Cancelling America

The presstitutes ’ story is that George Floyd died from asphyxiation — “ I can ’ t breathe ” — from a police officer ’ s knee on his neck .
This story is not supported by the autopsy and toxicology reports .
The autopsy report says Floyd died of a heart attack and that no life-threatening injuries were inflicted by police restraint .
The medical examiner found no physical evidence to “ support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.
” The toxicology report says that the concentration of Fentanyl in Floyd ’ s blood was more than three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dangerous opioid .
Reports that the coroner ruled Floyd ’ s death a homicide are incorrect .
The word “ homicide ” does not appear in the report .
As for Floyd ’ s neck , the autopsy report states there are “ no areas of contusion or hemorrhage .
.
.
The cervical spinal column is palpably stable and free of hemorrhage.
” Excited Delirium Syndrome ( EXD ) typically results from a fatal drug overdose .
The condition results in breathing problems and cardiopulmonary arrest .
These were the symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an analysis here .
Did you hear about this in the news ?
No , of course not .
And neither did billionaire Chick-Fil-A owner Dan Cathy .
Cathy assumed responsibility for white racism by humbling himself on his knee and polishing the shoes of a black rapper .
Whether this was a well-scripted public relations move to save Chick-Fil-A fast-food restaurants from being burned down or a genuine act of self-deprecation by an uninformed Christian is beside the point .
What Cathy , celebrities , and public authorities have done by assuming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to hand blacks carte blanche .
Violence and theft are now justified responses to alleged white racism .
Corporations are racing to atone for white racism by removing black images from food packaging .
Suddenly long-established famous brand names such as Aunt Jemima ’ s pancake mix , Uncle Ben ’ s rice , the black chef on the Cream of Wheat package , and Eskimo Pie , have become signs of “ systemic racism.
” It seems to me that the real racism is removing pictures of black people from packaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have images of white people on packaging ?
Wouldn ’ t that be racist ?
How can we reconcile the woke idea that images of blacks are racist with the long-time push to have more black models and more black actors on TV ?
Would it be racist to have an image of an Asian on a package ?
How did Eskimo , an indigenous people inhabiting cold regions and a language , become racist ?
It seems so mindlessly silly .
It reminds me of Stanford University students in 1971 demanding that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Stanford Indians , be changed ( currently the Stanford Cardinals ) .
Stanford ’ s honoring the memory of Indians was given an unintended meaning of racism or mockery , whereas in fact the university wanted its team associated with the fighting prowess of native Americans .
Blacks were associated with good home cooking .
Their images on food products was an effort to associate goodness with the food products .
I am certain that Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben were never intended as racist images , but by removing pictures of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assertion that black images are racist .
The external costs of these corporate PR hacks are high .
By accepting the charge that its packaging is racist , corporate public relations is enabling the rewriting of American history as a story of white racism .
Everything American is racist , even packaging .
Public authorities and celebrities everywhere are taking a knee and apologizing for George Floyd ’ s death as if they are responsible for him overdosing on narcotics .
These apologies reinforce the idea that whites are the reason all blacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ association is also rampant .
The stepmother of the Atlanta policeman , who shot the intoxicated black man who grabbed a taser from the police and aimed it at police , was fired from her job as human resources director at Equity Prime Mortgage as proof that EPM supports “ communities of color.
” The country music group , Lady Antebellum , has announced a name change to Lady A .
The definition of antebellum is “ existing before a war , ” but the music group thinks the word has racist connotations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wind .
All of this can only end by making the United States a country without a history .
America is being canceled .
According to The New York Times , the US is a country based on white racism .
Therefore , American history is entirely racist and more disturbing than Aunt Jemima or a statue of Robert E. Lee .
Indeed , Western culture , being offensive , is itself being canceled .
How can our cancellation be reconciled with the neoconservative claim that Americans are an exceptional and indispensable people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White liberals have taught black and white Americans that slavery is what whites do to blacks .
This is a lie .
Slavery has nothing to do with race .
Black slavery originated in Africa in the slave wars of the black king of Dahomey .
Robert Davis , professor of history at Ohio State University , concludes from his research that from 1500 to 1650 more white Christian slaves were taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas .
This fact-based information is kept under wraps .
Consequently , neither @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that whites were enslaved by people of color .
This allows blacks to claim to be the only victims of slavery , just as Jews claim special privileges as the only people to experience holocaust while they inflict holocaust on Palestinians .
The evidence is clear .
George Floyd was not killed by racist police .
But try getting that fact acknowledged .
The agenda is to cancel America , and facts are not permitted to get in the way .

The presstitutes’ story is that George Floyd died from asphyxiation — “I can’t breathe” — from a police officer’s knee on his neck. This story is not supported by the autopsy and toxicology reports.
The autopsy report says Floyd died of a heart attack and that no life-threatening injuries were inflicted by police restraint. The medical examiner found no physical evidence to “support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.” The toxicology report says that the concentration of Fentanyl in Floyd’s blood was more than three times the fatal dose. Fentanyl is a dangerous opioid. Reports that the coroner ruled Floyd’s death a homicide are incorrect. The word “homicide” does not appear in the report.
As for Floyd’s neck, the autopsy report states there are “no areas of contusion or hemorrhage . . . The cervical spinal column is palpably stable and free of hemorrhage.”
Excited Delirium Syndrome (EXD) typically results from a fatal drug overdose. The condition results in breathing problems and cardiopulmonary arrest. These were the symptoms that Floyd showed.
John-Paul Leonard provides an analysis here.
Did you hear about this in the news? No, of course not. And neither did billionaire Chick-Fil-A owner Dan Cathy. Cathy assumed responsibility for white racism by humbling himself on his knee and polishing the shoes of a black rapper.
Whether this was a well-scripted public relations move to save Chick-Fil-A fast-food restaurants from being burned down or a genuine act of self-deprecation by an uninformed Christian is beside the point. What Cathy, celebrities, and public authorities have done by assuming white responsibility for the rioting and looting is to hand blacks carte blanche. Violence and theft are now justified responses to alleged white racism.
Corporations are racing to atone for white racism by removing black images from food packaging. Suddenly long-established famous brand names such as Aunt Jemima’s pancake mix, Uncle Ben’s rice, the black chef on the Cream of Wheat package, and Eskimo Pie, have become signs of “systemic racism.”
It seems to me that the real racism is removing pictures of black people from packaging. Does this mean we can only have images of white people on packaging? Wouldn’t that be racist? How can we reconcile the woke idea that images of blacks are racist with the long-time push to have more black models and more black actors on TV? Would it be racist to have an image of an Asian on a package? How did Eskimo, an indigenous people inhabiting cold regions and a language, become racist?
It seems so mindlessly silly. It reminds me of Stanford University students in 1971 demanding that the name of the football team, the Stanford Indians, be changed (currently the Stanford Cardinals). Stanford’s honoring the memory of Indians was given an unintended meaning of racism or mockery, whereas in fact the university wanted its team associated with the fighting prowess of native Americans.
Blacks were associated with good home cooking. Their images on food products was an effort to associate goodness with the food products. I am certain that Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben were never intended as racist images, but by removing pictures of blacks corporate PR hacks have accepted the assertion that black images are racist. The external costs of these corporate PR hacks are high. By accepting the charge that its packaging is racist, corporate public relations is enabling the rewriting of American history as a story of white racism. Everything American is racist, even packaging.
Public authorities and celebrities everywhere are taking a knee and apologizing for George Floyd’s death as if they are responsible for him overdosing on narcotics. These apologies reinforce the idea that whites are the reason all blacks aren’t multi-millionaires. Guilt by association is also rampant. The stepmother of the Atlanta policeman, who shot the intoxicated black man who grabbed a taser from the police and aimed it at police, was fired from her job as human resources director at Equity Prime Mortgage as proof that EPM supports “communities of color.”
The country music group, Lady Antebellum, has announced a name change to Lady A. The definition of antebellum is “existing before a war,” but the music group thinks the word has racist connotations like the movie, Gone With The Wind.
All of this can only end by making the United States a country without a history. America is being canceled. According to The New York Times, the US is a country based on white racism. Therefore, American history is entirely racist and more disturbing than Aunt Jemima or a statue of Robert E. Lee.
Indeed, Western culture, being offensive, is itself being canceled. How can our cancellation be reconciled with the neoconservative claim that Americans are an exceptional and indispensable people entitled to hegemony over the world?
White liberals have taught black and white Americans that slavery is what whites do to blacks. This is a lie. Slavery has nothing to do with race. Black slavery originated in Africa in the slave wars of the black king of Dahomey. Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, concludes from his research that from 1500 to 1650 more white Christian slaves were taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas.
This fact-based information is kept under wraps. Consequently, neither black nor white Americans have a clue that whites were enslaved by people of color. This allows blacks to claim to be the only victims of slavery, just as Jews claim special privileges as the only people to experience holocaust while they inflict holocaust on Palestinians.
The evidence is clear. George Floyd was not killed by racist police. But try getting that fact acknowledged. The agenda is to cancel America, and facts are not permitted to get in the way.
Originally published on Paulcraigroberts.org.


personalliberty--2020-07-17--The sordid history of scam science

The sordid history of scam science

I went with scam science in the title partly because of the alliteration but mostly because Steve Milloy already claimed junk science .
His Junk Science Judo ( and website ) , Julian Simon ’ s Hoodwinking the Nation , Matt Ridley ’ s The Rational Optimist , and Thomas Sowell ’ s Intellectuals and Society are must reads if you are struggling , as I continue to do , with the world ’ s wacky reaction to the not-so-novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 .
For those with insufficient time or inclination to read a thousand pages , I offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get me wrong , COVID-19 is a very , very serious disease for the aged and those with comorbidities .
But it was never serious enough to merit locking down much of the world ’ s economy for months on end .
Even an outbreak of smallpox or the Black Death would not have merited that blunt , top-down , one-size-fits all response .
( Incidentally , while smallpox has been eradicated from the wild , cases of the bubonic plague still plague the western United States .
No joke !
This map @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ has to be ” correct . )
The socioeconomic and health effects of the lockdown are far-reaching temporally , geographically , and environmentally and will take years to sort out carefully .
For example , while some cheer that fewer critters have been killed by vehicles because of the lockdown , few policymakers realize that right now in Africa a wildebeest or gazelle is being torn to shreds by a pack of ravenous dogs ( Canis familiaris ) that their owners can no longer afford to feed .
( Fewer still realize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely soon to be mauled by a natural predator or killed by disease/starvation anyway .
Not many expire from old age . )
What was also not-so-novel about the COVID crisis was its origin in scam or junk science .
John Ionnnidis , one of the leading critics of weak scientific work , jumped right in to alert people and policymakers about the many problems with various predictive models but he was largely ignored despite being one of the most highly-cited scientists alive .
That is actually not unusual .
Even before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Spring in 1962 , Americans have been inundated with alarmist “ scientific ” claims that have not held up to close scrutiny .
The problem is , they always hear about false claims but almost never hear about the retractions and whispered mea culpas ( Latin for “ my bad ” ) .
The net effect is undue pessimism about the state of the world .
Most scientific scares are rooted in the extrapolation of current trends to the point of disaster or desolation with no thought given to the possibility of cyclicality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Ridley jokes about the nineteenth century prediction that by 1950 the streets of London would be ten feet deep in horse manure .
Unfortunately , real scam science is no laughing matter .
Here is a partial list : Love Canal and Other “ Cancer Clusters : ” Love Canal refers to a housing development built near an improperly capped toxic waste disposal site in Niagara Falls , New York , where the media reported a cluster of cancer cases .
It turns out , though , that cancer clusters are random @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , again by sheer luck , cancer is rare .
Most cancers , it seems , are not caused by man-made chemicals .
Many more carcinogens lurk naturally in foods like cabbage and coffee than in pesticides .
Dioxin , the main chemical culprit at the Love Canal site , was claimed to be so toxic that 3 ounces of the stuff would kill one million people .
When 3 pounds of it was accidentally spread over a 700-acre town near Milan , Italy in 1976 , though , the worst that came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even in the resident who had the highest level of the substance ever found in a human body .
A 1983 study also showed that a control group had higher levels of chromosomal damage than Love Canal residents !
Nevertheless , environmentalists tried to prevent people fully aware of Love Canal ’ s history from moving back in .
Radon Panic : Radon sounds scary because it is a radioactive gas .
It comes from uranium deposits and its “ daughters , ” the isotopes produced by its decay , like polonium , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The risk to homeowners , though , was never clear , so the media easily hyped it in the 1980s into a full blown scare labeled “ The Colorless Odorless Killer ” by Time .
Like SARS-COV-2 , radon wasn ’ t really novel but the ability to detect it in the small quantities found in most homes was .
The so-called precautionary principle kicked in and the next thing you know the EPA mandated testing and set a limit of just 4 picocuries per liter of air even though miners exposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effects , forcing homeowners to spend billions on radon mitigation technologies .
( If you think that spending helps the economy , read this . )
Peak Oil : Remember when the earth was proclaimed to be just a few years away from maximum oil production and a rapid rise in oil prices followed by a production collapse due to an absolute dearth of the stuff ?
It didn ’ t happen and does not appear likely to anytime soon .
Production recently declined along with prices but due to a demand shock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vanishing reserves .
The world will stop using petroleum when its price rises above the price of substitutes , just like it stopped using whale oil when its price went above that of petroleum .
Likewise , the Stone Age did not end for lack of stone .
Superstorm Hell : Global warming was supposed to cause a spate of tropical superstorms that would wipe out coastal areas time and again .
Some big storms have hit and were hyped to the sky but there is no indication that they are any larger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Air Pollution Armageddon : For all the talk of Greens , one would think that air quality is steadily degrading .
In fact , carbon monoxide , nitrogen oxide , sulphur dioxide , and various volatile organic compound emissions have been steadily decreasing for decades .
Remember smog ?
Not many do , even in Los Angeles , the city with the worst air quality in America .
But even in the City of Angels nobody dons gas masks anymore , except to slow the spread of novel coronavirus of course .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which sent me scurrying inside as a yute in the 1970s and 80s , was just slightly more acidic than regular rain .
Although some predicted that acid rain would destroy all the forests in Germany by 2002 , acidic rain did little to no net environmental damage then and has since become as rarified as smog .
And what happened to the “ hole ” in the ozone layer that Neil Young ranted about in his 1989 song “ Rockin ’ in the Free World ?
” and that Newsweek likened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” It was always seasonal and limited to the earth ’ s three “ poles ” ( North , South , and Himalayas ) and now scientists say it is “ closing , ” showing that environmental “ damage ” need not be permanent .
The ban on the main human-produced causal agent of ozone depletion , chlorofluorocarbons ( CFCs ) , was relatively easily achieved because cheap substitutes were available .
To this day , however , scientists have not shown that the “ hole ” was primarily man-made or that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any ecological systems .
And because CFC substitutes are less energy efficient , they may contribute to global warming .
And that is just “ hard ” sciences like chemistry and physics .
When we move into the biological and social sciences and nutrition , we encounter failed prognostications like : Overpopulation : In middle income and rich nations , people are having fewer children , not more .
Food production has outstripped demand , leading to lower food prices and more obesity , not starvation , in richer countries .
Even in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and caused by governments , not absolute dearth .
Even the fake New York Times now says that the human population will peak earlier than expected , in 2067 at fewer than 10 billion .
Ecological destruction : Ecosystems were supposed to collapse , leading to mass extinction .
Instead , where property-rights have supplanted open commons , as with catch shares , natural resources like fisheries have stabilized and even rebounded .
Many places in the United States sport too many deer , turkey , and wild hogs .
The beepocalypse had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paradise : In the 1980s , the government claimed that suburban sprawl was going to swallow up most of America ’ s farmland , which was losing all its topsoil anyway , leaving Americans dependent on foreign nations for bread .
Turns out that the USDA grossly overestimated lost acreage and soil erosion and , miracle of miracles , conversion slowed and then reversed when farm prices increased .
Despite those revelations , the media continued to harp on the “ farmland crisis ” for years .
Much like a covidic cat , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Simon said .
Death by Eggs : About the same time , the media made eggs seem akin to a tasty poison , like alcohol .
It is okay to have one or two every now and again but if you developed an egg habit , you were a goner .
Then eggs became okay as scientists began to differentiate between “ good ” and “ bad ” cholesterol .
Now many consider eggs a “ super food.
” Would I be less fat today if I had eaten eggs as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food like Sugar Coated Gluten Flakes ?
We ’ ll never know .
Death by Apples : I also avoided death foods like apples “ tainted ” with Alar , an allegedly poisonous chemical applied to apples to slow their ripening .
Until , that is , the manufacturer withdrew it under regulatory pressure after a slick media blitz coordinated by an environmental activist group in 1989 .
Turns out , though , that Alar was way less dangerous than the high fructose corn syrup I consumed instead of my daily apple juice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , scientists had to have them ingest the human equivalent of 19,000 quarts of apple juice … per day , every day , throughout their lives !
Who knew ?
Arguably scientists and the media gatekeepers should have , but money and kudos flow fastest to alarmists with no stake in the underlying reality .
Off-the-Charts Income Inequality : The mere framing of this concept belies its real purpose , to redistribute “ income.
” If framed correctly , as productivity inequality , the “ problem ” disappears or begs the question why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ productive than most others and why some produce nothing at all .
Hint : it is natural heterogeneity plus stochastic processes layered onto inequality-enhancing government regulations , like minimum wages , interest rate caps , and rent controls .
In fact , rich countries have far less income and wealth inequality than poor ones and inequality cycles up and down rather than making a beeline towards either extreme .
Most disturbing of all , it appears that some researchers are willing to distort statistics to match their doomsday scenarios .
Thankfully , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before their “ story ” had become a “ stylized fact ” widely accepted by the media and Twitter rage monkeys .
Why do scam science and flawed studies so consistently prevail ?
For starters , the world is a complex place where parsing cause-and-effect is a tricky thing , especially where living creatures are involved .
Existence does not easily yield its secrets .
Nevertheless , incentives all list toward preliminary studies with big , scary findings because that makes them novel and important and hence newsworthy .
Even cub reporters know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with headlines like “ Careful Scientific Study Replicates Previous Work Showing Small , Nuanced Causal Connection.
” “ Everything Will Be Just Fine If No Action Is Taken ” is also a loser because it won ’ t sell papers or attract pageviews .
Retractions of previous errors are also boring so they end up buried when published at all , leaving the impression that the alarmist hot take was correct even when it was clearly not .
“ Bad Things May Happen in the Future , Unless ” -type stories , by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adroitly done they do not even elicit backlash , allowing their perpetuation .
First , note the weasel word “ may.
” Next , the amount of possible destruction and the distance of the prediction in time usually vary directly .
Finally , the unless provides yet more wiggle room and a segue into policy proposals .
When the world doesn ’ t end in a decade , everyone has forgotten about the article , the reporter is long gone , s/he wrote “ may ” anyway so s/he wasn ’ t technically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the policy proposals was kinda sorta implemented so if anything the story “ saved us ” from Armageddon .
Pulitzers and Peabodys all round !
In 1983 , ABC News reported on the unemployment situation in five states “ where unemployment is most severe ” without mentioning that unemployment was actually down in the other 45 states .
That sounds a lot like recent COVID-19 “ case ” reporting by the New York Times and Washington Post .
But if you intimate that such news is misleading , if not entirely “ fake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pro-Trump .
In fact , there is a lot of misleading to fake scholarship because even scholars who took clear stances and were proven wrong beyond the shadow of a doubt — on crucial matters of policy — somehow manage to keep their reputations intact .
Nobody is perfect , of course , but why do people who are routinely wrong remain relevant , and even revered ?
Neil Ferguson , the physics-trained mastermind behind nine of the last one pandemic , is simply one of numerous examples that include : Rachel Carson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Andrew Morriss showed in their 2012 edited volume Silent Spring at 50 : The False Crises of Rachel Carson ( Washington , DC : CATO ) , any of Carson ’ s remaining mystique is sheer mysticism .
Except for lung cancer , cancer deaths are down and were even trending that way when Carson , a marine biologist , scared the bejesus out of almost everyone about the dangers of DDT , a pesticide that extended half a billion human lives by killing disease-carrying mosquitoes .
She accurately claimed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among American children but failed to mention that was because other childhood diseases , especially the communicable ones , had been conquered .
Ironically , she died of cancer , a viral infection , and a heart attack , but her fame lives on .
Paul Ehrlich : In 1968 , predicted the explosion of a Population Bomb that would kill most of humanity through disease , starvation , and war before 2000 .
That didn ’ t even happen in Africa much less globally .
He claimed that life expectancy in America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a surprisingly exact prediction considering how far off the mark it was .
This famous entomologist ( insect scientist ) also bet Simon that the prices of metals would increase and , infamously , lost .
Yet Ehrlich remains an environmental guru .
Paul Krugman : Has been wrong about almost everything since he won the Nobel in 2008 for his work on international economic trade theory and concentrated his efforts on the newspaper columnist career he began in 2000 .
His biggest errors are in labor economics , including the effects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Krugman by Robert Murphy for details .
When their views are directly challenged , such erudite individuals usually a ) ignore the challenge and hope it goes away ; b ) belittle the challenger ’ s qualifications ; c ) label the challenge “ simplistic ” even though simpler explanations are generally preferred ( “ Occam ’ s Razor ) and , as Sowell says , “ evasions of the obvious can become very complex ; ” d ) inaccurately ascribe to the challenge claims that are easily refuted ; or , increasingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a bigot or that her thought emanates from a presumably racist or sexist or fascist school of thought .
In other words , they deflect instead of trying to defend the indefensible .
That is perfectly natural as evidenced by the fact that small children also engage in such deflections , albeit more “ simplistically.
” What does this all mean ?
We have to return to teaching people how to research and think for themselves and not just mindlessly jump on # bandwagons while falling for gross rhetorical tricks .
Light @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just a new term for trolleys .
Call low-lying areas where stagnant water accumulates swamps or call them wetlands , they are still just sloughs where mosquitoes breed .
Not everything labeled racist actually is ; some claims considered “ woke ” are deeply racist .
Calling a piece of legislation the Affordable Care Act does not mean that it will result in more affordable healthcare .
Shelter-in-place orders may just be a soft form of martial law that leads to bankruptcy , default , and unemployment , not safety .
Most importantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ save .
Robert E. Wright has taught business , economics , and policy courses at Augustana University , NYU ’ s Stern School of Business , Temple University , the University of Virginia , and elsewhere since taking his Ph.D. in History from SUNY Buffalo in 1997 .

I went with scam science in the title partly because of the alliteration but mostly because Steve Milloy already claimed junk science. His Junk Science Judo (and website), Julian Simon’s Hoodwinking the Nation, Matt Ridley’s The Rational Optimist, and Thomas Sowell’s Intellectuals and Society are must reads if you are struggling, as I continue to do, with the world’s wacky reaction to the not-so-novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19. For those with insufficient time or inclination to read a thousand pages, I offer my synthesis here.
Don’t get me wrong, COVID-19 is a very, very serious disease for the aged and those with comorbidities. But it was never serious enough to merit locking down much of the world’s economy for months on end. Even an outbreak of smallpox or the Black Death would not have merited that blunt, top-down, one-size-fits all response. (Incidentally, while smallpox has been eradicated from the wild, cases of the bubonic plague still plague the western United States. No joke! This map is from the CDC, so it “has to be” correct.)
The socioeconomic and health effects of the lockdown are far-reaching temporally, geographically, and environmentally and will take years to sort out carefully. For example, while some cheer that fewer critters have been killed by vehicles because of the lockdown, few policymakers realize that right now in Africa a wildebeest or gazelle is being torn to shreds by a pack of ravenous dogs (Canis familiaris) that their owners can no longer afford to feed. (Fewer still realize that animals not hit by cars are likely soon to be mauled by a natural predator or killed by disease/starvation anyway. Not many expire from old age.)
What was also not-so-novel about the COVID crisis was its origin in scam or junk science. John Ionnnidis, one of the leading critics of weak scientific work, jumped right in to alert people and policymakers about the many problems with various predictive models but he was largely ignored despite being one of the most highly-cited scientists alive. That is actually not unusual. Even before the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962, Americans have been inundated with alarmist “scientific” claims that have not held up to close scrutiny. The problem is, they always hear about false claims but almost never hear about the retractions and whispered mea culpas (Latin for “my bad”). The net effect is undue pessimism about the state of the world.
Most scientific scares are rooted in the extrapolation of current trends to the point of disaster or desolation with no thought given to the possibility of cyclicality, natural limits, or behavioral changes. Ridley jokes about the nineteenth century prediction that by 1950 the streets of London would be ten feet deep in horse manure. Unfortunately, real scam science is no laughing matter. Here is a partial list:
Love Canal and Other “Cancer Clusters:” Love Canal refers to a housing development built near an improperly capped toxic waste disposal site in Niagara Falls, New York, where the media reported a cluster of cancer cases. It turns out, though, that cancer clusters are random events simply more salient than places where, again by sheer luck, cancer is rare. Most cancers, it seems, are not caused by man-made chemicals. Many more carcinogens lurk naturally in foods like cabbage and coffee than in pesticides.
Dioxin, the main chemical culprit at the Love Canal site, was claimed to be so toxic that 3 ounces of the stuff would kill one million people. When 3 pounds of it was accidentally spread over a 700-acre town near Milan, Italy in 1976, though, the worst that came of it were cases of acne, even in the resident who had the highest level of the substance ever found in a human body. A 1983 study also showed that a control group had higher levels of chromosomal damage than Love Canal residents! Nevertheless, environmentalists tried to prevent people fully aware of Love Canal’s history from moving back in.
Radon Panic: Radon sounds scary because it is a radioactive gas. It comes from uranium deposits and its “daughters,” the isotopes produced by its decay, like polonium, pose a real risk to uranium miners. The risk to homeowners, though, was never clear, so the media easily hyped it in the 1980s into a full blown scare labeled “The Colorless Odorless Killer” by Time. Like SARS-COV-2, radon wasn’t really novel but the ability to detect it in the small quantities found in most homes was. The so-called precautionary principle kicked in and the next thing you know the EPA mandated testing and set a limit of just 4 picocuries per liter of air even though miners exposed to 12,000 picocuries showed no adverse health effects, forcing homeowners to spend billions on radon mitigation technologies. (If you think that spending helps the economy, read this.)
Peak Oil: Remember when the earth was proclaimed to be just a few years away from maximum oil production and a rapid rise in oil prices followed by a production collapse due to an absolute dearth of the stuff? It didn’t happen and does not appear likely to anytime soon. Production recently declined along with prices but due to a demand shock, the covidic global economy, not vanishing reserves. The world will stop using petroleum when its price rises above the price of substitutes, just like it stopped using whale oil when its price went above that of petroleum. Likewise, the Stone Age did not end for lack of stone.
Superstorm Hell: Global warming was supposed to cause a spate of tropical superstorms that would wipe out coastal areas time and again. Some big storms have hit and were hyped to the sky but there is no indication that they are any larger or more frequent than in the past.
Air Pollution Armageddon: For all the talk of Greens, one would think that air quality is steadily degrading. In fact, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulphur dioxide, and various volatile organic compound emissions have been steadily decreasing for decades. Remember smog? Not many do, even in Los Angeles, the city with the worst air quality in America. But even in the City of Angels nobody dons gas masks anymore, except to slow the spread of novel coronavirus of course.
Turns out that “acid” rain, which sent me scurrying inside as a yute in the 1970s and 80s, was just slightly more acidic than regular rain. Although some predicted that acid rain would destroy all the forests in Germany by 2002, acidic rain did little to no net environmental damage then and has since become as rarified as smog.
And what happened to the “hole” in the ozone layer that Neil Young ranted about in his 1989 song “Rockin’ in the Free World?” and that Newsweek likened to “AIDS in the sky?” It was always seasonal and limited to the earth’s three “poles” (North, South, and Himalayas) and now scientists say it is “closing,” showing that environmental “damage” need not be permanent. The ban on the main human-produced causal agent of ozone depletion, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), was relatively easily achieved because cheap substitutes were available. To this day, however, scientists have not shown that the “hole” was primarily man-made or that it caused any ill effects on humans or any ecological systems. And because CFC substitutes are less energy efficient, they may contribute to global warming.
And that is just “hard” sciences like chemistry and physics. When we move into the biological and social sciences and nutrition, we encounter failed prognostications like:
Overpopulation: In middle income and rich nations, people are having fewer children, not more. Food production has outstripped demand, leading to lower food prices and more obesity, not starvation, in richer countries. Even in poor countries, famines are now rare and caused by governments, not absolute dearth. Even the fake New York Times now says that the human population will peak earlier than expected, in 2067 at fewer than 10 billion.
Ecological destruction: Ecosystems were supposed to collapse, leading to mass extinction. Instead, where property-rights have supplanted open commons, as with catch shares, natural resources like fisheries have stabilized and even rebounded. Many places in the United States sport too many deer, turkey, and wild hogs. The beepocalypse had no sting. Imagine that.
Paving Paradise: In the 1980s, the government claimed that suburban sprawl was going to swallow up most of America’s farmland, which was losing all its topsoil anyway, leaving Americans dependent on foreign nations for bread. Turns out that the USDA grossly overestimated lost acreage and soil erosion and, miracle of miracles, conversion slowed and then reversed when farm prices increased. Despite those revelations, the media continued to harp on the “farmland crisis” for years. Much like a covidic cat, it “seemed to have nine lives,” Simon said.
Death by Eggs: About the same time, the media made eggs seem akin to a tasty poison, like alcohol. It is okay to have one or two every now and again but if you developed an egg habit, you were a goner. Then eggs became okay as scientists began to differentiate between “good” and “bad” cholesterol. Now many consider eggs a “super food.” Would I be less fat today if I had eaten eggs as a kid instead of “healthy” food like Sugar Coated Gluten Flakes? We’ll never know.
Death by Apples: I also avoided death foods like apples “tainted” with Alar, an allegedly poisonous chemical applied to apples to slow their ripening. Until, that is, the manufacturer withdrew it under regulatory pressure after a slick media blitz coordinated by an environmental activist group in 1989. Turns out, though, that Alar was way less dangerous than the high fructose corn syrup I consumed instead of my daily apple juice. To induce cancer in lab rats, scientists had to have them ingest the human equivalent of 19,000 quarts of apple juice … per day, every day, throughout their lives! Who knew? Arguably scientists and the media gatekeepers should have, but money and kudos flow fastest to alarmists with no stake in the underlying reality.
Off-the-Charts Income Inequality: The mere framing of this concept belies its real purpose, to redistribute “income.” If framed correctly, as productivity inequality, the “problem” disappears or begs the question why a few people are so much more productive than most others and why some produce nothing at all. Hint: it is natural heterogeneity plus stochastic processes layered onto inequality-enhancing government regulations, like minimum wages, interest rate caps, and rent controls. In fact, rich countries have far less income and wealth inequality than poor ones and inequality cycles up and down rather than making a beeline towards either extreme. Most disturbing of all, it appears that some researchers are willing to distort statistics to match their doomsday scenarios. Thankfully, they have been called out repeatedly but not before their “story” had become a “stylized fact” widely accepted by the media and Twitter rage monkeys.
Why do scam science and flawed studies so consistently prevail?
For starters, the world is a complex place where parsing cause-and-effect is a tricky thing, especially where living creatures are involved. Existence does not easily yield its secrets.
Nevertheless, incentives all list toward preliminary studies with big, scary findings because that makes them novel and important and hence newsworthy. Even cub reporters know not to pitch their editors on stories with headlines like “Careful Scientific Study Replicates Previous Work Showing Small, Nuanced Causal Connection.” “Everything Will Be Just Fine If No Action Is Taken” is also a loser because it won’t sell papers or attract pageviews. Retractions of previous errors are also boring so they end up buried when published at all, leaving the impression that the alarmist hot take was correct even when it was clearly not.
“Bad Things May Happen in the Future, Unless”-type stories, by contrast, are commercial winners. If adroitly done they do not even elicit backlash, allowing their perpetuation. First, note the weasel word “may.” Next, the amount of possible destruction and the distance of the prediction in time usually vary directly. Finally, the unless provides yet more wiggle room and a segue into policy proposals. When the world doesn’t end in a decade, everyone has forgotten about the article, the reporter is long gone, s/he wrote “may” anyway so s/he wasn’t technically wrong, and besides, one of the policy proposals was kinda sorta implemented so if anything the story “saved us” from Armageddon. Pulitzers and Peabodys all round!
In 1983, ABC News reported on the unemployment situation in five states “where unemployment is most severe” without mentioning that unemployment was actually down in the other 45 states. That sounds a lot like recent COVID-19 “case” reporting by the New York Times and Washington Post. But if you intimate that such news is misleading, if not entirely “fake,” you get immediately smeared as pro-Trump.
In fact, there is a lot of misleading to fake scholarship because even scholars who took clear stances and were proven wrong beyond the shadow of a doubt — on crucial matters of policy — somehow manage to keep their reputations intact. Nobody is perfect, of course, but why do people who are routinely wrong remain relevant, and even revered? Neil Ferguson, the physics-trained mastermind behind nine of the last one pandemic, is simply one of numerous examples that include:
Rachel Carson: As Roger Meiners, Pierre Desrochers, and Andrew Morriss showed in their 2012 edited volume Silent Spring at 50: The False Crises of Rachel Carson (Washington, DC: CATO), any of Carson’s remaining mystique is sheer mysticism. Except for lung cancer, cancer deaths are down and were even trending that way when Carson, a marine biologist, scared the bejesus out of almost everyone about the dangers of DDT, a pesticide that extended half a billion human lives by killing disease-carrying mosquitoes. She accurately claimed that cancer was the leading cause of death among American children but failed to mention that was because other childhood diseases, especially the communicable ones, had been conquered. Ironically, she died of cancer, a viral infection, and a heart attack, but her fame lives on.
Paul Ehrlich: In 1968, predicted the explosion of a Population Bomb that would kill most of humanity through disease, starvation, and war before 2000. That didn’t even happen in Africa much less globally. He claimed that life expectancy in America would drop to 42 years by 1980, a surprisingly exact prediction considering how far off the mark it was. This famous entomologist (insect scientist) also bet Simon that the prices of metals would increase and, infamously, lost. Yet Ehrlich remains an environmental guru.
Paul Krugman: Has been wrong about almost everything since he won the Nobel in 2008 for his work on international economic trade theory and concentrated his efforts on the newspaper columnist career he began in 2000. His biggest errors are in labor economics, including the effects of minimum wage policies. See Contra Krugman by Robert Murphy for details.
When their views are directly challenged, such erudite individuals usually a) ignore the challenge and hope it goes away; b) belittle the challenger’s qualifications; c) label the challenge “simplistic” even though simpler explanations are generally preferred (“Occam’s Razor) and, as Sowell says, “evasions of the obvious can become very complex;” d) inaccurately ascribe to the challenge claims that are easily refuted; or, increasingly, e) insinuate that the challenger is a bigot or that her thought emanates from a presumably racist or sexist or fascist school of thought. In other words, they deflect instead of trying to defend the indefensible. That is perfectly natural as evidenced by the fact that small children also engage in such deflections, albeit more “simplistically.”
What does this all mean? We have to return to teaching people how to research and think for themselves and not just mindlessly jump on #bandwagons while falling for gross rhetorical tricks. Light rail, it turns out, is just a new term for trolleys. Call low-lying areas where stagnant water accumulates swamps or call them wetlands, they are still just sloughs where mosquitoes breed. Not everything labeled racist actually is; some claims considered “woke” are deeply racist. Calling a piece of legislation the Affordable Care Act does not mean that it will result in more affordable healthcare. Shelter-in-place orders may just be a soft form of martial law that leads to bankruptcy, default, and unemployment, not safety. Most importantly, science might sometimes scam rather than save.
Robert E. Wright has taught business, economics, and policy courses at Augustana University, NYU’s Stern School of Business, Temple University, the University of Virginia, and elsewhere since taking his Ph.D. in History from SUNY Buffalo in 1997.


personalliberty--2020-07-28--Why Marxists Like BLM Seek to Dismantle the ‘Western Nuclear Family’

One of the most oft-cited and criticized goals of the Black Lives Matter organization is its stated desire to abolish the family as we know it .
Specifically , BLM ’ s official website states : This idea isn ’ t unique to BLM , of course .
“ Disrupting ” the “ nuclear family ” is a commonly stated goal among Maxist organizations .
Given that BLM ’ s founders have specifically claimed to be “ trained Marxists , ” we should not be surprised that the organization ’ s leadership has embraced a Marxian view of the family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the family originate ?
Partly , it comes from the theories of Marx and Engels themselves , and their views that an earlier , matriarchal version of the family rejected private property as an organizing principle of society .
It was only later that this older tribal model of the family gave way to the modern “ patriarchal ” family , which promotes and sustains private property .
Clearly , in the Marxian view , this “ new ” type of family must be opposed , since the destruction of this family model @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property as well .
Frederick Engels ’ s 1884 book The Origin of the Family , Private Property and the State provides a historical perspective of the Marxian view of the development of the modern Western family unit and its relation to property rights .
( Engels , of course , was the longtime benefactor of and collaborator with Marx . )
In reconstructing the origins of the family within a Marxian framework , Engels traces back to the “ savage ” primeval stage of humanity that , according to his research , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexual intercourse existed within a tribe , so that every woman belonged to every man , and vice versa.
” Under such conditions , Engels explained , “ it is uncertain who is the father of the child , but certain , who is its mother.
” Only female lineage could be acknowledged .
“ [ B ] eing the only well known parents of younger generations , ” Engels explained , women as mothers “ received a high tribute of respect and deference , amounting to a complete women ’ s rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Engels wrote , tribes were subdivided into smaller groups called “ gentes , ” a primitive form of an extended family of sorts .
These gens were consanguineous ( i.e.
, included people descended from the same ancestor ) on the mother ’ s side , within which intermarrying was strictly forbidden .
“ The men of certain ‘ gens , ’ therefore , could choose their wives within the tribe , and did so as a rule , but had to choose them outside of their ‘ gens , ’ ” Engels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this stage was a “ communal ” affair , meaning that multiple partnerships between men and women was closer to the rule than the exception .
Because mothers were the only parents who could be determined with certainty , and the smaller gentes were arranged around the mother ’ s relatives , early family units were very maternal in nature and maternal law regarding rights and duties for childrearing and inheritance were the custom .
This was the state of affairs for thousands of years , according to Engels .
Over time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to as the “ pairing family , ” in which “ A man had his principal wife…among many women , and he was to her the principal husband among others.
” This was in no small part due to the “ gentes ” within tribes developing more and more classes of relatives not allowed to marry one another .
Due to these increasing restrictions , group marriage became increasingly impossible and ever more replaced by the pairing family structure .
Under this structure , however , the role of mothers was still dominant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among the Seneca Iroquois tribe , Engels notes , “ The female part generally ruled the house….The women were the dominating power in the clans [ gentes ] and everywhere else.
” The fact that women all belonged to the same gens , while husbands came from separate gentes “ was the cause and foundation of the general and widespread supremacy of women in primeval times , ” Engels wrote .
“ In the ancient communistic household comprising many married couples and their children , the administration of the household entrusted to women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a socially necessary industry , as the procuring of food by men , ” he added .
As society evolved , as Engels described it , from “ savagery ” to “ barbarism , ” an important evolution was man ’ s development of weapons and knowledge that enabled them to better domesticate and breed animals .
Cattle and livestock became a source of wealth , a store of milk and meat .
“ But who was the owner of this new wealth ?
” asked Engels .
“ Doubtless it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , referring to a collective , or group ownership over the sources of wealth .
“ However , private ownership of flocks must have had an early beginning.
” “ Procuring the means of existence had always been the man ’ s business .
The tools of production were manufactured and owned by him .
The herds were the new tools of production , and their taming and tending was his work .
Hence he owned the cattle and the commodities and slaves obtained in exchange for them , ” Engels explained .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ collective ” property to “ private ” ownership over property—particularly property in productive resources .
Such a transformation , Engels noted , “ brought about a revolution in the family.
” Part of that revolution involved a shift in the power dynamics of the household .
“ All the surplus now resulting from production fell to the share of the man .
The woman shared in its fruition , but she could not claim its ownership , ” wrote Engels .
The domestic status of the woman in the house , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the means of sustenance , had been reversed .
“ Man ’ s advent to practical supremacy in the household marked the removal to his universal supremacy , ” and further ushered in “ the gradual transition from the pairing family to the monogamic family ” ( what we would consider the nuclear family ) .
With the superior status acquired , Engels wrote , men were able to overthrow the maternal right to inheritance , a move he described as “ the historic defeat of the female sex.
” The family unit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was complete , according to Engels .
Much of the blame for this can be attributed to the emergence of private property and men ’ s claim over it .
How to Overcome the Patriarchy ?
In the Marxian view , therefore , the modern nuclear family runs counter to the ancient “ communistic ” household Engels had earlier described .
It is patriarchal and centered on private property .
“ In the great majority of cases the man has to earn a living and to support his family , at least among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a superior position that has no need of any legal special privilege .
In the family , he is the bourgeois , the woman represents the proletariat.
” The family unit , rather than the collective tribe , had become the “ industrial unit of society.
” The overthrow of this patriarchic dominance can only come , according to Engels , by abolishing private property in the means of production—which he and those steeped in Marxist ideology blame for the patriarchy .
“ The impending [ communist ] revolution will reduce this whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ changing at least the overwhelming part of permanent and inheritable wealth – the means of production – into social property , ” he concluded .
What would this new social arrangement look like , according to Engels ?
In this we see early echoes of the modern left ’ s current refrain attacking “ patriarchy ” and the nuclear family as essentially capitalist and private property–based institutions .
In this , BLM is no different from other Marxist groups .
The organization ’ s goals extend far beyond police abuse and police brutality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a society based upon private property in the means of production .
Bradley Thomas is the creator of the website EraseTheState.com , and is a libertarian activist and writer with nearly fifteen years of experience researching and writing on political philosophy and economics .

One of the most oft-cited and criticized goals of the Black Lives Matter organization is its stated desire to abolish the family as we know it. Specifically, BLM’s official website states:
We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
This idea isn’t unique to BLM, of course. “Disrupting” the “nuclear family” is a commonly stated goal among Maxist organizations. Given that BLM’s founders have specifically claimed to be “trained Marxists,” we should not be surprised that the organization’s leadership has embraced a Marxian view of the family.
But where does this hostility toward the family originate? Partly, it comes from the theories of Marx and Engels themselves, and their views that an earlier, matriarchal version of the family rejected private property as an organizing principle of society. It was only later that this older tribal model of the family gave way to the modern “patriarchal” family, which promotes and sustains private property.
Clearly, in the Marxian view, this “new” type of family must be opposed, since the destruction of this family model will make it easier to abolish private property as well.
Early Family Units in Tribal Life
Frederick Engels’s 1884 book The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State provides a historical perspective of the Marxian view of the development of the modern Western family unit and its relation to property rights. (Engels, of course, was the longtime benefactor of and collaborator with Marx.)
In reconstructing the origins of the family within a Marxian framework, Engels traces back to the “savage” primeval stage of humanity that, according to his research, revealed a condition in which “unrestricted sexual intercourse existed within a tribe, so that every woman belonged to every man, and vice versa.”
Under such conditions, Engels explained, “it is uncertain who is the father of the child, but certain, who is its mother.” Only female lineage could be acknowledged. “[B]eing the only well known parents of younger generations,” Engels explained, women as mothers “received a high tribute of respect and deference, amounting to a complete women’s rule [gynaicocracy].”
Furthermore, Engels wrote, tribes were subdivided into smaller groups called “gentes,” a primitive form of an extended family of sorts.
These gens were consanguineous (i.e., included people descended from the same ancestor) on the mother’s side, within which intermarrying was strictly forbidden. “The men of certain ‘gens,’ therefore, could choose their wives within the tribe, and did so as a rule, but had to choose them outside of their ‘gens,’” Engels explained. And “marriage” at this stage was a “communal” affair, meaning that multiple partnerships between men and women was closer to the rule than the exception.
Because mothers were the only parents who could be determined with certainty, and the smaller gentes were arranged around the mother’s relatives, early family units were very maternal in nature and maternal law regarding rights and duties for childrearing and inheritance were the custom.
Transition to the “Pairing Family”
This was the state of affairs for thousands of years, according to Engels. Over time, however, there emerged what Engels referred to as the “pairing family,” in which “A man had his principal wife…among many women, and he was to her the principal husband among others.” This was in no small part due to the “gentes” within tribes developing more and more classes of relatives not allowed to marry one another. Due to these increasing restrictions, group marriage became increasingly impossible and ever more replaced by the pairing family structure.
Under this structure, however, the role of mothers was still dominant. Quoting Arthur Wright, a missionary among the Seneca Iroquois tribe, Engels notes, “The female part generally ruled the house….The women were the dominating power in the clans [gentes] and everywhere else.”
The fact that women all belonged to the same gens, while husbands came from separate gentes “was the cause and foundation of the general and widespread supremacy of women in primeval times,” Engels wrote.
“In the ancient communistic household comprising many married couples and their children, the administration of the household entrusted to women was just as much a public function, a socially necessary industry, as the procuring of food by men,” he added.
As society evolved, as Engels described it, from “savagery” to “barbarism,” an important evolution was man’s development of weapons and knowledge that enabled them to better domesticate and breed animals.
Cattle and livestock became a source of wealth, a store of milk and meat. “But who was the owner of this new wealth?” asked Engels. “Doubtless it was originally the gens,” he answered, referring to a collective, or group ownership over the sources of wealth. “However, private ownership of flocks must have had an early beginning.”
“Procuring the means of existence had always been the man’s business. The tools of production were manufactured and owned by him. The herds were the new tools of production, and their taming and tending was his work. Hence he owned the cattle and the commodities and slaves obtained in exchange for them,” Engels explained. This transition marked an early passage from “collective” property to “private” ownership over property—particularly property in productive resources.
Such a transformation, Engels noted, “brought about a revolution in the family.”
Part of that revolution involved a shift in the power dynamics of the household.
“All the surplus now resulting from production fell to the share of the man. The woman shared in its fruition, but she could not claim its ownership,” wrote Engels.
The domestic status of the woman in the house, which had previously involved control and distribution of the means of sustenance, had been reversed.
“Man’s advent to practical supremacy in the household marked the removal to his universal supremacy,” and further ushered in “the gradual transition from the pairing family to the monogamic family” (what we would consider the nuclear family).
With the superior status acquired, Engels wrote, men were able to overthrow the maternal right to inheritance, a move he described as “the historic defeat of the female sex.”
The family unit’s transition to a male-centered patriarchy was complete, according to Engels. Much of the blame for this can be attributed to the emergence of private property and men’s claim over it.
How to Overcome the Patriarchy?
In the Marxian view, therefore, the modern nuclear family runs counter to the ancient “communistic” household Engels had earlier described. It is patriarchal and centered on private property.
“In the great majority of cases the man has to earn a living and to support his family, at least among the possessing classes. He thereby obtains a superior position that has no need of any legal special privilege. In the family, he is the bourgeois, the woman represents the proletariat.” The family unit, rather than the collective tribe, had become the “industrial unit of society.”
The overthrow of this patriarchic dominance can only come, according to Engels, by abolishing private property in the means of production—which he and those steeped in Marxist ideology blame for the patriarchy.
“The impending [communist] revolution will reduce this whole care of inheritance to a minimum by changing at least the overwhelming part of permanent and inheritable wealth – the means of production – into social property,” he concluded.
What would this new social arrangement look like, according to Engels?
The care and education of children becomes a public matter. Society cares equally well for all children, legal or illegal. This removes the care about the “consequences” which now forms the essential social factor – moral and economic – hindering a girl to surrender unconditionally to the beloved man.
In this we see early echoes of the modern left’s current refrain attacking “patriarchy” and the nuclear family as essentially capitalist and private property–based institutions.
In this, BLM is no different from other Marxist groups. The organization’s goals extend far beyond police abuse and police brutality. The ultimate goal is the abolition of a society based upon private property in the means of production.
Bradley Thomas is the creator of the website EraseTheState.com, and is a libertarian activist and writer with nearly fifteen years of experience researching and writing on political philosophy and economics.


personalliberty--2020-08-06--Who profits from militarizing the police?

Since 1997 , the Pentagon ’ s 1033 Program , as it ’ s called , has channeled to 8,000 separate law enforcement agencies more than $ 7.4 billion in surplus equipment , including Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected ( MRAP ) vehicles of the kind used on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan , along with rifles , ammunition , grenade launchers , and night vision devices .
As Brian Barrett has pointed out at Wired , “ Local law enforcement responding to even nonviolent protests has often looked more like the U.S. Armed Forces.
” Political scientist Ryan Welch coauthored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came to police departments equipped in such a fashion , “ that officers with military hardware and mindsets will resort to violence more often and more quickly.
” Under the circumstances and given who ’ s providing the equipment , you won ’ t be surprised to learn that the 1033 Program also suffers from lax oversight .
In 2017 , the Government Accountability Office ( GAO ) created a fake law enforcement agency and was able to acquire $ 1.2 million worth of equipment through the program , including night-vision goggles and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approved within a week of the GAO ’ s application .
The Obama administration finally implemented some reforms in the wake of Ferguson , banning the transfer of tracked vehicles , grenade launchers , and weaponized aircraft , among other things , while requiring police departments to supply more detailed rationales describing their need for specific equipment .
But such modest efforts—and they proved modest indeed — were promptly chucked out when Donald Trump took office .
And the Trump administration changes quickly had a discernible effect .
In 2019 , the 1033 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever , with about 15,750 military items transferred to law enforcement , a figure exceeded only in 2012 , in the Obama years , when 17,000 such items were distributed .
As noted , the mere possession of military equipment has been shown to stoke the ever stronger “ warrior culture ” that now characterizes so many police departments , as evidenced by the use of Special Weapons and Tactics ( SWAT ) teams armed with military weaponry for routine drug enforcement activities .
It ’ s hardly just SWAT teams , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the 1033 Program are widely employed by ordinary police forces .
NBC News , for instance , reported that armored vehicles were used at least 29 times in response to Black Lives Matter protests organized since the murder of George Floyd , including in major urban areas like Philadelphia and Cincinnati .
NBC has also determined that more than 1,100 Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles have been distributed to local law enforcement agencies under the MRAP program , going to communities large and small , including Sanford , Maine , population 20,000 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8,400 .
A report from the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ) has similarly documented the use of Pentagon-supplied equipment in no-knock home invasions , including driving up to people ’ s houses in just such armored vehicles to launch the raids .
The ACLU concluded that “ the militarization of American policing is evident in the training that police officers receive , which encourages them to adopt a ‘ warrior ’ mentality and think of the people they are supposed to serve as enemies , as well as in the equipment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , flashbang grenades , and APCs [ Armored Personnel Carriers ] .
” Companies in the military-industrial complex earn billions of dollars selling weapons , as well as building and operating prisons and detention facilities , and supplying the police while theoretically dealing with problems with deep social and economic roots .
Generally speaking , by the time they ’ re done , those problems have only become deeper and more rooted .
Take , for example , giant weapons contractors like Lockheed Martin , Boeing , and Raytheon that profit so splendidly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saudi Arabia , weaponry that in turn has been used to kill tens of thousands of civilians in Yemen , destroy civilian infrastructure there , and block the provision of desperately needed humanitarian assistance .
The result : more than a hundred thousand deaths in that country and millions more on the brink of famine and disease , including COVID-19 .
Such major weapons firms have also been at the front of the line when it comes to benefiting from America ’ s endless post-9/11 wars .
The Costs of War Project at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has spent over $ 6.4 trillion on just some of those overseas conflicts since 2001 .
Hundreds of billions of those dollars ended up in the pockets of defense contractors , while problems in the US , left far less well funded , only grew .
And by the way , the Pentagon ’ s regular budget , combined with direct spending on wars , also manages to provide huge benefits to such weapons makers .
Almost half of the department ’ s $ 750 billion budget goes to them .
According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest report on the top recipients of government contracts , the five largest US arms makers alone—Lockheed Martin , Boeing , Raytheon , Northrop Grumman , and General Dynamics—split well over $ 100 billion in Pentagon awards among them in 2019 .
Meanwhile , those same five firms pay their CEOs a total of approximately $ 100 million per year , with hundreds of millions more going to other top executives and board members .
Meanwhile , in the Trump years , the militarization of the border has become a particularly lucrative business @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instance , supplying ever more surveillance drones and General Dynamics supplying an ever more intricate and expensive remote sensor surveillance system .
There are also millions to be made running privatized prisons and immigrant detention centers , filling the coffers of firms like CoreCivic and the GEO Group , which have secured record profits in recent years while garnering about half their revenues from those two sources .
Last but not least is the market for even more police equipment .
Local forces benefit from grants from the Department of Homeland Security to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplement the Pentagon ’ s 1033 Program .
Much has been written about America ’ s failed post-9/11 wars , which have cost trillions of dollars in taxpayer treasure , hundreds of thousands of lives ( American and otherwise ) , and physical and psychological injuries to hundreds of thousands more .
These wars have also propped up sectarian and corrupt regimes that have actually made it easier for terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS to form and spread .
Think of it as the ultimate boomerang effect , in which violence begets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to thrive .
As journalist Nick Turse has noted with respect to the militarization of US Africa policy , the growth in American military operations on that continent has proceeded rather strikingly in conjunction with a proliferation of new terrorist groups .
Put the best light on them and US counterterror operations there have been ineffective .
More likely , they have simply helped spawn further increases in terrorist activities in the region .
William D. Hartung is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ War : Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex .

Since 1997, the Pentagon’s 1033 Program, as it’s called, has channeled to 8,000 separate law enforcement agencies more than $7.4 billion in surplus equipment, including Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles of the kind used on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, along with rifles, ammunition, grenade launchers, and night vision devices. As Brian Barrett has pointed out at Wired, “Local law enforcement responding to even nonviolent protests has often looked more like the U.S. Armed Forces.” Political scientist Ryan Welch coauthored a 2017 study suggesting, when it came to police departments equipped in such a fashion, “that officers with military hardware and mindsets will resort to violence more often and more quickly.”
Under the circumstances and given who’s providing the equipment, you won’t be surprised to learn that the 1033 Program also suffers from lax oversight. In 2017, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) created a fake law enforcement agency and was able to acquire $1.2 million worth of equipment through the program, including night-vision goggles and simulated M-16A2 rifles. The request was approved within a week of the GAO’s application.
The Obama administration finally implemented some reforms in the wake of Ferguson, banning the transfer of tracked vehicles, grenade launchers, and weaponized aircraft, among other things, while requiring police departments to supply more detailed rationales describing their need for specific equipment. But such modest efforts—and they proved modest indeed — were promptly chucked out when Donald Trump took office. And the Trump administration changes quickly had a discernible effect. In 2019, the 1033 Program had one of its biggest years ever, with about 15,750 military items transferred to law enforcement, a figure exceeded only in 2012, in the Obama years, when 17,000 such items were distributed.
As noted, the mere possession of military equipment has been shown to stoke the ever stronger “warrior culture” that now characterizes so many police departments, as evidenced by the use of Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams armed with military weaponry for routine drug enforcement activities. It’s hardly just SWAT teams, though. The weaponry and related items provided under the 1033 Program are widely employed by ordinary police forces. NBC News, for instance, reported that armored vehicles were used at least 29 times in response to Black Lives Matter protests organized since the murder of George Floyd, including in major urban areas like Philadelphia and Cincinnati. NBC has also determined that more than 1,100 Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles have been distributed to local law enforcement agencies under the MRAP program, going to communities large and small, including Sanford, Maine, population 20,000, and Moundsville, West Virginia, population 8,400.
A report from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has similarly documented the use of Pentagon-supplied equipment in no-knock home invasions, including driving up to people’s houses in just such armored vehicles to launch the raids. The ACLU concluded that “the militarization of American policing is evident in the training that police officers receive, which encourages them to adopt a ‘warrior’ mentality and think of the people they are supposed to serve as enemies, as well as in the equipment they use, such as battering rams, flashbang grenades, and APCs [Armored Personnel Carriers].”
Who Benefits?
Companies in the military-industrial complex earn billions of dollars selling weapons, as well as building and operating prisons and detention facilities, and supplying the police while theoretically dealing with problems with deep social and economic roots. Generally speaking, by the time they’re done, those problems have only become deeper and more rooted. Take, for example, giant weapons contractors like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon that profit so splendidly from the sales of weapons systems to Saudi Arabia, weaponry that in turn has been used to kill tens of thousands of civilians in Yemen, destroy civilian infrastructure there, and block the provision of desperately needed humanitarian assistance. The result: more than a hundred thousand deaths in that country and millions more on the brink of famine and disease, including COVID-19.
Such major weapons firms have also been at the front of the line when it comes to benefiting from America’s endless post-9/11 wars. The Costs of War Project at Brown University estimates that the United States has spent over $6.4 trillion on just some of those overseas conflicts since 2001. Hundreds of billions of those dollars ended up in the pockets of defense contractors, while problems in the US, left far less well funded, only grew.
And by the way, the Pentagon’s regular budget, combined with direct spending on wars, also manages to provide huge benefits to such weapons makers. Almost half of the department’s $750 billion budget goes to them. According to the Federal Procurement Data System’s latest report on the top recipients of government contracts, the five largest US arms makers alone—Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics—split well over $100 billion in Pentagon awards among them in 2019. Meanwhile, those same five firms pay their CEOs a total of approximately $100 million per year, with hundreds of millions more going to other top executives and board members.
Meanwhile, in the Trump years, the militarization of the border has become a particularly lucrative business opportunity, with General Atomics, for instance, supplying ever more surveillance drones and General Dynamics supplying an ever more intricate and expensive remote sensor surveillance system. There are also millions to be made running privatized prisons and immigrant detention centers, filling the coffers of firms like CoreCivic and the GEO Group, which have secured record profits in recent years while garnering about half their revenues from those two sources.
Last but not least is the market for even more police equipment. Local forces benefit from grants from the Department of Homeland Security to purchase a wide range of items to supplement the Pentagon’s 1033 Program.
The True Bottom Line
Much has been written about America’s failed post-9/11 wars, which have cost trillions of dollars in taxpayer treasure, hundreds of thousands of lives (American and otherwise), and physical and psychological injuries to hundreds of thousands more. These wars have also propped up sectarian and corrupt regimes that have actually made it easier for terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS to form and spread. Think of it as the ultimate boomerang effect, in which violence begets more violence while allowing overseas terrorist organizations to thrive. As journalist Nick Turse has noted with respect to the militarization of US Africa policy, the growth in American military operations on that continent has proceeded rather strikingly in conjunction with a proliferation of new terrorist groups. Put the best light on them and US counterterror operations there have been ineffective. More likely, they have simply helped spawn further increases in terrorist activities in the region.
William D. Hartung is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy. He is the author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex.


personalliberty--2020-08-27--4 life-threatening unintended consequences of the lockdowns

When policymakers across the country decided to “ lock down ” in response to the March outbreak of the novel coronavirus , they took a leap into the unknown .
Not only did we know little about COVID-19 itself at that time , but we knew almost nothing about how shutting down nearly all of society would affect people .
Policymakers focused on their models predicting how lockdowns could help limit the spread of COVID-19 ; an important factor , to be sure .
So , too , many acknowledged the negative economic ramifications of lockdowns .
But in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many other dire consequences stem from the unprecedented shutdown of society .
Future public health policy should take these four life-threatening unintended consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns into account .
Even the most fortunate among us felt the emotional strain from months behind closed doors .
Being cut off from friends , family , and many of the other things that give life meaning has proved too much for many of those who were already struggling .
As FEE.org Managing Editor Jon Militmore has detailed , the Centers for Disease Control found that one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thoughts during the pandemic to date .
( For comparison , less than six percent of young people harbored similar thoughts in 2008-2009 according to older CDC data ) .
And more than 40 percent of respondents said the crisis had prompted mental health or behavioral problems .
Anecdotal evidence also suggests that suicidality increased during lockdown .
Given that young people without preconditions are at almost zero risk of death from COVID-19 and the well-documented deleterious effects of social isolation , it ’ s fair to largely attribute this disturbing trend in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social isolation and despair are key triggers for substance abuse relapse .
So it ’ s no surprise to see the emotional and mental consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns have exacerbated an already-severe drug crisis in the US .
This has played out in my backyard , the Washington , DC metro area .
“ In April , the most recent month for which statistics are available , the city [ of Washington DC ] saw its largest monthly number of opioid overdoses in five years , ” the Washington Post reports .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national trend of overdose increases that health experts say has accelerated in recent months.
” Meanwhile , Maryland saw more than double the opioid overdose fatalities in the first quarter of this year compared to the previous year .
And in Virginia , state officials estimate that they will “ record almost 1,700 such fatalities by year ’ s end—the highest annual toll since at least 2007.
” This is a country-wide trend .
NPR reports that overdoses nationally have spiked by about 18 percent .
For comparison , in 2018 , more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An 18 percent increase undoubtedly means thousands of additional tragic overdose deaths .
Will you get a COVID-19 vaccine ?
The US Census Bureau recently surveyed Americans on how the COVID-19 crisis has affected their ability to feed their families , and the results are chilling .
“ The number of Americans who say they can ’ t afford enough food for themselves or their children is growing , ” the Wall Street Journal reports .
“ As of late last month , about 12.1 % of adults lived in households that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at some point in the previous week , up from 9.8 % in early May , Census figures show .
And almost 20 % of Americans with kids at home couldn ’ t afford to give their children enough food , up from almost 17 % in early June.
” Meanwhile , food banks report unprecedented , surging levels of demand for their charitable services .
Closing down businesses and schools might have limited the spread of COVID-19 .
But it ’ s also clear the economic consequences of the lockdowns caused mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the brink of starvation .
( Globally , the COVID-19 lockdowns could push up to 100 million people into extreme poverty . )
Tragically , trapping people at home and cutting them off from outside support is a recipe for domestic violence .
This has played out on a global level , with reports of skyrocketing domestic violence amid tension and home confinement in India , Mexico City , the United Kingdom , and other nations around the world .
There ’ s reason to believe the US has experienced a similar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journal Radiology found greatly increased levels of injuries consistent with domestic violence wounds at a Massachusetts hospital during the state ’ s stay-at-home emergency order .
“ This data confirms what we suspected , ” the study ’ s co-author told US News and World Report .
“ Being confined to home for a period of time would increase the possibility for violence between intimate partners.
” A separate study analyzing data from police precincts in several major US cities also showed increases in domestic violence during the lockdown period , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent .
These dire unintended consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns are tragic , but frankly , they aren ’ t so shocking .
We have long known that sweeping government interventions have ripple effects that extend far beyond their intended goals .
Why ?
Because of what economic philosopher Friedrich Hayek called the “ knowledge problem.
” “ If we can agree that the economic problem of society is mainly one of rapid adaptation to changes in the particular circumstances of time and place , ” Hayek wrote .
“ It would seem to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left to the people who are familiar with these circumstances , who know directly of the relevant changes and of the resources immediately available to meet them.
” Simply , the knowledge problem means that central planning efforts are doomed to fail .
Only those closest to a problem know the ins and outs of it .
For example , can you imagine planning a birthday party for a person you ’ ve never met ?
You don ’ t know what kind of cake they like .
You don ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pizza .
You don ’ t even know who to invite .
Now , what are the odds you can plan a party that won ’ t go horribly ?
This is the Herculean task that awaits government officials who try to dictate the every behavior of millions of individuals .
So , when it comes to sweeping , nation-wide pandemic lockdowns , central planners will never be able to adequately assess all the deadly unintended consequences that correspond with their drastic actions .
This doesn ’ t mean the government should do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arena , but that elected officials ought to be far more humble in the extent of their actions .
The deadly unintended consequences of sweeping COVID-19 lockdowns remind us why .
Brad Polumbo is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education .
This article was originally published on FEE.org .
Read the original article .

When policymakers across the country decided to “lock down” in response to the March outbreak of the novel coronavirus, they took a leap into the unknown. Not only did we know little about COVID-19 itself at that time, but we knew almost nothing about how shutting down nearly all of society would affect people.
Policymakers focused on their models predicting how lockdowns could help limit the spread of COVID-19; an important factor, to be sure. So, too, many acknowledged the negative economic ramifications of lockdowns. But in the months since, we’ve seen many other dire consequences stem from the unprecedented shutdown of society.
Future public health policy should take these four life-threatening unintended consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns into account.
1) Massive Spikes in Suicide Rates and Mental Health Crises
Even the most fortunate among us felt the emotional strain from months behind closed doors. Being cut off from friends, family, and many of the other things that give life meaning has proved too much for many of those who were already struggling.
As FEE.org Managing Editor Jon Militmore has detailed, the Centers for Disease Control found that one in four young people have had suicidal thoughts during the pandemic to date. (For comparison, less than six percent of young people harbored similar thoughts in 2008-2009 according to older CDC data). And more than 40 percent of respondents said the crisis had prompted mental health or behavioral problems. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that suicidality increased during lockdown.
Given that young people without preconditions are at almost zero risk of death from COVID-19 and the well-documented deleterious effects of social isolation, it’s fair to largely attribute this disturbing trend in mental health to lockdowns.
2) Uptick in Drug Overdoses and Substance Abuse
Naturally, social isolation and despair are key triggers for substance abuse relapse. So it’s no surprise to see the emotional and mental consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns have exacerbated an already-severe drug crisis in the US.
This has played out in my backyard, the Washington, DC metro area.
“In April, the most recent month for which statistics are available, the city [of Washington DC] saw its largest monthly number of opioid overdoses in five years,” the Washington Post reports. “[This] is part of a national trend of overdose increases that health experts say has accelerated in recent months.”
Meanwhile, Maryland saw more than double the opioid overdose fatalities in the first quarter of this year compared to the previous year. And in Virginia, state officials estimate that they will “record almost 1,700 such fatalities by year’s end—the highest annual toll since at least 2007.”
This is a country-wide trend. NPR reports that overdoses nationally have spiked by about 18 percent. For comparison, in 2018, more than 67,300 Americans died from drug overdoses. An 18 percent increase undoubtedly means thousands of additional tragic overdose deaths.
3) Economic Devastation Leads to Hunger
The US Census Bureau recently surveyed Americans on how the COVID-19 crisis has affected their ability to feed their families, and the results are chilling.
“The number of Americans who say they can’t afford enough food for themselves or their children is growing,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “As of late last month, about 12.1% of adults lived in households that didn’t have enough to eat at some point in the previous week, up from 9.8% in early May, Census figures show. And almost 20% of Americans with kids at home couldn’t afford to give their children enough food, up from almost 17% in early June.”
Meanwhile, food banks report unprecedented, surging levels of demand for their charitable services.
Closing down businesses and schools might have limited the spread of COVID-19. But it’s also clear the economic consequences of the lockdowns caused mass malnutrition and even pushed many American families to the brink of starvation. (Globally, the COVID-19 lockdowns could push up to 100 million people into extreme poverty.)
4) Surge in Domestic Violence Under COVID-19 Lockdowns
Tragically, trapping people at home and cutting them off from outside support is a recipe for domestic violence. This has played out on a global level, with reports of skyrocketing domestic violence amid tension and home confinement in India, Mexico City, the United Kingdom, and other nations around the world.
There’s reason to believe the US has experienced a similar trend. One study published in the journal Radiology found greatly increased levels of injuries consistent with domestic violence wounds at a Massachusetts hospital during the state’s stay-at-home emergency order.
“This data confirms what we suspected,” the study’s co-author told US News and World Report. “Being confined to home for a period of time would increase the possibility for violence between intimate partners.”
A separate study analyzing data from police precincts in several major US cities also showed increases in domestic violence during the lockdown period, with the increases ranging from 10 percent to 27 percent.
5) Unintended Consequences Necessitate Humble Policymaking
These dire unintended consequences of COVID-19 lockdowns are tragic, but frankly, they aren’t so shocking. We have long known that sweeping government interventions have ripple effects that extend far beyond their intended goals.
Why? Because of what economic philosopher Friedrich Hayek called the “knowledge problem.”
“If we can agree that the economic problem of society is mainly one of rapid adaptation to changes in the particular circumstances of time and place,” Hayek wrote. “It would seem to follow that the ultimate decisions must be left to the people who are familiar with these circumstances, who know directly of the relevant changes and of the resources immediately available to meet them.”
Simply, the knowledge problem means that central planning efforts are doomed to fail. Only those closest to a problem know the ins and outs of it.
For example, can you imagine planning a birthday party for a person you’ve never met? You don’t know what kind of cake they like. You don’t know if they prefer pepperoni pizza or Hawaiian pizza. You don’t even know who to invite. Now, what are the odds you can plan a party that won’t go horribly?
This is the Herculean task that awaits government officials who try to dictate the every behavior of millions of individuals.
So, when it comes to sweeping, nation-wide pandemic lockdowns, central planners will never be able to adequately assess all the deadly unintended consequences that correspond with their drastic actions. This doesn’t mean the government should do nothing at all in the public health arena, but that elected officials ought to be far more humble in the extent of their actions. The deadly unintended consequences of sweeping COVID-19 lockdowns remind us why.
Brad Polumbo is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.
This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.