RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/02/claremont-under-fire/

What is the most important think tank in America circa 2021? I’d say that a good case could be made in support of the Claremont Institute, the California-based organization that is home to the Claremont Review of Books—perhaps our single most incisive quarterly devoted to high politics and the vocation of statesmanship—and a number of world-class scholars. Their statement of purpose says that “The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.” Through the CRB and the writings of their scholars and fellows, the institute lives up to that high calling. 

What is the single most disgusting and mendacious article published this year? The competition for that title is stiff, I know, but I’d like to propose Daniel Drezner’s mephitic eructation in the Washington Post abusing the Claremont Institute and some of the scholars associated with that organization. Mary McCarthy once noted that every word that Lillian Hellman wrote was a lie, including the words “and” and “the.” Hellman had nothing on Drezner, whose hysterical (I do not mean “funny”) effort at demolition is as embarrassing as it is tendentious.  

The one amusing passage (inadvertently amusing, I hasten add) is the bit toward the end where Drezner invokes the late, great Samuel Huntington for support in his vendetta against Claremont. “The connection between democracy and political science has been a close and continuing one,” Huntington said in a late 1980s speech for the American Political Science Association. “Where democracy is strong, political science is strong; where democracy is weak, political science is weak.” Drezner offers this gloss: “Make no mistake, whatever it was in the past, the 2021 version of the Claremont Institute explicitly wants to weaken democracy.” That rumbling sound you hear is Huntington turning over in his grave. The author of The Clash of Civilizations and Who Are We? would not have been amused to be enlisted in this attempted character assassination.

As it happens, abusing the Claremont Institute has become a favorite pastime of our would-be masters. The occasion for Drezner’s flaccid fusillade was the American Political Science Association’s decision to ostracize Claremont from its annual conference, taking place this weekend in Seattle. In July, The Bulwark, Bill Kristol’s current squeaky megaphone, published a fevered attack called “What the Hell Happened to the Claremont Institute?” That piece is a runner-up for my prize of most deceitful article of the year.

What is it about the Claremont Institute that drives the snotty establishment to distraction? In a word, Trump. They hate Donald Trump and they hate anyone who doesn’t share their hatred. They especially hate anyone who questions the legitimacy of the deeply problematic 2020 election or raises questions about the FBI-sponsored protest at the Capitol on January 6. 

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/02/heroes-of-the-pandemic/

Many highly accomplished and credentialed medical professionals have put their careers and reputations on the line with their public opposition to the failed COVID strategies of the global biomedical complex. For this, the corporate media has done everything it can to discredit them, and suppress their alternative message.

Over  9,100 medical doctors and scientists have signed a document charging policy-makers with potential “crimes against humanity,” accusing them of preventing physicians from providing life-saving treatments for their patients and suppressing open scientific discussion.

The now-famous “Rome Declaration” wasn’t even the first time a large number of medical experts had gone on the record to reject the tenets of the church of COVID.

A year ago, more than 860,000 infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists signed a declaration expressing their “grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies.”

The Great Barrington Declaration argued that “the most compassionate” way to reach herd immunity while minimizing mortality and social harm was “to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk.”

Unfortunately, because of the work they’ve done over the past year and a half advocating for early treatments, and raising red flags about the experimental vaccines, many brave doctors and scientists have had their voices muzzled and their reputations smeared by the corporate media.

Why? Because no one is allowed to question the official narrative of the global biomedical complex, which is that the vaccines are very safe, effective, and the best way to fight COVID-19.

Among the detractors of this narrative, highlighted below, are medical doctors, infectious-disease researchers, virologists, a former vice president of Pfizer, the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, and even a state surgeon general.

Even as the authoritarian Biden Administration has ratcheted up pressure on unvaccinated Americans to get the jab or lose all of their rights, these bold medical professionals have fought back, arguing that the experimental injections fail a risk-benefit assessment for most people, and are arguably a violation of the Nuremberg Code.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/inequality__the_engine_of_prosperity_.html

“The proponents of economic equality fail to recognize the immutable fact — freedom enables people to use their ingenuity to generate wealth, whereas coerced economic equality suppresses the very freedom required to innovate and begets poverty.”

Throughout the history of civilization, people have been dreaming of a perfect world — full employment, full satisfaction of material and intellectual needs, and equal distribution of wealth — only to discover, to their disappointment, that this utopian system does not exist on this side of the grave.            

Nevertheless, the illusory ideas of economic equality transcend time and appeal to people of all colors and races. If the supporters of economic equality, including Marxist graduates of American universities, absorb human history, they may realize that the only historical datum that points to economic equality goes back to the era of primitive communism. Ten thousand years ago, before farming, people were forced to obtain food collectively. Everything that was produced was immediately consumed. This primitive society produced no surplus and created no wealth. Under such arrangement, the private property was limited to personal articles of clothing, hunting tools, etc. resulting in total economic equality — in absolute poverty. Ironically, this is the only way economic equality can be achieved — economic equality and wealth are mutually exclusive.

As people invented agriculture and property ownership, put fences around their properties, produced surplus, engaged in commerce and subsequently built up wealth — inequality was born. The predominant pursuit of wealth creation is the purpose of any society, whether it is slavery, feudalism or capitalism.

Inspired by human’s inherent desire for well-being and passion to extricate himself from misery, wealth creation became the locomotive of economic growth. Capitalism stands out as the greatest wealth generator and distributor that has created more wealth during the last 250 years than all preceding civilizations combined in 7,000 years. 

The source of this enormous wealth is the man’s God-given ability to think and innovate. This intellectual ability is a property of the individual and has not been dispersed equally. Hence, it wouldn’t be reasonable to expect equal results from unequal abilities.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/01/the-cult-of-victimhood-will-destroy-western-civilization/

Human beings are complex social animals who evolved the extraordinary ability to empathize with others—especially in their suffering—which further led to the ability to signal suffering to other humans as a strategy to receive help, resources, and social status. This tactic can be morally desirable. For example, people are more willing to donate to causes, such as GoFundMe, when difficult social circumstances are a factor in the request. A just and moral society is concerned with the welfare of those in low positions through no fault of their own. 

Wherever benefits can be obtained from exhibiting hard-to-verify personal information, however, there will always be cynical and morally obtuse people looking to cash in on the generosity of a well-intended populace. This unfortunate reality is exacerbated by our modern proclivity to use victimhood as an identity.

Victim identities, deserved or undeserved, are said to warrant special care and deference, whereas “privileged” identities are devalued. Victimhood confers a special status that today generates tremendous power; it can be used as justification for retributive acts against “oppressors,” provide an exclusive moral legitimacy or position to speak to certain issues, and function as an excuse for one’s personal wrongdoing or failures. The allure of victim status—because of the leverage it seems to impart to people who want to obtain power and sympathy all at once—should not be underestimated. Seeking this anointed status, would-be victims often exaggerate the severity of offenses or create these offenses themselves.

Recent research into victimhood signaling found individuals who exhibit high degrees of narcissism, psychopathy, personal entitlement, and amoral manipulation. The frequency with which these individuals signal victimhood predicts their willingness to engage in ethically questionable behaviors, such as exaggerating claims about being harmed in an organizational context.

The Victim Hoax Game

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/bidens_militarized_executive_agencies.html
Does the IRS really need all that ammunition?

The Obama-Biden administration stockpiled an arsenal of high-powered weapons in the Executive Branch based on the vision of a civilian national security force.  The stockpile can outfit an army.  The Biden regime controls the trigger to the arsenal.  

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set.  We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,”  Obama said on July 2, 2008.

Non-profit OpentheBooks released a comprehensive oversight report earlier this year titled “The Militarization of The U.S. Executive Agencies” (here).  The report estimated “that there are now more federal officers with firearm authority (200,000+) than U.S. Marines (186,000).”  It’s the fulfillment of Obama’s well funded prophecy.

There is clearly no legal authority, requirement, or reason for general administrative agencies, like the Internal Revenue Service, whose power is limited to implementing laws, to have weapons.  Biden plans on expanding the IRS by 87,000 workers.  Will their audit training include marksmanship?

Accountability isn’t a strength of the federal government.  The Pentagon never passed its 2017 audit, nor could the Department of Defense document $22 trillion in expenditures.  Not a vote of confidence when it comes to the executive agencies protecting the decentralized stockpiles of firearms and ammunition.  Weapons could easily fall into the hands of vigilantes like Antifa.  Given the Biden administration’s top-down revolution, it is not unthinkable for agencies to intimidate citizens in gun-toting confrontations, conduct government purges, or supply military-grade weapons to a civilian national security force (paramilitary).

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/the_manifold_dangers_of_pretending_to_be_the_opposite_sex.html

In 2015, during the Obama administration, the Supreme Court ruled that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  This decision — which made the final pronouncement on the first major battle about gender confusion — rendered meaningless the distinction between men and women.  It was no longer necessary for a married couple to comprise a male and a female.  In a marriage, there could now be two husbands or two wives.

The weekend prior to this ruling, Bruce Jenner, a former decathlete who won gold in the 1976 Olympics, came out as transgender and won an award for “courage” for doing so.  Thus began the linking of sexual orientation and gender identity that cemented the transformation of LGB to LGBT.  In the following years, Hollywood and the media sought to mainstream transgenderism by highlighting it in TV shows, movies, and articles.  Meanwhile, the Obama administration began pushing legal mandates that characterized gender identification — whether in education, health care, housing, or the military — as a civil rights issue.  An individual’s “gender identification,” not biological sex, would be the criterion for determining admittance to public schools, sports teams, washrooms, locker rooms, showers, dorms, and the like.

The dogmatism and irrational haste surrounding so-called “anti-discriminatory” gender policies and the notion of “gender fluidity” have made it nearly impossible to voice alternative views.  This not only is unhealthy for society, but deprives the gender dysphoric — that is, people who are uncomfortable with their sex — of balanced counseling and a reasonable amount of time to arrive at how they want to be identified and whether they want so-called “sex change” surgery.  As a matter of course, counselors driven by the false narrative of “trapped in the wrong body” impose gender reassignment on confused youths, often causing untold trauma.

https://victorhanson.com/eeyores-cabinet-revolution-without-the-middle-class/

The beleaguered middle class, especially those of the suburbs, for the most part did not join rioting radicalized youths and inner-city minorities in the violence, looting, and destruction, even as their businesses were often targeted, and jobs lost.

Some small stores that had somehow endured the two months of shutdowns, did not survive the flames and break-ins that devoured entire city blocks from Santa Monica to Minneapolis. It was also no accident that many of the nation’s wealthiest, from enclaves in Malibu, Silicon Valley, and Manhattan, played the Jacobin role among the French aristocracy, and so cheered on the violent protests, assured that they were exempt from the violent ramifications of their own ideology.

Certainly, while there was expressed outrage about reports of the use of riot gas in dispersing violent protestors in the nation’s capital, few even noticed that the Beverly Hills police department stopped all would-be Black Lives Matter protestors aimed at Beverly Hills, through the generous use of tear gas.

In reductionist terms, the violence was medieval. The underclass attacked the sustenance of the middle class, while the progressive upper class virtue signaled the protests from their secure keeps. Disenchanted and mostly white youth found a new relevance for their education as megaphones for violence, in a loud and visible fashion that working at Starbucks or Target had never offered. Their foot soldiers who looted on television were all too often the urban and minority underclass.

So, in bitter irony, an entrenched feudalism was apparent even in the new resistance society—as the more educated middle class condescendingly directed the noncredentialled poorer to new looting grounds.