LAYING SIEGE TO THE INSTITUTIONS My recent speech at Hillsdale College. Christopher Rufo

https://christopherrufo.com/laying-siege-to-the-institutions/?mc_cid=b3e343d61f&mc_eid=9bde3e8efb

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on April 5, 2022, during a two-week teaching residency at Hillsdale as a Pulliam Distinguished Visiting Fellow in Journalism.

Why do I say that we need to lay siege to our institutions? Because of what has happened to our institutions since the 1960s.

The 1960s saw the rise of new and radical ideologies in America that now seem commonplace—ideologies based on ideas like identity politics and cultural revolution. There is a direct line between those ideas born in the ’60s and the public policies being adopted today in leftist-run cities like Seattle, San Francisco, and Chicago.

The leftist dream of a working-class rebellion in America fizzled after the ’60s. By the mid-1970s, radical groups like the Black Liberation Army and the Weather Underground had faded from prominence. But the leftist dreamers didn’t give up. Abandoning hope of a Russian-style revolution, they settled on a more sophisticated strategy—waging a revolution not of the proletariat, but of the elites, and specifically of the knowledge elites. It would proceed not by taking over the means of production, but by taking control of education and culture—a strategy that German Marxist Rudi Dutschke, a student activist in the 1960s, called “the long march through the institutions.”

An awakening: Conservatives vs. progressives By Patricia McCarthy

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/an_awakening_conservatives_vs_progressives.html

George C. Leef has written a wonderful, definitive book that lays out the difference between self-identified progressives and conservatives.  The Awakening of Jennifer Van Arsdale: A Political Fable for Our Time is a fictionalized narrative about a Washington Post journalist — a progressive leftist, of course — who is chosen to write an official biography of the first female president, Patricia Farnsworth.  The facts of this woman’s eight years in office are essentially the Obama/Biden two terms in all but name.  Their destructive policies, briefly interrupted by the successful presidency of Donald Trump, are all in play again.  The Supreme Court has been packed.  Offending statues have been duly destroyed.  Riots and protests are endemic, often staged for political purposes.  Opponents of the left have been virtually silenced.  The book feels as though it was written in just the past few weeks, so accurate are the devastating consequences of progressive policies Americans are enduring under Biden.

Van Arsdale is at first thrilled at the opportunity to write about the woman she has long considered heroic.  She has written numerous columns celebrating Farnsworth’s policies, implemented to transform America without regard for the Constitution.  Both women pride themselves on their successful gambits that have destroyed opponents and won elections.  Farnsworth even brags about having ballots ready to submit if needed.  Arsdale is selected because she is particularly skilled at constructing progressive narratives to go with any event, policy, or disaster without letting facts get in her way.  She has fully embraced the dictates of gender and identity politics.  She knows how to slant any story, how to obscure inconvenient facts in order to make any column suitably progressive.  As a lover of classical music, she attends concerts in disguise because, among her friends and colleagues, classical music is “problematic” since most composers were white.  She would have heartily supported the We See You White American Theater manifesto.  Shakespeare is also “problematic.”

Rescuing Socrates By John J. Miller

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2022/05/30/rescuing-socrates/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=second

Roosevelt Montás, defender of the Western canon

New York City

‘I knew I was going to drop a grenade in the meeting,” says Roosevelt Montás, with a smile, during a conversation in his office in Hamilton Hall at Columbia University on April 7. He’s referring to an address he gave four years ago in Aspen, Colo., to a gathering of presidents and provosts from colleges and universities. He delivered a message that they probably didn’t want to hear.

“Our students often seem ill informed about the implications of their own political positions and are drawn, unthinkingly, into illiberal and bigoted stances,” said Montás in Aspen. “Our undergraduate curricula have not been educating our students for the life of free citizenship.” He excoriated his audience of left-leaning academics for their abandonment of the old-fashioned liberal arts.

Montás made his remarks behind closed doors. (He prepared a text, but apparently there’s no recording.) Word of his performance nevertheless spread. Eventually he came to the attention of a top editor at Princeton University Press. “I kept hearing his name,” says Peter Dougherty, now editor at large there.

The two men met for lunch at the Oyster Bar in Grand Central Terminal, where they hatched a plan for Montás to write about his beliefs in a book that is one part autobiography and one part polemic — and whose recent publication marks the rise of a powerful and unexpected voice on behalf of liberal-arts learning. At a time when many of the loudest voices in higher education condemn everything traditional as a manifestation of systemic racism and regard the canon of great books as the polluted products of dead white men, Montás offers a simple but disarming counterclaim: “I’m not the face of white supremacy.”

Gutless Media in New Haven By Jack Fowler

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/gutless-media-in-new-haven/

If you want to know what is happening in the Connecticut city that’s home to Yale University and its activist and intimidating law school, here’s some advice: Cross the Atlantic and read England’s Daily Mail, because the Nutmeg State local media — namely, the New Haven Register and the ABC affiliate, WTNH — refuse to cover the madness happening under their noses.

The madness is this, per the Daily Mail: Brats at the Yale Law School, the same ones who last March disrupted a free-speech panel featuring conservative lawyer Kristen Waggoner (a story you would not have read about at the Register or seen on WTNH — it was left to the New York Post and other non-New Haven outlets to cover the outrage), have now embarked on plotting “unrelenting daily confrontation” directed at conservative classmates, particularly those belonging to the school’s chapter of the Federalist Society. Torqued by the release of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion that might kybosh Roe v. Wade, the jurisprudential darlings took to social media to demand targeting outrage and harm at real people:

In [Instagram posts], a number of liberal law students took aim at their conservative peers — in particular, members of the law school’s Federalist Society.

‘The members of YLS [Federalist Society] are conspirators in the Christo-fascist political takeover we all seem to be posting frantically about,’ first-year law student Shyamala Ramakrishna said in an Instagram posting.

‘So why are they still coming to our parties/laughing in the library/roaming these weirdly high school-esque halls with precious few social consequences and without unrelenting daily confrontation?’

Another first-year law student, Leah Fessler, who is planning on interning for federal Judge Lewis Liman this summer, wrote: ‘Democratic Institutions won’t save us. If you’re not ready to hold accountable the people and groups who at this very school produced the men who just took away women’s bodily autonomy, miss me with the commentary.’

NIH Hides $350M in Royalty Payments, Including Ones Made to Fauci By Nick Koutsobinas

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/nih-covid19-pharmaceutical-companies-royalty-payments/2022/05/15/id/1069975/

The National Institutes of Health last year gave out $30 billion worth of government grants to nearly 56,000 contractors.

According to a report from Open The Books’ Adam Andrzejewski, despite a large portion of taxpayer money going out to fund research, an investigation revealed that a large influx of cash had come back to the NIH and individual NIH scientists in the form of royalty payments from third parties. “(T)hink pharmaceutical companies” the report said.

Andrzejewski’s investigation revealed that from 2010 to 2020, third parties paid an estimated $350 million back to the agency and its scientists. The third parties were credited as co-inventors. And because the payments enrich the agency or its scientists, the donations could be construed as a potential conflict of interest requiring disclosure.

The report details that the disclosure of payments from September 2009 to September 2014 showed that nearly 1,700 NIH scientists received more than 22,100 royalty payments totaling nearly $134 million. The revelation came from a federal lawsuit between Open The Books and the NIH, indicating that the agency has held onto 3,000 pages of line-by-line royalties since 2009. But so far, only 1,200 pages have been produced. The other 1,800 pages would detail the agency’s royalties from 2015 to 2020.

Most of the NIH documents are heavily redacted and point only to the number of payments scientists received, as well as the aggregate dollar amount per NIH agency.

$5 gas could become widespread as prices hit another record By Matt Egan,

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/16/business/gas-prices-inflation/index.html

Prices at the pump continue to shatter records ahead of Memorial Day weekend.

The national average for regular gas hit a fresh record of $4.48 a gallon Monday, according to AAA. That marks an increase of 15 cents in the past week and 40 cents in a month.
Gas prices are now up by 27% from the day before Russia invaded Ukraine.

First on CNN: Record-high gas prices slash US spending by $9 billion a month

“Everything is pointing toward even higher prices. We are well on our way toward $5,” Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates, told CNN Monday.

Citing a surge in gasoline futures, Lipow is raising his gasoline forecast from $4.50 to $4.75 a gallon, suggesting drivers on Memorial Day weekend may be greeted by record-high prices.
Lipow said $5 is “possible,” though he conceded the outlook could change considerably if there is a surprise development in the war in Ukraine or with Covid.
According to AAA, the average is already above $5 a gallon in four states: California, Washington, Nevada and Hawaii. Oregon is just a penny away.
Gas spike is making inflation worse

Commerce Cronyism: Inside Deals, Conflicts of Interest and Chinese Connections by Peter Schweizer

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18530/department-of-commerce-cronyism

The Commerce Department is the fourth most lobbied federal office, behind only the Treasury Department, Health & Human Services, and the White House itself. It is more lobbied than the bigger budgeted Department of Defense and Department of Transportation, despite managing a far smaller budget. This is no accident, because Commerce makes what can be life-and-death decisions for particular industries and businesses.

Yet the mission of this “hodgepodge” of administrative agencies, bureaus, and offices could not be more important. The Commerce Department’s broad purpose is “to create the conditions for economic growth and opportunity.”

Through its Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce regulates what are known as “dual use” technologies, which have potential military applications for foreign powers, another sore spot in the US-China relationship.

Let’s start with the current Secretary of Commerce, Gina Raimondo.

Artificial intelligence is the focus of the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security because it often has direct military applications, making it sensitive for US national security…. In February of this year, [Andrew Moffit, Raimondo’s husband] exercised his PathAI stock options and purchased at least $50,000 worth of its stock. He left his full-time job with the company and became instead its “strategic adviser,” thus deepening his financial ties to the firm while creating an appearance of greater distance between his role with the company and his wife’s duties as Commerce secretary.

In addition, Raimondo’s department has loosened restrictions on Huawei, the Chinese telecom giant that Trump administration regulators had sanctioned, because of the company’s ties to the Chinese government and particularly its military….. Huawei has been identified as a security threat by the governments of Japan, Taiwan, France, Great Britain, the US, Australia, and Germany, among others.

Then there was Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Commerce under President Trump. Ross was a successful businessman with huge commercial ties to China. He had shipping companies that had major Chinese investment… Wilbur Ross kept investments in companies directly affected by tariff policy, even as the Commerce Department handed out tariff exemptions and negotiated new trade agreements.

Before Ross, President Obama’s Commerce Secretary was Penny Pritzker…. In 2015, the Clean Energy Trust, a Chicago-based not-for-profit supporting clean energy start-ups through business development, received $10 million of funding through a grant program administered by the Department of Commerce. It was the only Chicago-area group to receive such funding. Its board of directors was co-chaired at the time by Penny Pritzker’s cousin, Nick Pritzker.

GAI’s report discusses a number of other issues, personalities, and programs that are of questionable merit but generate high interest from Washington insiders who see their potential. The cronyism of past and present secretaries is but one part of the story the report tells. It is worth your attention.

The US Department of Commerce seldom grabs headlines or congressional scrutiny. It does not become “weaponized” against political opponents of the incumbent party. After the 2016 election, an article on Vox about incoming power-players of the Trump administration dismissed the department as a “hodgepodge of agencies,” and a “Cabinet backwater.”

Here’s What the Buffalo Shooter’s Alleged Manifesto Actually Says By Matt Margolis

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/05/15/heres-what-the-buffalo-shooters-alleged-manifesto-actually-says-n1597997

On Saturday afternoon, an 18-year-old from Upstate New York traveled to Buffalo and live-streamed himself shooting several people, ten of whom he killed, at a Tops Friendly Market in a predominantly black neighborhood. The suspect was captured by law enforcement and has been arraigned on 10 first-degree murder charges.

With their usual swiftness, leftists on Twitter quickly launched a seemingly coordinated effort to blame Fox News and Tucker Carlson for allegedly radicalizing the suspect.

As word of the shooting quickly spread on social media, so did reports that the shooter had posted a 180-page manifesto online, explaining his racist and anti-Semitic motives and detailing how he planned to carry out the attack. PJ Media obtained a copy of the manifesto, and while we cannot independently verify its authenticity, it is widely believed to be genuine, and some left-wing operatives are intent on claiming that the manifesto proves the shooter was radicalized by Fox News and right-wing politics. I’ll show you want the manifesto actually says (though I will not link to it).

First, despite the coordinated effort to blame Fox News, the manifesto attacks a number of news networks, including Fox, for hiring Jews.

A search of the entire manifesto also yields no mentions of Tucker Carlson and specifically mentions “the internet” as where he got his beliefs.

Others have tried to link the shooter in a more general way to right-wing politics. For example, the so-called conservative S.E. Cupp of CNN tried to blame “right-wing extremism” for the shooting.

But here’s what the manifesto says about the shooter’s politics:

The Cycles of Revolutions in Our Midst The world is fragmenting and changing in all different directions. Unfortunately, contemporary America is offering no guidance. By Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2022/05/15/the-cycles-of-revolutions-in-our-midst/

We are witnessing a number of radical military, social, and political revolutions that are changing the United States—and the world—in fundamental ways that we still have not appreciated. 

The taboo about never mentioning the first-strike use of nuclear weapons in a major conventional war is now apparently over. Vladimir Putin routinely threatens their use. Communist China hints at its growing nuclear capability and is hell-bent on rushing into production a huge new nuclear missile force. The world is defining nuclear incineration down.

The more China and North Korea talk about nukes, the more necessary it is that uneasy democracies such as Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan will make adjustments. And the more the United States bows out of its prior role of extending its nuclear umbrella over Western democracies, the more likely these societies will consider going nuclear themselves. Should Iran acquire nuclear weapons—and its patrons Russia and China seem to be ensuring that it will—then the long feared but heretofore never reified nuclear Middle East arms race will finally break out, as the petro-rich Arab world tries to deter Iran’s unhinged theocrats.

There is also a revolutionary vacuum occurring abroad. Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are trying to figure out whether there is still any old-style American deterrence, or whether the woke progressives now in power in Washington dislike the customs and traditions of the United States even more than they do.

Lots of disasters have contributed to the current perilous state of affairs, including the precipitous American retreat from and humiliation in Afghanistan. Add in voluntary cutbacks in oil and gas production by the West, and the subsequent embarrassment of a superpower beseeching thuggish regimes to send us their energy. 

The politicized transformation of the U.S. military from a meritocratic force focused on wartime lethality into an  extension of the social welfare state driven by diversity, equity and inclusion has encouraged our enemies to take risks they otherwise might not have taken. 

Other contributors to the American power vacuum are the enormous federal debt, hyperinflation, and likely stagflation and recession this winter—along with the worldwide mania following COVID and the disastrous blanket lockdowns. All of the above has suggested to the world that a cognitively challenged 79-year-old Joe Biden is both an illustration and cause of American decline, rather than a temporary embarrassing aberration. 

A climate change class action lawsuit By Christopher Garbacz

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/a_climate_change_class_action_lawsuit.html

The UN IPCC and associated green activist groups; Federal, state, and local entities; universities; foundations; non-profit groups; and many corporations argue that the world will be destroyed without policies designed to turn on their heads the current energy system and American economy. However, the green agenda that is designed to eradicate fossil fuels will inflict enormous economic damage on America’s ordinary citizens and overall economy—and will do the same to other countries as well. This is true even though the “climate change” models have never been fully and objectively vetted, so there is no solid evidence to justify these upheavals.

Nevertheless, American Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency and, indeed, almost every federal agency and their federally funded cohorts in many state agencies are committed to decarbonization. This is true for a commitment that they admit that they do not know how to implement, as to which they cannot ascertain the final cost, and they’re unable to determined the overall consequences of their policies.

Daniel Yergin, in his The New Map, explains that the current energy system took 100 years to develop. To turn it on its head within a few decades is simply not possible. He predicts that we will move towards decarbonization, though at a slower pace than currently targeted. Further he claims that the “climate change” debate is over, even if the green winners are found to be grossly wrong and trillions of dollars are wasted. But should we accept that a debate that never really took place is over?