I've always found it odd that multicultural kumbaya liberal types are so anti other cultures. For example, they love Asian cuisine but want the very thing that makes it authentic outlawed—mono sodium glutamate, or MSG. Recently, the liberal onslaught against good taste has expanded to table salt with idiot-in-chief, New York Assemblymen Felix Ortiz's proposed bill to outlaw the use of salt in restaurants.
They tell us it's for our own good—for our health. And yet, those rascally healthy Japanese eat five times as much sodium as we do, and theirs is in the more evil form of MSG. So in that spirit, here's a British article about the wonders of MSG.
Synopsis: An interesting article that starts with criticizing anti-gun rhetoric and ends with an analysis of anti-freedom actions in the United States.
This is pretty much the definition of fascism, also known by Mussolini's preferred name—corporatism. It is the partnership between government and private businesses. Watch the video; you'll see what I mean.
Synopsis: Here is a test that was administered to eighth graders in 1895. See how you do today. Bet you fail.
Synopsis: Walter Williams describes how "cultural sensitivity" toward black Americans keeps them down far more than any overt oppression. Pretending that blacks cannot speak English or be held to the same standard as white Americans is true racism.
Synopsis: It's interesting that throughout the world you can hear, "Yankee, go home" yet the phrase was first uttered by Southerners. There is, in fact, a large difference between Americans and Yankees. Other countries love America and Americans—it's Yankees they hate. Americans love freedom, mind their own business, and help their neighbors. Yankees want you to be free to do what they think is best, meddle, and think they are superior to their neighbors. In this article, Clyde Wilson gives us some insight into why we should wary of Yankees and the Yankee attitude.
Synopsis: Ron Paul does an admirable job of describing the Neoconservative philosophy. For those of you who don't have time to read the whole article, they are the worst of the old-style Progressives—embodied in Woodrow Wilson, who believed that he was improving the world by fighting a war, because by "making the world safe for democracy" he was ushering in the Millennial reign of Christ. They have never met government spending they didn't like, whether military or welfare. They believe the government should lie to its own citizens for their own good Unfortunately, the conservative movement was completely co-opted by the Neocons. The revolution of 1994 gave way to the largest increases in government spending and power ever.
Synopsis: I clearly remember hearing Rush report in 2008 that a Congressional subcommittee had heard this confiscation plan presented to them. Naturally, he was poo-pooed for taking it seriously. The only problem is that you can bet your breeches that the bureaucrats and elected officials in Washington are taking it seriously. Medicare is bankrupt; Social Security is bankrupt; the deficit is at an all time high, and Washington can't find buyers for their worthless debt. It's only a matter of time before they come after your retirement funds. This article describes how and offers some strategies to prevent the complete destruction of your personal wealth.
Synopsis: Joseph Sobran, a long-time writer for the New Republic describes his journey from political conservatism to libertarianism, and finally anarchy. (For the record, when libertarians use the term, they do not mean chaos and lawlessness, but rather a condition in which there is no state.) I have excerpted the end which deals directly with Christianity.
Ludwig von Mises explained it way back in 1922 Socialism:
To the intellectual champions of social insurance, and to the politicians and statesmen who enacted it, illness and health appeared as two conditions of the human body sharply separated from each other and always recognizable without difficulty or doubt. Any doctor could diagnose the characteristics of ‘health.’ ‘Illness’ was a bodily phenomenon which showed itself independently of human will, and was not susceptible to influence by will. There were people who for some reason or other simulated illness, but a doctor could expose the pretense. Only the healthy person was fully efficient. The efficiency of the sick person was lowered according to the gravity and nature of his illness, and the doctor was able, by means of objectively ascertainable physiological tests, to indicate the degree of the reduction of efficiency.
Now every statement in this theory is false. There is no clearly defined frontier between health and illness. Being ill is not a phenomenon independent of conscious will and of psychic forces working in the subconscious. A man’s efficiency is not merely the result of his physical condition; it depends largely on his mind and will. Thus the whole idea of being able to separate, by medical examination, the unfit from the fit and from the malingerers, and those able to work from those unable to work, proves to be untenable. Those who believed that accident and medical insurance could be based on completely effective means of ascertaining illnesses and injuries and their consequences were very much mistaken. The destructionist aspect of accident and health insurance lies above all in the fact that such institutions promote accidents and illness, hinder recovery, and very often create, or at any rate intensify and lengthen, the functional disorders which follow illness or accident.
Feeling healthy is quite different from being healthy in the medical sense, and a man’s ability to work is largely independent of the physiologically ascertainable and measurable performances of his individual organs. The man who does not want to be healthy is not merely a malingerer. He is a sick person. If the will to be well and efficient is weakened, illness and inability to work is caused. By weakening or completely destroying the will to be well and able to work, social insurance creates illness and inability to work; it produces the habit of complaining – which is in itself a neurosis – and neuroses of other kinds. In short, it is an institution which tends to encourage disease, not to say accidents, and to intensify considerably the physical and psychic results of accidents and illnesses. As a social institution it makes a people sick bodily and mentally or at least helps to multiply, lengthen, and intensify disease.