects including religion, the philosophy of science and postmodern theory. He is the founder of New Discourses and currently promoting his new book "Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody."

Why Schools Are Teaching Our Kids “Social Justice”

BY JAMES LINDSAY

SEE: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/10/schools-teaching-kids-social-justice/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Woke have a very specific conception of the world and a very specific mission that has everything to do with that conception. Most of us, going about our daily lives and getting hit with Critical Social Justice — the ideology that leads one to become “woke” — don’t understand this. We mistake what is, in fact, an entire worldview for a set of fringe ideas dealing with socially important issues like racism, sexism, and transgender rights. Most of us see “Wokeness,” in other words, as something that’s probably mostly good or, at worst, well-intentioned and benign.

When it comes to our children’s schools, then, many of us will conclude that it’s necessary and important in our modern, progressive world for our children to learn about these sorts of issues, and we trust our educators to communicate important truths about them so our kids can keep doing the good work of building a better society.

This kindly liberal view, borne from a combination of good intentions and being too busy to learn otherwise, misunderstands the Critical Social Justice ideology at the most fundamental level, however. It therefore completely misses the specific mission woke people—and woke educators—have for our society and our children. The crux of that mission is hiding in plain sight in the word “woke” itself, and it has everything to do with why we should be opposed to seeing these ideas featured in our educational system.

The mission of Critical Social Justice, to use its right name, is to “awaken” people to the so-called “realities” of systemic oppression in society, as it defines it—thus, “woke.” People who are woke are people who have been trained to see systemic oppression in a particular way, which has been outlined in an otherwise obscure branch of philosophy known as Critical Theory. Speaking formally, the Woke are people who have developed a “critical consciousness” about the identity-based systems of power that are alleged to permeate and define all of society, creating profound and almost intractable injustices that must be “disrupted and dismantled” to achieve “liberation.” The goal of “anti-racist,” “culturally aware,” and “social justice” approaches to education is to awaken a critical consciousness in our children so that they will grow up not to think critically but to think in terms of Critical Theories.

To understand why this isn’t just a problem but an incredibly alarming one requires understanding how the Critical Theories in Critical Social Justice see the world. That is, you have to understand what your kids will be “woke up” to in their classrooms.

To take the issue of race, Critical Race Theory begins with the assumption that racism is ordinary in our societies and present in all interactions and social and cultural phenomena, and it is up to the Critical Race Theorist—using a Woke critical consciousness—to “make it visible” and “call it out.” In Critical Race Theory, the question is not “did racism take place?” but rather, “how did racism manifest in that situation?”

Rather than learning how to do mathematics, then, your children will be taught to ask questions like how mathematics is used to maintain racial oppression—for it must, according to Critical Race Theory. This is precisely the sort of curriculum that we already see in the Ethnic Studies program in the state of Washington and its “ethnomathematics” project. Rather than focusing on the mechanics of mathematics, students will be taught to focus on the ways they can explore topics like racism and oppression through mathematics, or leaning on math as a foil that facilitates discussions on important topics—like “who it benefits” to focus on getting right answers in mathematics.

Other subjects will be similar, if not worse. A Critical Theory approach to studying American history will be dedicated to making students woke to all of the ways the United States, from its founding, has been an unjust, oppressive nation that systemically oppresses certain identity groups. This shouldn’t be understood to be part of a balanced program that reckons honestly with the darker aspects of our national past as framed against the liberal promises that eventually—and painfully—have won great freedom and equality to our diverse citizenry. It will be a sustained program of teaching our children how America is a horrible nation that has never been able to or even wanted to live up to its promise of all men having been created equally, as individuals. “Whiteness is property,” they will instruct, and that property is theft—slogans we have heard repeated as justifications for race-based riots throughout this ugly summer.

Indeed, many such programs will claim that the United States was founded intentionally on genocide, slavery, and a principle of white supremacy and anti-Blackness that has never been repaired. Its legacy is white privilege and white comfort that must be challenged at every opportunity if we are ever to achieve racial equity. Already, at least in the state of California, a proposed – although rejected – curriculum would teach these lessons not as history but as “hxrstory,” where “his” has been replaced by an explicitly “non-binary” formulation of “her,” so that maleness and cisheteronormativity won’t accidentally be centered in the term. (By the way, “his-story” isn’t even the genuine etymology of the word history, but Critical Theory looks for oppression hidden in unlikely symbols, even when it doesn’t make sense.)

Bringing Critical Social Justice into our educational systems is therefore not beneficent or benign. It is a deliberate attempt to try to program our children to think in an explicitly cynical, pessimistic, and falsely sociological way about all matters relevant to identity in every possible subject, including our history and even science and mathematics. The goal is to make our children woke, to give them a critical consciousness with which they will, unlike their parents, know that the point of understanding society is to change it in a very narrow and increasingly divisive way.

Editor’s Note: This article has been revised to clarify that a proposal to rename “history” “hxrstory” in California was rejected.

This article was originally published at Roca News.

_______________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/what-is-critical-race-theory/

AND: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/11/why-your-organization-should-not-do-diversity-training/

_______________________________________________________________________

COURSES IN SELF-PITY & "GRIEVANCE STUDIES" AT YOUR COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY

James Lindsay sits down with American Thought Leaders host Jan Jekielek to discuss Critical Social Justice, the Grievance Studies project, and neo-Marxism in education and culture at large.

From American Thought Leaders:

To “expose the political corruption that’s taken hold of the university,” James Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose made headlines in 2018 with a series of hoax papers that were accepted in peer-reviewed journals. Since then, Lindsay has made it his life’s mission to understand the ideas and theories underpinning what they dubbed “grievance studies.” Just how are these identity-oriented academic fields rooted in deeply flawed methodologies? And how has neo-Marxism and what Lindsay recently named “critical social justice” permeated the education system in America? Lindsay documents his work on his website “New Discourses”, where a constantly updated “Social Justice Encyclopedia” can also be found.

Peter Boghossian: How Social Justice Silences - New Discourses

In October of 2019, we held a conference in the heart of London with the simple mission of starting to “Speak Truth to Social Justice,” a conversation that we can all plainly see now was, even by then, long overdue. Among the eight talks given that day to address the subject, Peter Boghossian addressed the important issue of the ways that the Social Justice ideology stifles free speech. In this passionate talk, he outlines many of the speech-stifling actions that have been made against himself and others when they have dared to speak up about something they believe in when it goes against the “prevailing moral orthodoxy.” For Boghossian, and now many of us, that moral orthodoxy is the ideology calling itself Critical Social Justice.

Boghossian outlines seven different ways that the Critical Social Justice ideology stifles free speech and discusses each with poignant examples. Its advocates call names. They brand unwanted speech as violence. They assert policies of “inclusion” that are meant only to allow viewpoints they agree with. When people who hold ideas that challenge their growing hegemony are invited to speak about those views, its advocates see to it that they’re disinvited. Speech is stifled further in institutional settings that take up “Bias Response Teams.” They also, quite famously now, engage in a bullying tactic reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution of China that goes by the name “cancel culture.” Lastly, they justify all of this through “idea laundering,” a process by which they provide false legitimacy to these ideas and the other tenets of their ideology by getting them published in their own corners of the academic literature and mainstream journalism. These seven methods combine to stifle speech and even free thought in an incredible fashion.

Join Dr. Boghossian as he walks you through these points, speaking truth to “Social Justice” and fighting back for freedom of speech and cognitive liberty.


Watch Peter Boghossian’s subsequent presentation from this conference here. The audio version of this presentation is available on SoundcloudApple PodcastsGoogle PlaySpotifyStitcher, and RSS.

___________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO FROM LIGHTHOUSE TRAILS RESEARCH: 

NEW BOOKLET: S is for Social Justice The Language of Today’s Cultural “Revolution”

https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=32824

NEW BOOKLET: Critical Race Theory, Southern Baptist Convention, and a Marxist “Solution” That Will Not Work

https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=32684

(Higher) Education Is Destroying America-New Discourses

BY ALEXANDER ZUBATOV

SEE: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/higher-education-destroying-america/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“[Y]ou offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they … seem to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise.” – Plato’s Phaedrus

“I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Harvard University,” conservative icon William F. Buckley notoriously remarked. I have always thought of his oft-quoted quip as just that: a clever quip. But we have reached the point today where, given the choice Buckley was contemplating, I would vote for the 2,000 Average Joes over the 2,000 professors in a heartbeat. Even in a firmly Democratic-blue city like Boston, where the politics of ordinary citizens might resemble the professors’ political preferences far more than they would resemble mine, I wholeheartedly believe that those 2,000 random names would bring to the task of governance more common sense and more diversity of opinion. They would ultimately create a healthier, more vibrant and more livable society. And I strongly suspect that I am increasingly far from alone in that view.

Consider this apparent paradox: commanding, as they do, behemoth corporate entities, the media, the entertainment industry and the social media and tech hubs of Silicon Valley, the educated today arguably wield more power, influence and ubiquitous social control than they have ever wielded in American history, and yet they are also as scorned and distrusted as they have ever been. The prevalence of loony conspiracy theories on the political right notwithstanding, less educated people have their reasons for feeling conspired against and for distrusting those who are ostensibly their betters. They distrust the educated contingent’s claims to knowledge and expertise because they both consciously and instinctively know that such “experts” can no longer be trusted, that knowledge claims by the educated elites now routinely come packaged with liberal doses of barely concealed political prejudice. Experts are the ones who tell us that Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden will defeat Donald Trump in a blowout and that Democrats are set to pick up significant gains and take control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election. Experts are the unelected backroom technocrats at Twitter and Google who take it upon themselves, despite having transparent political biases and no obvious qualifications for such roles, to intervene on the side of “Truth” in complex political and factual debates — inevitably citing as backup for their decisions some of their favorite sources, such as CNN or The Washington Post — and then proceed to label, take down, bury and censor competing claims and their conservatives or contrarian sources. Experts are the ones who issue confident pronouncements about Covid-19, only to issue inconsistent but equally confident pronouncements a few weeks or months later, the ones who tell us masks don’t help to protect healthy individuals only to completely reverse that guidance, the ones who command us that frequenting religious services, Trump rallies, restaurants, hair salons or family gatherings poses a mortal risk to our health while turning a blind eye to or even throwing full support behind massive #BLM protests or disregarding their own edicts and going unmasked into chic hair salons or large parties at expensive French restaurants. And, as I’ll have reason to discuss in more detail below, the kind of “expertise” that emanates from the mainstream media or the educational establishment is egregious in its political biases.

The reason for the problem is simple: the “educated” have become a stale, stagnant monoculture, a culture within which groupthink reigns, within which prejudice predominates, bad ideas go unchallenged and the worst ideas get insulated from scrutiny by strictly enforced taboos. In fact, the more “elite” the quality and quantity of the education people receive, the more herd-minded, prejudiced and intolerant of dissent they become. The danger of this predicament is not just one for political conservatives to bear; when a diversity of ideas is choked out by years of ideological indoctrination and enforced conformity when thought police patrol our public and private spaces and factual claims and ideas remain untested in the crucible of free and open debate, the resulting harm is borne by all. As I will explain in what follows, the ultimate issue springs from a tectonic shift in the complexion of our educational institutions. It will not be solved until those institutions are shaken to their very foundations and remade from the ground up.

Driving Polarization

In recent studies, education — the very thing that is supposed to open minds — has repeatedly been found, instead, to create closed-minded filter bubbles. A 2019 study by the polling and analytics firm PredictWise, retained by The Atlantic for the purpose of analyzing partisan prejudice, found that a high level of education was strongly correlated with political intolerance. The Atlantic reported as well on prior research from University of Pennsylvania professor Diana Mutz that had concluded that “white, highly educated people are relatively isolated from political diversity” and that “people who went to graduate school have the least amount of political disagreement in their lives.” Mutz’s explanation was that such people are less likely to talk with those who disagree with them.

A 2019 study by the “More in Common” project that analyzed the accuracy of people’s perceptions about their ideological opposites reached similar conclusions. Among its notable findings was that “the more educated a person is, the worse their Perception Gap” — their distorted view of and tendency to attribute extreme positions to those on the “other side.” But the “one critical exception” to this finding is that it applies only to Democrats, not Republicans:

[W]hile Republicans’ misperceptions of Democrats do not improve with higher levels of education, Democrats’ understanding of Republicans actually gets worse with every additional degree they earn. This effect is so strong that Democrats without a high school diploma are three times more accurate than those with a postgraduate degree.

Why does this differentiation exist? The “More in Common” research echoes Diana Mutz’s conclusion: “Highly educated Democrats are the most likely to say that ‘most of [their] friends’ share their political beliefs.” While the political composition of Republicans’ circle of acquaintances does not correlate with education, for Democrats the correlation is very direct: the more education they receive, the less likely they are to associate with anyone who disagrees with them. And there is good reason to believe that the composition of those with whom one pals around play a causal role in creating polarized groupthink: as research by Cass Sunstein, David Schkade and Reid Hastie has demonstrated, when people spend time discussing issues with like-minded others, their views predictably become more extreme.

Education’s Left Turn

Has education always cooked up an over-saturated brew bubbling over with an overpowering flavor of left ideological extremism? No. Pew Research Center findings from 2016 show a widening ideological gap between 1994 and 2015 among those who are more versus less educated. One metric examined the extent to which people’s views have become monolithically down-the-line liberal or conservative over the years. In 1994, one percent of those whose educations stopped after their high school graduation or even earlier leaned “consistently liberal,” while that number was four percent for those with “some college,” five percent for college graduates and seven percent for post-grads — a small upward progression but, all in all, not a massive difference. By 2015, however, the educational divide had become a gulf: five percent of those in the high-school-or-less category were consistently liberal in their views, but those numbers were 12% of those with some college, 24% of college graduates and 31% of post-grads. No similar pattern obtained for those who were “consistently conservative.” Both in 1994 and in 2015, the percentage of down-the-line conservatives hovered between six percent and 11 percent across all education categories, with no particular correlation with education to be found. The massive growth in the consistently liberal-minded over the course of these two decades had not come at the expense of conservatives, but rather, largely at the expense of those with less partisan and more “mixed” political views. While 53% of the “high school or less” crowd had held ideologically “mixed” views in 1994 and 48% held mixed views in 2015, among post-grads, that number had declined from 38% in 1994 to 24% in 2015. The conclusion: something has shifted dramatically over the course of the past 20 years to yield a direct correlation between how many years of education we have had and the extent to which we are immersed in an across-the-board liberal monoculture.

What changed is education itself. Beginning in the late 1980s — not long before the political opinions of the “educated” began to veer sharply to the left — education itself went from being a universally touted pathway to personal enlightenment and professional advancement to becoming a one-sided purveyor of political ideology. Belying any notion that university professors are inherently liberal-minded mainly because liberals are simply more curious and open-minded than their conservative brethren, not so very long ago, a fairly even split in political affiliations could still be found: in 1984, 39% of college faculty identified as left/liberal, while 34% identified as right/conservative, as reported in a 2005 paper from Stanley Rothman et al. A massive sea-change materialized over the course of the ensuing decade-and-a-half, according to the same paper: by 1999, 72% of faculty (and 81% among humanities faculty) identified as left/liberal, and 15% identified as conservative. By 2018, the situation had become still more dire, especially at the most elite universities. A comprehensive National Association of Scholars report from April 2018 headed by Mitchell Langbert of Brooklyn College, which tracked the political registrations of 8,688 tenure-track professors at top liberal arts colleges, found that “78.2 percent of the academic departments in [his] sample have either zero Republicans, or so few as to make no difference.” At the leftward end of the spectrum were the newly emerged ideological fields, such as gender studies and Africana studies, in which there was not “a single Republican with an exclusive appointment.” Again, casting serious doubt upon any notion that academics are overwhelmingly liberal simply because liberals are better suited to be eggheads, the political affiliations of university administrators are now similarly skewed far to the left. A 2018 survey of 900 college administrators by Samuel J. Abrams of Sarah Lawrence College revealed that 71% identified as liberal, and only 6% identified as conservative.

I have explored the causes of this seismic shift at length elsewhere, and suffice it to say here that the gradual replacement of a highly literate elite by a techno-financial elite dislodged the academic humanities from their once-vaunted perch in which they had served a pragmatic economic function (not a function that I believe true higher education should serve in any event, as I will make clear later). This change opened the door for a takeover of these departments by 60s radicals entering their 40s and 50s and positions of peak influence in the mid-to-late 1980s and 1990s. These original culture warriors succeeded in repurposing the humanities (dragging other university departments behind them to greater or lesser extents), deflecting them from the tasks of education, enlightenment and career prep and re-orienting them to the mission of social critique. The academic humanities, having been displaced from their prestigious mission of preparing a new generation for elite careers, found a new way of clawing back what they had lost by adopting a less practical but, in their eyes, still more critical mission: preparing a new generation of those who could claim elite status by virtue of their ability to stand in judgment over the rest of us. They spawned a new array of ideological victimology departments within academia and a market for diversity consultants and sensitivity training within corporate America and for hysterical and sensationalized media coverage of alleged oppression and persecution of “marginalized” and “vulnerable” minorities of every sort.

Distorted Academic Priorities

It is the lack of ideological diversity, not liberal bias per se, that presents the bigger challenge. I would not want universities or other institutions to be dominated by conservative groupthink any more than I want the current alternative. Thoroughgoing conservative bias at universities that are supposed to cultivate out-of-the-box thinking and groundbreaking research would, I assume, result in stagnation. But this is not the reality with which we are dealing. What we have is overwhelming liberal bias, not conservative bias. And liberal bias at institutions principally intended to instill a love of learning, an appreciation of a great tradition and the pursuit of lux et veritas creates its own specific problems.

A recent study from SUNY New Paltz’s Glenn Geher et al. — a study, it should be noted, that the authors had trouble publishing because of its politically explosive conclusions — building upon the prior work of prominent NYU psychologist Jonathan Haidt, found that the profound liberal bias in much of academia today is not without consequence. The researchers surveyed 177 academics in a variety of universities about their political orientations and personality characteristics as measured on the “Big Five” model of personality and then asked them to assign weights to five possible priorities: academic rigor, academic freedom, student emotional well-being, social justice and the advancement of knowledge. What they found is not surprising, but it is disturbing: liberal professors were significantly more likely to place a higher value on social justice and student emotional well-being than were their conservative colleagues, who tended to place a higher value on academic rigor and the advancement of knowledge. While many modern-day liberal academics — whether following in the tradition leading back to the prominent mid-20th century liberal Columbia sociologist C. Wright Mills or of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci ­— believe in activist scholarship, few of us would disagree that if academic rigor and the advancement of knowledge are not at the very forefront of university professors’ priorities, the reputation and reliability of scholarship suffers, and mass skepticism of the politicized professoriate starts to seem justified. Still more concerning is that these researchers found that, of the academics surveyed, those who taught in schools of education — the places that teach the teachers to whom our kids are handed over for instruction — were the most likely to hold social justice and student emotional well-being in highest esteem. Indeed, we are seeing pre-college education today becoming both radicalized (with 79% of teachers leaning left, including 87% of high school teachers and 97% of English teachers, and becoming increasingly hostile to religion, so much so that they are one of the primary causes of its decline) and racialized (with school systems throughout the country beginning to teach The New York Times’ discreditedahistorical and hate-filled “1619 Project” as actual history).

Finally, the study found the Big-Five personality trait of “agreeableness” to be positively correlated with a preference for social justice and student emotional well-being and negatively correlated with academic rigor and advancement of knowledge. While the researchers’ proffered explanation for that result is that agreeable people are more likely to be “inclined to help students with issues that are not strictly academic,” my interpretation of their data would be different: agreeableness is known to be correlated with “conformity to social norms and expectations,” while disagreeable people are less concerned with what others think. Because liberal pro-social justice dogma is unquestionably an ascendant orthodoxy at universities, while dissent requires real intestinal fortitude, it makes total sense that those who are most agreeable are most likely to follow the herd. From this standpoint, therefore, the disturbing aspect of the role of agreeableness in these research results is that it signals that many academics are not so much joining a dominant consensus due to their own independently reasoned conclusions as they are, for fear of bucking the tide, reflexively hopping aboard a bandwagon — and, in the end, adding dead weight to what is fast becoming a sinking ship.

Sowing Ignorance and Stifling Debate

As I have already begun to suggest above, the impact of this comparatively rapid transformation in the core complexion of university staff upon the rest of society has been monumental and remains one of the great under-reported stories of the past few decades. Today, nearly three-quarters of students enrolled in U.S. News & World Report’s top ten colleges identify as liberal, while only 15% identify as conservative. Far from cultivating any spirit of open-minded inquiry of the sort one might expect to be the outcome of a university education, however — but consistent with the findings of the Glenn Geher et al. research profiled above — those top universities are leading the anti-intellectual crackdown against “disfavored” viewpoints. Here, according to FIRE’s survey of 20,000 students from a variety of American universities from earlier this year, are some of their attitudes concerning measures they think may appropriately be taken with respect to speakers with whom they disagree:

Students from Universities Ranked 50 or Below Students from Top 10-Ranked Universities
Okay to tear down speaker flyers/announcements 60% 73%
Okay to block entrances to speaker events 37% 50%
Okay to use violence to stop speakers 17% 21%

These numbers, as a whole, will be disturbing to anyone who values open-minded intellectual inquiry, but the numbers from top-ranked universities are especially alarming, showing a pronounced inability on the part of our purportedly “best and brightest” to abide opposing views.

More evidence concerning the unrepresentative and muddle-headed beliefs of the highly educated comes from the large 2018 “Hidden Tribes” demographic survey of political attitudes. The survey found that the left-most grouping — those who could be described as “Progressive Activists” — are the wealthiest and most educated subgroup in America, with 59% of this overwhelmingly white subgroup having completed college, as contrasted with a 29% average in the general population. Such people are far more likely to be politically engaged (73% as compared to a general-population average of 35%) and, for that reason, “have an outsized role in political debates.” Such people are also obsessed with what they perceive to be racism, sexism and other identity-based discrimination, and a whopping 69% of them (as compared to 24% of all Americans) are “ashamed to be American.”

Zach Goldberg’s 2019 discussion of data pertaining to such white liberals documents the fact that their leftward shift in beliefs is of relatively recent vintage but largely predates Trump’s Presidency and is, thus, not attributable to him or his policies. Among the highlights:

  • The percentage of these liberals who thought anti-black discrimination to be a “very serious” problem did not change much between 1996 (27%) and 2010 (25%), yet it shot up to 47% in 2015 and to 58% in 2016.
  • In 1995, 2000 and 2007, white liberals were evenly split among those who thought the criminal justice system fair to blacks and those who thought it biased against them. But by 2014, there was a 70%/20% gap in favor of those who thought the system biased.
  • 29% of white liberals perceived there to be “a great deal” of discrimination against immigrants in 2000; in 2013, that number had risen to 57%. The percentage of liberals feeling “very sympathetic” to illegal immigrants rose from 22% to 42% between 2006 and 2014.

Notably, in each of these cases ­— and especially in the cases of racial issues, with our first black President having still been in office through the end of 2016 — there was no obvious, relevant real-world change for the worse that would have spurred the very significant attitudinal change reflected in these numbers. It is the skewed content of their education, not rational considerations spurred by real-world changes, that is getting these highly educated liberals to alter their views.

At least four more of Goldberg’s conclusions with respect to these white liberals merit attention:

  • The attitudes of these liberals on race issues and immigration issues are significantly to the left of the attitudes of the very minorities they claim to represent.
  • These white liberals have recently developed a significant pro-outgroup bias, meaning that, by a significant margin, they prefer other racial groups to their own. Goldberg calls such an unusual bias “unprecedented,” and of course, no other group — blacks, Hispanics, Asians or non-liberal whites — exhibits such a bias.
  • Their “lack of awareness of how fast and far their attitudes have shifted fosters an illusion of conservative extremism,” whereas the data indicates that “[i]n reality, the conservatives of today are not all that different from the conservatives of years past.”
  • Consistent with the conclusion of the “Hidden Tribes” survey, Goldberg observes that while “[w]hite liberals make up 20-24% of the general population, … [they] exert an outsize political and cultural influence. They are more likely to consider themselves activists, are more active on social media, and, significantly, they are one of the most affluent groups in the country.”

That last point, in particular, merits further reflection. Rich, university-educated white liberals are precisely the kinds of people who rise to prominent and influential positions in what used to be called “media” but what, at this point (for much the same reasons professional wrestling is now commonly known as “sports entertainment”) should rightfully be called the “infotainment industry” — combining, as it does, the likes of formerly white-shoe, traditional media publications that have long since buttoned down and given themselves over to unvarnished advocacy, shameless scandal-sheet propagandists, social media “influencers,” Silicon Valley tech authoritarians, moralizing musicians, woke jocks and other species of shrill B-list celebrities.

“Educated” Infotainers

As The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf has written, “The New York Times, New York, The Intercept, Vox, Slate, The New Republic, and other outlets are today less ideologically diverse in their staff and less tolerant of contentious challenges to the dominant viewpoint of college-educated progressives than they have been in the recent past.” Predictably, the role of the infotainment industry in broadcasting out to the masses the messages our politicized educators have taught them cannot be understated. The “Perception Gap” research of the “More in Common” project that I discussed above reaches this conclusion about the depressing role of the media in driving distorted perceptions of reality:

You might think that people who regularly read the news are more informed about their political opponents. In fact, the opposite is the case. We found that the more news people consumed, the larger their Perception Gap. People who said they read the news “most of the time” were nearly three times more distorted in their perceptions than those who said they read the news “only now and then.”

Zach Goldberg reaches similar conclusions in an August 2020 article fittingly entitled “How the Media Led the Great Racial Awakening,” in which he presents a treasure trove of data convincingly demonstrating that, in a word, the media was in the cockpit of our careening craft. In a few short years, beginning roughly around 2010 (thus, again, well before Trump appeared on the national stage as anything other than a vulgar television personality), the media — with The New York Times leading the charge — began to racialize America, vastly expanding its coverage of race and racism, immeasurably expanding its definition of what counted as “racism” or “white supremacy” to encompass anything and everything that, regardless of the reason, did not produce total and utter demographically proportionate equality and, in the end, getting us all to believe, regressively, that “‘color’ is the defining attribute of other human beings.” The opinions of these infotainment industry thought leaders were quickly adopted by their liberal readers, viewers, listeners and followers, leading, finally, in the summer of 2020, to nationwide protesting, looting and rioting due to the mass adoption of a wildly delusional belief that black people are dying every day at the hands of racist white killer cops — the truth, as FBI data and numerous studies have shown, being that cops do not kill unarmed blacks at higher rates than the crime data would predict and, more importantly, that in all of 2019 (the last year for which there is full data on record), 14 unarmed black people, as well as 25 unarmed white people, were killed by police, as compared, for the sake of maintaining perspective, to 20 (presumably unarmed) people killed by a lightning strike in the same year. As Goldberg documents, the black victims of police shootings generated huge waves of sensationalized media coverage, while the white victims were largely met with the chirping of crickets. What the infotainment industry is doing to our perceptions of race and racism, in other words, might best be characterized as a never-ending, omnipresent Willie Horton ad driving us into irrational paroxysms of racialized mass hysteria.

What emerges from the data I have advanced thus far is a picture in which a massive leftward lurch in the composition of university faculty and administrators beginning in the late 1980s and continuing on through the ’90s and ’00s created, some years down the road, a massive leftward lurch among infotainment industry elites, leading together, in turn, to a massive leftward lurch among the “educated” public as a whole and resulting, finally, in the formation of a fissure between the educated and their less-educated peers. This is why the main axis along which pro-Trump versus pro-Biden voters were divided in 2020 is not the media’s favorite bugaboo of race, but rather, education. Trump’s many obvious faults aside, we should not mistake the joyful tears of the talking heads on our screens and the delighted yelps of urban bobos, yuppies and hipsters in the streets on that Saturday when the media called the election for Joe Biden for anything other than what it was: the relieved cry of the educated elites that the most organized mass propaganda campaign this side of Stalin had succeeded in toppling the crude, unhinged, nationalist-populist championed by the deplorable underclass and installing the easily puppeted, doddering career politician favored by the wealthy, the powerful and the educated. For this reason, as well, the Biden administration is expected to be chock-full of college faculty, a straightforward case of dancing with the ones that bring you to the dance.

Credential Inflation

So education today, and especially elite higher education, is systematically polarizing us, driving misperceptions of the “other” side, fomenting an escalating race war and skewing the composition of the electorate, all while replacing the pursuit of knowledge with politicized groupthink. But is it at least doing a good job of discharging its practical function? Are nominally great universities at least giving us our money’s worth in educating a highly qualified workforce? Not exactly. A recent study demonstrated that when 28,339 graduates from 294 universities — representing universities around the world ranging from the top 50 to 10,000 spots down — were evaluated on various facets of their job performance, for every 1,000 spots lower on the university rankings, the graduates exhibited a performance decline of a measly 1.9%. The starting salaries these students commanded, however, exhibited a far wider gap: while graduates of universities at the top of the rankings had average starting salaries in the high $80,000s or low $90,000 bestowed upon them, graduates 1,000 spots down got average starting salaries in the high $40,000s or low $50,000s, a difference of about 45%. The moral of the story for employers: save your money, and hire the kid from the university a thousand spots down on the list, the one who’ll do almost as good a job but without the political headache and petulant demands the top-tier grad is likely to bring to the job. The moral of the story for the rest of us: highly ranked universities might be paying off financially for some of their graduates (assuming they monetize their credentials rather than pursuing their passions), but they’re not paying off for society as a whole.

What such universities may be producing, in lieu of better qualifications, is what is known as “credential inflation” (a type of phenomenon likely to be especially prevalent during a pandemic-driven recession), in which jobs that never used to — and still technically don’t — require a college education go to college graduates, while jobs that require no more than a college degree go to graduates of the more elite colleges. What happens when we are all reflexively told to go to college is mass underemployment, with, as of September 2020, over half of college graduates and just under half of recent college graduates underemployed, holding down jobs that do not require a college degree. In fact, as a recent Hechinger Report article concludes, college grads could often have gotten similar or higher salaries (without incurring the national average of $28,950 in four-year college loan debt) had they pursued lucrative professional or associate’s degrees in fields such as nursing, construction management or dental hygiene.

Social Instability

What universities may also be producing today is social unrest, not only by miseducating and radicalizing the public, as I have described at length above, but also by contributing to what the U. Conn. scientist and cultural evolution researcher Peter Turchin has dubbed “elite overproduction,” the phenomenon that occurs when a society manufactures many individuals who would appear to have some claim to elite status — such as by virtue of their educational credentials — without there being enough actual elite job slots to go around to satisfy their inflated self-conceptions. In such circumstances, Turchin argues, history repeatedly shows that these individuals become troublemaking malcontents. They begin to comprise a “counter-elite” that lays the groundwork for revolution by fulminating against their own society, its ruling class and the legitimacy of its governing principles, e.g., against the very notion of American meritocracy. Revolutions, in this empirically driven conception, are not made by Marx’s romanticized immiserated proletarians having reached their breaking point, but rather, by aspiring status-seekers and would-be intellectuals stymied by structural roadblocks that prevent their advancement through acceptable, conventional routes. Consistent with Turchin’s thesis, terrorism — the ultimate outlet for malcontents — is also normally not driven by ignorance or poverty, but rather, by a “lack of adequate employment opportunities for educated individuals.”

That social instability is generally summoned up by alienated elements within the “thinking classes” is something prophetic writers like Dostoevsky understood some time ago: his “commoners” tend to be preternaturally virtuous or preternaturally vicious, but it is various disaffected thinkers — students and the like — who tend to become possessed by dangerous ideas. As Adam Garfinkle has written in an article on the decline of deep literacy published in National Affairs earlier this year, superficial education not vivified by a habit of lifelong learning and deep reading, largely serves to make people ideal victims of and disseminators of propaganda. Such “scantily educated” individuals, emboldened by the official sanction of university credentials and enabled by social media, “contribute scantily supported opinions about things they don’t really understand, validating the old saw that a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing” and bringing into being the kind of “distributed mob … the ancient Greeks warned against.” I would add to Garfinkle’s diagnosis just one more proviso: with education configured as it currently is, more does not equal better. In fact, more education will only make the problem worse, adding more dug-in groupthink, more unwarranted self-assurance and more specialized steeping masking deep ignorance.

For all these reasons, fewer people going to college — and especially to high-price-tag, uber-politicized elite colleges — today is a win-win-win, a win for employers who can pay significantly lower salaries without a comparable drop-off in performance quality, a win, paradoxically, for employees, provided they make strategic choices to go into in-demand fields that pay almost as much as or even more than they would have made without incurring crushing debt in the process and a win for society as a whole, which will be saved much of the polarization, systematically skewed politics and social instability associated with contemporary education.

A Higher Calling

But what of education for its own sake? After all, don’t we want people to aspire to the enlightenment that knowledge itself confers? Yes, absolutely. I am far from being one of those philistine conservatives who value only that which can be monetized. I believe firmly that all of us who are truly willing and able to study “the best which has been thought and said” should have that opportunity … but that is certainly not what universities are teaching today. Contemporary universities are little more than social clubs and credentialing degree mills where kids get to stave off the responsibilities of adulthood for four years while insulating themselves (unless they happen to be conservative) from true challenges and discomforts and learning, repeatedly, the pat PBS children’s moral that everyone (except, perhaps, white male heterosexuals) is great exactly as they already are.

There is, moreover, no reason for those intent not on the pursuit of knowledge but on lucrative careers as doctors, lawyers, financiers and techies to waste four unproductive, costly years suffering through classes in elite universities in which they will get little more than some inadequately considered radical politics and an admission ticket into the intolerant American intelligentsia. Just like nurses, auto mechanics or electricians, such careerists should go straight from high school into their professional training schools and not be invited to delude themselves into believing that they are informed aristocrats merely by virtue of their elite credentials and resulting compensation packages. It is only when we take the ruse of career prep out of higher education and reserve such education for those few who want to be working their way, line by line, through the glories of Shakespeare or musing about the wildest implications of quantum mechanics that we will have any chance of purging the universities of the unintellectual students not up to the task and the anti-intellectual academics who thrive by giving those very students the sour-grapes license they need to reject our finest traditions.

To say this another way, the bottom-line problem is that when we made the mistake of trying to open higher education to everyone, we opened the campus gates to people who neither had any interest in learning “the best which has been thought and said,” nor the ability to breathe that rarefied air. We then found ourselves in the position of facing and acceding to strident calls of elitism, racism and other -isms and began to dumb our education down to meet people where they were. A wise observation from T.S. Eliot’s mid-20th-century compendium of essays published as Notes Toward the Definition of Culture puts this point better than I could:

[W]hether education can foster and improve culture or not, it can surely adulterate and degrade it. For there is no doubt that in our headlong rush to educate everybody, we are lowering our standards, and more and more abandoning the study of those subjects by which the essentials of our culture — of that part of it which is transmissible by education — are transmitted; destroying our ancient edifices to make ready the ground upon which the barbarian nomads of the future will encamp in their mechanised caravans.

Eliot’s essay also contains this absolutely critical observation: “A high average of general education is perhaps less necessary for a civil society than is a respect for learning.” While I will leave it to those more qualified for that task to debate whether or not a trickle-down approach works in the realm of economics, in the realm of culture and education, such an approach is exactly what we need. A society in which higher education is reserved for the few who actually crave the precious gifts it confers is one in which higher learning remains an appropriately lofty and difficult arcana unadulterated by the need to condescend to a mass audience. In such a society, elite educated mandarins and, more importantly, the knowledge they command are held in high esteem because they serve as its protectors, keeping it sacrosanct. Then knowledge retains its luminescence, a polestar towards which would-be-initiates will aspire and a guiding light towards which even their less capable brethren among the masses will incline. Lit up by the glow at the top, an entire society is haloed over.

When, instead, the seal is broken, when higher education is instrumentalized in the service of financial rewards or bastardized to avoid bruising the fragile egos of second-rate students, then sacred syllables and profound mysteries are de-solemnized and set adrift in a generalized sea of indifference in which every crown jewel will be lost and every drop of holy water will be diluted. The more open to the barbarian hordes are the gates of our ivory towers, the more closed will remain the minds of those who scramble in their unimpeded headlong rush to the top. When the unreconstructed barbarian resurfaces at the tower’s very apogee and peers down from his newfound perch upon those he now thinks are his inferiors, he may be shocked to find that, far from inspiring the kind of reverence he had imagined came with the role, he will see gazing up from below slightly more ungroomed and unpolished — though also less haughty and more grounded — versions of himself, a sea of expressions betraying skepticism of his claims to expertise and mirroring his own scorn. And when he flings boulders down in disgust to crush dissent, he will find them hurled unceremoniously right back at him.

 

HOMESCHOOLING: America’s Broken Education System; Leigh Bortins Talks Classical Education, Homeschool

As we enter 2021 and contemplate new beginnings, we sit down with homeschooling expert Leigh Bortins, founder of the curriculum company Classical Conversations, to discuss how American public education has declined in the past century, the responsibility of parents in educating their children, and how classical education can enrich the lives of America’s next generation. This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

Fauci Proudly Announces US Will Stay in and Fund WHO Under Biden, Walking Back Trump Withdrawl

Fauci Proudly Announces U.S. Will Stay in and Fund WHO Under Biden, Walking Back Trump Withdrawal

BY LUIS MIGUEL

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/fauci-proudly-announces-u-s-will-stay-in-and-fund-who-under-biden-walking-back-trump-withdrawal/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and chief medical advisor to the president, was pleased to tell the pro-China World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday that the United States will remain in it after Joe Biden reversed President Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the scandal-plagued outfit.

“I am honored to announce that the United States will remain a member of the World Health Organization,” Fauci said while speaking at a World Health Organization Executive Board meeting.

At the gathering, Fauci called WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus “my dear friend.”

Tedros is an actual communist who does not even have a medical degree. He landed his UN job with backing from Communist China. Before setting up shop at WHO, he played a leading role in the murderous Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) in his native Ethiopia. This Marxist terror organization declared war on other ethnic groups. Tedros served as a top member of TPLF’s Politburo Central Committee.

The U.S. government designated TPLF a terrorist organization for its history of murder, kidnapping, and other violent acts, including attacks on religious figures, journalists, and private citizens. In fact, the Global Terror Database still lists it as such.

Fauci then announced that Biden had signed a letter retracting former President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from WHO — and assured those present that the United States will continue to fund the organization.

“I join my fellow representatives in thanking the World Health Organization for its role in leading the global public health response to this pandemic,” Fauci said.

The NIAID head made no mention of the WHO’s failures during the COVID-19 outbreak, during which it allowed China to lie and downplay the nature of the disease until it had spread to much of the world.

It was because of the WHO’s failures and its favoritism toward China that President Trump withdrew the United States from it in July 2020.

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year,” Trump said in July 2020. The country was scheduled to withdraw from the organization in July 2021.

“The Biden Administration also intends to be fully engaged in advancing global health, supporting global health security and the Global Health Security Agenda, and building a healthier future for all people,” Fauci declared in his speech before the WHO Executive Board.

Fauci further announced that Biden will reaffirm the United States’ commitment to join COVAX, a WHO program to push vaccine acceleration and distribution while subsidizing vaccine access in poorer countries.

Tedros was grateful to know the United States will be remaining in his organization.

Fauci was often at odds with President Trump on COVID-19 policy, but the NIAID director appears eager to form part of the Biden administration.

In November, in fact, Fauci appeared in a livestream with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in which the tech baron said he would work closely with the new administration to “push around authoritative information on vaccines.”

On his second day in office, Joe Biden is expected to sign an executive order mandating the use of masks or face coverings in airports and on commercial planes.

This would come right after his Wednesday order that all federal employees and contractors wear masks, as well as anyone in federal buildings or on federal lands.

“Put simply, masks and other public health measures reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when communities make widespread use of such measures, and thus save lives,” reads Wednesday’s order.

The expected Thursday order would extend to modes of public transportation such as trains and intercity buses.

These moves have the support of the unions.

As Fox News notes:

Airlines for America, a trade organization with members including most major U.S. carriers, has previously and repeatedly championed masks in both airports and on airplanes since the start of the pandemic. Most recently, the group lauded the Federal Aviation Administration’s decision to implement a new “zero tolerance” policy for passengers who refuse to comply with the airlines’ mask policies, or exhibit unruly behavior. While not a federal mandate — the airlines are currently responsible for setting and enforcing their own face-covering policies — the FAA will impose steeper fines and penalties for passengers who refuse to comply with the carriers’ rules.

… “We will no longer adjudicate certain of these unruly passenger cases with counseling or warnings,” FAA Chief Steve Dickson told Reuters, outlining fines of up to $35,000 and possible jail time. “We’re going to go straight to enforcement.”

Joe Biden’s America truly will be one long “dark winter” unless patriots step up to stop him.


Hail to the Thief BIDEN: Democrats celebrate a “victory for democracy” with barbed wire, soldiers, and political terror.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/hail-thief-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

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

On a cold, windy day with a small group of spectators watching from behind barbed wire,

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. swore another in a long series of false oaths before his motorcade passed between a long row of soldiers with their backs to him looking outward for threats.

No inauguration has been this empty in a century of American history. And at no inauguration have the spectators been outnumbered by a raw display of armed force. American presidents have been inaugurated in wartime and during actual national emergencies with a better turnout.

Through world wars and wars on terror, Washington D.C. has remained a national capital where the hundreds of millions of taxpayers who labor to pay for its grand edifices, free museums, and lavish lifestyles could briefly come to enjoy a little of the life lived by the ruling class in the Imperial City. Now the ruling class has made it clear that it doesn’t want peasants entering D.C.

Even as Biden’s team prepped the executive orders that would end the national emergency at the border and shut down construction of the wall, new walls topped by razor wire were rising across the imperial city. The new Fortress of Government sealed off two miles of the National Mall and parts of downtown D.C. and filled it with more soldiers than are deployed in Iraq.

The Secret Service designated green and red zones. Some 25,000 National Guard members were dispatched from Vermont, Maine, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Arkansas, Missouri, South Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Colorado to prepare for a fake invasion that never came. But the armored vehicles and heavy weaponry did come. President Trump had wanted a military parade that would show America’s strength to the world. Biden held his own military parade to intimidate his fellow Americans.

Democrats had deployed more soldiers in D.C. than they had in Iraq and Afghanistan while authorizing them to use lethal force and investigating their politics before the deployment. The radical leftists who had resisted using the military to fight terrorism or secure the border from invasion were eager to deploy the military against the people of the United States of America.

The handfuls of ordinary people who arrived, as Americans always do, to attend the inauguration of a new president were confronted with heavy weapons and barbed wire.

D.C. had become a Baghdad and Berlin of checkpoints, choking off access to much of the city, closing roads, bridges, and metro stations. Soldiers could be seen on every corner, and the 25,000 troops were bolstered by 4,000 Marshalls, and a motley crew of local forces, including 200 members of the NYPD, 40 members of the Chicago police, New Jersey and Maryland state troopers, Miami-Dade cops, and other law enforcement officers who were needed back home.

24 people were shot in Chicago this weekend and murders are already up 125% this year in New York City. Those officers could have done more good at home, but Democrats don’t care about murder victims in urban areas, instead redeploying officers to D.C. in a show of force.

Biden took office in a city under military occupation whose businesses were closed and boarded up. The D.C. government had tried to force hotels to shut down. The hotels didn’t close, but there were hardly any people. Instead the hotels were filled with soldiers tramping through their lobbies. Any tourists that did come found nothing to see except barricades and barbed wire.

Sometimes what you don’t see is more important than what you do see.

Filling D.C. with soldiers meant that no one was going to measure Biden’s crowds. The only crowds were heavily armed and had been ordered to come. The complete lack of enthusiasm for the new one-party state that was getting its Mussolini on was the dog that didn’t bark.

Questioning Biden’s election has been deemed to be incitement. It’s enough to get you censored, de-platformed, and fired by the companies standing behind him. The election challenges have been used as the pretext for a military occupation of Washington D.C. But the cloud of a disputed election, like the winter clouds overhead, still hung over the inauguration.

There were no crowds, just soldiers. After the military and police contingent, the second largest group there for the inauguration weren’t Biden’s civilian supporters, but his propagandists. With few people, the media had to work twice as hard to manufacture the illusion that this was a popular leader taking office instead of a usurper imposed by Amazon, Google, Facebook, and the rest of the political, cultural, and economic oligarchy which owns the media on America.

CNN, a subsidiary of AT&T, had already gushed about, "Joe Biden's arms embracing America". MSNBC, a subsidiary of Comcast, compared Biden to God. "He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds." The only wounds being bound up were those of the ruling class which had temporarily lost electoral power to an army of flyover country workers and peasants, only to reclaim it with sedition, wiretapping, abuse of power, billions of dollars, and soldiers in the street.

Popular leaders, elected or unelected, might have troops in their cities, but they also have adoring crowds to cheer them on. Biden’s only cheers were coming from employees of huge corporations whose jobs depend on praising him as the greatest thing since SuperPACs.

Biden couldn’t manage the cheering crowds that greeted even the most mediocre presidents on their arrival. The band might as well have struck up a rousing chorus of, “Hail to the Thief.”

Jokes like that are all but illegal these days even though they were ubiquitous during the Bush and Trump administrations. But jokes only need to be banned when they’re too close to the truth. The hysterical fascist theater with troops in the streets and fawning praise on the lips of the press are all efforts to overcompensate for the hollow man taking a false oath on a bible.

This isn’t the pageantry of Stalin or Hitler. It’s the weary theater of Brezhnev, a senescent leader of a decaying regime being propped up by desperate threats of force by the nomenklatura. Even though the media has told us more about Biden’s dogs than it has about any of the Americans killed by Islamic terrorists enabled by the open borders that Biden just reinstated, no one cares.

Biden isn’t a charismatic leader. He isn’t moving the cause forward. He’s a placeholder for a ruling class that wants homes in Dupont Circle that it buys by selling out America to China, by ruining our economy with environmental consulting gigs and racial contract quotas, and for all the manifold ways which the swamp is coming back as Biden’s wetlands restoration project.

“Hail to the Thief” is as much their anthem as it is Biden’s. They fought to keep hold of D.C., the center of their power base not because they care about its history or that of this country, but because it’s where they network, collaborate, and do their dirty little deals at our expense.

The troops in the street are their warning to the rest of the country about who is really in charge.

And it isn’t Joe Jr, who, along with his criminal family, will be allowed to dip their beaks in cash and cocaine until they’re sopping wet, along with every aide, staffer, and associate. Biden will be fawned over, his idiot wife will be dubbed a doctor, and the investigations involving his son and brother will be swiftly dropped. And when the time is right, Kamala Harris will step into his place.

When the Soviet Union was entering its last days, one leader quickly made way for another. The parade of old Communist hacks in their dotage became a procession of political funerals. Generations after the revolution and the purges, the only thing anyone in Moscow believed in was the power and decadence of the ruling class. That and the threat America posed to them.

These are still the only three things that Washington D.C.’s ruling class believes in anymore.

Democrats and their media claim that this charade is a “victory for democracy”.

"We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it, would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy. And this effort very nearly succeeded. But while democracy can be periodically delayed, it can never be permanently defeated," Amanda Gorman, the Harvard youth poetess, sonorously recited her tin-eared Maoist verses at the inauguration.

But where is this democracy? Where are the adoring crowds, the joyous mobs celebrating and the people cheering the tremendous victory of the democracy of Google, Facebook, Amazon, AT&T, Comcast and their D.C. lobbyists and associates over the Rust Belt and the flyovers?

Biden and the Democrats celebrated their democratic victory with barbed wire, troops in the streets, political terror, and the threat of even more political repression to come.

"There is a broader societal issue that is going to take years to detox the disinformation," Ben Rhodes, the Obama adviser who had boasted of creating a media echo chamber, ranted on Comcast's MSNBC. On that same state TV news network, John Brennan warned that "because of this growth of polarization in the United States" members of the Biden team would be "moving in laser-like fashion" to "root out an insidious threat to our democracy".

Democracy is in a state of permanent emergency that requires locking down D.C., filling it with soldiers, walls, and barbed wire, and investigating political crimes. And D.C. will do everything it can to end the threat that Americans pose to democracy even if its ruling class has to live in its green zone surrounded by troops and barbed wire until democracy is saved from Americans.

Biden, we are told by the political interests and corporations advocating this, is incredibly popular. But the crowds of his devotees can’t be allowed to come to Washington D.C. Anyone who doubts that Biden is incredibly popular is inciting violence and will have to be rooted out as an insidious threat to our democracy. The more people doubt Biden’s popularity, the longer D.C. will have to be under military occupation until finally no one doubts his legitimacy in office.

Hail to the Thief.

 
1 32 33 34 35 36 50