Wednesday, August 19, 2026

Why Young Americans Are Not Taught About Evil

From Real Clear Politics.com (August 29, 2023):

Most of our schools teach almost nothing of importance, and nothing is more important than the study of good and evil. In the United States today, nearly all schools, from elementary through graduate, concentrate on teaching about racism, sexism, preferred pronouns, homophobia, transphobia, LGBTQIA+, climate change, diversity, equity, inclusiveness and white guilt. In other words, most of our educational institutions, including the most prestigious, do not educate.

Here are a few proofs.

It is almost certain that the great majority of American high school and college students (with the obvious exceptions of Christian students) could not name the Four Gospels (presuming they even know what they are); five of the Ten Commandments (presuming they know what those are); or the names of two Shakespeare plays. Most American students know little about the American Revolution, let alone about the French or Russian Revolutions. The same holds true for the Constitution and every other American founding document. It is doubtful that, other than Washington and Jefferson having owned slaves, American students know anything about these men or could name two other Founders.

When it comes to evil, the ignorance is enormous, often almost total. For example, according to Pew, about half of Americans ages 18-39 cannot identify Auschwitz or any other Nazi death camp. And there is every reason to assume that much fewer than half could identify the Gulag Archipelago (20 million-plus murdered); the Ukrainian forced famine (5 to 6 million murdered in a little over a year); Mao's Great Leap Forward (about 60 million murdered); or Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge (about one in every four Cambodians murdered).

As noted, almost no one outside of Russia has ever heard of the Russian Civil War, let alone knows anything about it. One reason is that the winners, the communists, had no desire that people know about it. Yet, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica, about 10 million people, the great majority noncombatants, were killed.

Why don't students know about evil?

The first reason is that nearly all the genocides of the 20th century were committed by communists, and the Left, which runs virtually all educational institutions, has always had a soft spot for communism. If people were to recognize that communism has been the greatest source of evil in the modern age in terms of numbers murdered, number of lives destroyed, liberty stolen, and the sheer amount of human suffering inflicted (greater by those metrics than those of the Nazis before they were forcibly stopped), the Left would lose much of its appeal.

Another reason is the foolish notion that people are basically good. This has been a left-wing belief since the French Enlightenment leader Jean-Jacques Rousseau came up with the idea. As he wrote in his book, "On Philosophy, Morality, and Religion," "Man is a naturally good being, loving justice and order; there is no natural perversity in the human heart... All the vices imputed to the human heart are not natural to it."

This nonsense had been foreign to the Western mind. Its view of humanity was rooted in the Bible, and neither Bible-based religion -- Judaism or Christianity -- affirmed the goodness of the human heart. As Genesis states, "The will of man's heart is evil from his youth," and the rest of the Bible repeatedly warns us against following our hearts.

However, as the West began to abandon the Bible, including belief in the God of the Bible, Westerners began to believe in man. As Marx put it, "Man is God." People had no choice. For if there is no God to believe in, one must believe in man -- or one has literally nothing to believe in. Therefore, belief in man's inherent goodness became both psychologically and philosophically necessary.

A third reason follows from the second. With the exception of the mass murder of the Armenians (which was committed by Muslim Turks), the genocides and the other horrors of the 20th century were committed by secular regimes. Given the centrality of secularism to leftism, this fact has been kept from young people. Likewise, the fact that all these genocides were committed by big governments is not taught to young people because big government is also central to left-wing ideology. In other words, a true depiction of the evils of the 20th century would mean the end of the two pillars of left-wing ideology: secularism and big government.

If you want to make a more moral world, you must begin with the study of evil. But, for the reasons enumerated here, the Left is not -- and cannot be -- interested in fighting real evil. So, the Left fights made-up evils: American systemic racism, transphobia, capitalism, carbon emissions, sexism and former President Donald Trump, to name a few.

This is why young people know almost nothing about evil. The Left doesn't want them to know about it. Because knowledge of evil inevitably leads directly to rejection of the Left. [source]

Great points. Dennis Prager's last comment sums his essay up quite nicely: "This is why young people know almost nothing about evil. The Left doesn't want them to know about it. Because knowledge of evil inevitably leads directly to rejection of the Left."

Tuesday, August 18, 2026

Top 10 takeaways from Anthony Fauci's hearing in front of Senate committee


From Just the News.com (July 29):

Former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared in front of the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, where he was grilled about his work during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The former NIAID director refused to answer lawmaker questions throughout the hearing, invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, despite having a presidential pardon that covered his work during the pandemic.

Despite Fauci's refusal to answer questions, the hearing was filled with major revelations and accusations.

Here are the top 10 major takeaways from the Senate hearing:

1. Fauci applied for government grants for himself/got government employees to do it for him

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley revealed during the hearing that Fauci allegedly used federal employees while he was NIAID director to apply for government grants on his behalf for his work during the pandemic.

"You got rich while people were dying," a heated Hawley said. "You were using federal employees with taxpayer money to apply for and solicit cash prizes for you personally. Cash prizes totaling over a million dollars."

Hawley said he has evidence of the applications for cash prizes that Fauci received, including the Dan David award and the Smithsonian award.

"You actually wrote to people and said, 'Do you think maybe I'd qualify?' And you got cash for all of this. And it wasn't just one or two employees, was it? In fact, you used eight separate federal employees on federal time using federal resources to solicit cash awards. Isn't that true?"

Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment in response.

2. Ron Johnson alleges Fauci covered up evidence ivermectin works

Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson accused Fauci during the hearing of covering up alleged evidence that the controversial prescription drug medication ivermectin actually is effective against the coronavirus.

“You said there was no evidence," Johnson said. "There were all kinds of evidence. Loved ones had to go to hospitals, had to sue hospitals ... So I want to know, to what extent were you involved in sabotaging Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin?”

Johnson highlighted studies that found there were 60-70% effectiveness rate against the virus. Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment again in response.

3. Moreno asks why Fauci hired a criminal defense attorney

Ohio GOP Sen. Bernie Moreno questioned why Fauci would hire a prominent criminal defense attorney if he had done nothing wrong when it came to the COVID-19 pandemic, stating that the attorney was someone a client hires if they are in "deep s***."

"Let me tell you who David Schertler is for the audience," Moreno said. "He's a high-profile criminal attorney. He's represented some really great people like Senator Bob Menendez ... And there's an article here in the Washington Free Beacon that talks about why you would hire a guy like David Schertler. The comment is, 'if you're in deep s***, that's who you call.'"

4. Rand Paul confirms plans for Fauci contempt vote

Another top moment related to the hearing comes after Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul confirmed that he plans to hold a contempt vote against Fauci for pleading the Fifth in order to dodge answering the panel's questions.

"We believe... he didn't need to hide behind the 5th Amendment and that maybe the 5th Amendment doesn't attach when you have a pardon in place," he told reporters. "The question on contempt will be voted on and then there's the question of whether or not the Department of Justice will take that up."

5. Senators question legality of 5th amendment plea

Several senators also questioned whether Fauci could even plead the Fifth since he was pardoned by former President Joe Biden before he left office last year.

"You don't have any rights under the Fifth Amendment, because you've been pardoned, as you very well know," Hawley said. "As the Supreme Court has been clear for a century or more. Brown vs. Walker, 1896, 'when he has been pardoned he may not stand upon his privilege.'

"You know that. Your lawyers sitting behind you now, shifting nervously in their chairs, they know it. This isn't about the Constitution, this isn't about the law," he continued. "This is about contempt, contempt for this body and contempt for the American people." [read more]

The other takeaways:

  1. Rick Scott tells Fauci how lockdowns hurt his own family
  2. Hawley claims Fauci wanted to be 'Sun god of science'
  3. Paul presses Fauci on alleged deletion of federal records
  4. Fetterman regrets partisanship over lab leak theory
  5. Fauci's lawyer booted from the hearing

More stories and a video on the hearing:

Monday, August 17, 2026

Fauci Diaries Reveal Fame Focus Amid COVID Deaths


From Newsmax.com (July 26):

Newly released diary entries from Dr. Anthony Fauci suggest that the former White House COVID adviser became increasingly preoccupied with his growing celebrity status even as the coronavirus pandemic claimed tens of thousands of American lives.

The journals, released Sunday by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., chronicle Fauci's private thoughts during the early months of the pandemic, when he served as the nation's top infectious disease expert and a leading member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force.

In an April 7, 2020, diary entry, when more than 60,000 Americans were already dead from COVID-19, Fauci wrote, "Press still hot and heavy about me. Multiple stories per day directly or indirectly involving me."

Weeks later, on May 21, Fauci described his "national and international fame" as "explosive and really unimaginable," adding that it was "not hyperbole" to characterize his level of global recognition that way. By then, nearly 98,000 Americans had died from the virus.

The diary also shows Fauci receiving invitations tied to his newfound celebrity. In late June 2020, as daily U.S. COVID-19 cases climbed to a then-record 40,000, he wrote that he had been invited to appear on ABC's "Dancing With the Stars."

Fauci also documented growing tension with President Donald Trump's White House, writing that extensive media coverage was turning him into "a star that outshines" the president.

He recalled Secret Service officers at White House security gates routinely recognizing his vehicle and waving him through without requesting identification.

Despite the attention, Fauci wrote that he had "no desire to conflict with, embarrass or show up the POTUS" and later decided to stop participating in profile interviews.

Paul, a longtime Fauci critic and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, released the diary entries days before Fauci is scheduled to testify before the committee under a subpoena issued by the Kentucky Republican.

Paul argues the journals depict a senior public health official overly focused on his public image and media profile during one of the nation's worst public health crises.

"Anthony Fauci will answer to the American people," Paul wrote in a June 28 post on X, accusing federal health officials of prioritizing self-promotion and media narratives during the early months of the pandemic. [source]

"I am science" Fauci sure did love the attention and limelight even more than informing the general public affected by the pandemic. He did not serve America at all.

More info on the "diary:"

Sunday, August 16, 2026

AI and Smart Wisdom

From John Stonestreet on Breakpoint.org (Apr. 27):

Recently, Jensen Huang, CEO and co-founder of  NVIDIA, was asked to name the smartest person he knew. He replied by suggesting that the meaning of“smart” has been made obsolete by machines. He then offered an updated definition:

I think long term the definition of smart is someone who sits at that intersection of being technically astute, but human empathy and having the ability to infer the unspoken, around the corners, the unknowables.

Recently, my Colson Center colleague Dr. Glenn Sunshine suggested that if a scholar from hundreds of years ago was shown what AI can do, he’d be both impressed and disappointed. “You know a lot,” he might observe, “but you understand nothing.” As much as our machines can do, more is not always better. Having all the information and data from history, science, literature, art, philosophy, and medicine constantly accessible at our fingertips is hardly making us wiser.

Last month, a quote from the novel Dune went viral on X. It read, “Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.” Of course, Frank Herbert, who wrote the sci-fi series, was basically repeating an earlier observation from C.S. Lewis.

In a recent controversial essay entitled “Something Big is Happening,” Matt Shumer, CEO of OthersideAI, sparked an intense and wide-ranging conversation with this stark admission:

I am no longer needed for the actual technical work of my job. I describe what I want built, in plain English, and it just . . . appears. Not a rough draft I need to fix. The finished thing. I tell the AI what I want, walk away from my computer for four hours, and come back to find the work done. Done well, done better than I would have done it myself, with no corrections needed. A couple of months ago, I was going back and forth with the AI, guiding it, making edits. Now I just describe the outcome and leave.

Shumer is not bragging. He’s alarmed about the future of work and the need for humans to do it in the world he is helping to create. You might say that he is concerned that AI will replace human work. We should also consider how our technologies have replaced human wisdom.

Nearly a century ago, in his “Choruses from ‘The Rock,’” TS Elliot foresaw this confusion:

Endless invention, endless experiment,

Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness;

Knowledge of speech, but not of silence;

Knowledge of words, and ignorance of the Word.

All our knowledge brings us nearer to our ignorance,

All our ignorance brings us nearer to death,

But nearness to death no nearer to GOD.

Or, as C.S. Lewis put it in The Abolition of Man,

For the wise men of old, the cardinal problem of human life was how to conform the soul to objective reality, and the solution was wisdom, self-discipline, and virtue. For the modern, the cardinal problem is how to conform reality to the wishes of man, and the solution is a technique.

What has been lost in the uncritical embrace of technological advancement are the insights of ancient wisdom. Lost in the consistent pursuit of ease and pleasure are the habits that cultivate virtue. It’s not fundamentally a question of being for or against specific technologies. It’s that it is not sufficient to be technically “smart” if we are not also morally wise. What matters most for our collective futures are not which capacities and tools we can develop, it is what sort of people we are.

Knowledge can be dangerous when in the hands of the foolish, the immoral, or the wicked. Wisdom is not just the ability to “see around the corners of life.” Rather, it is the ability to live in light of what is true and good. It is about knowing the realities of the world, seen and unseen, and bowing to the One who created it this way. [source]

Don’t think AI will ever have smart wisdom that’s why people can’t lose it and should cherish it.

Friday, August 14, 2026

Ben Franklin and the Gulf Stream

The warm Gulf Stream current that flows eastward across the North Atlantic Ocean is one of the greatest movements of water on Earth. It is driven east by prevailing westerly winds, and is part of a great loop that then recrosses the Atlantic to the Caribbean. The current had been known since 1513, when Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León found his ship moving back north off Florida despite winds blowing him south. But it was only properly charted in 1770, by US statesman and scientist Benjamin Franklin.

As deputy postmaster of the British American colonies, Franklin was fascinated by why it took British packet ships delivering mail two weeks longer to cross the Atlantic than American merchant ships. Already famous for his invention of the lightning conductor, he asked Nantucket whaling captain Timothy Folger why this might be.

Franklin’s chart was published in 1770 in Britain, but it would be years before British captains learned to use the Gulf Stream to cut sailing times.

Source: The Science Book: Big Ideas Simply Explained (2014) by DK Publishing.

Thursday, August 13, 2026

In case of apocalypse, find the nearest 4-H club

From Chloe Coleman on Washington Post.com (Aug. 21, 2023):

Raising and training animals. Growing food. Fishing. Archery. Sewing clothes. Making preserves. These are some of the skills that humanity is going to need if one of the many fictional post-apocalypse narratives ends up coming true.

Growing up in rural Ohio, I developed some of those skills by participating in 4-H, the network of youth development organizations whose roots (in Ohio, coincidentally) date to 1902. Recently, I paid a nostalgic visit to my childhood county fair, and it was while strolling the various barns occupied by 4-H and FFA (Future Farmers of America) projects that my brain connected this wholesome form of learning to grim scenes from “The Last of Us.” [source]

Yea, when the poop hits the fan, having 4-H skills would be an advantage. Going back to the days of the old west before electricity. I am not a 4-H member but I get the writer's point. The Amish and Mennonites probably would be okay. I wonder if they would even notice if the electric grid stopped working.

Wednesday, August 12, 2026

Marxist teacher who called for 'forceful cultural revolution' lands seat on state legislature

From Fox News.com (Aug. 28, 2023):

A Marxist teacher from Colorado, who called for a "FORCEFUL Cultural Revolution" against "Whiteness," was voted in by Democrats to fill an open state House of Representatives seat Saturday.

Tim Hernández was selected as a state representative for the Denver area on Saturday by a committee of Democrats tasked with filling the vacant seat after its incumbent, Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez, was elected to the Denver City Council.

Hernandez worked at Aurora West Preparatory Academy in the Aurora Public Schools District, according to its website from May. Their staff list has since been scrubbed, and it was unclear if he continues to work in the Colorado district. A sign in his classroom called for "Dismantl[ing] White systems."

Fox News Digital previously found that Hernández went on a Marxist diatribe at a protest organized by unions.

"I want to tear some s---t up it out for you. Are you ready?" Hernández said.

"What I think is happening in our schools, what I think is showing up in my classroom, is a lot of the things that we get into ideological circles up here. We like to compete who knows Marx better, who knows these things better, who's a Leninist. Listen, all right, I'll give you a real take on this s---t. Kids don't care," he said.

It wasn't enough to preach the communist theory, it had to be put into practice, according to Hernández.

"Yes, it's important to know theory. But you have to do some practices, you have to get out into the streets. You have to get into your workplace. You have to go to your families. If we are just sitting, talking in an ideological circle, our kids are still going to schools that are underfunded where they are investing more in their failure than in their success."

"Your [communist] theory will not save you. The revolution… will happen in the hood. It will not be led by who understand Lenin best, it will not be led by the deepest Marxists. The revolution will be led by the people…. And I say all of this because I'm a teacher." 

Fox News Digital also probed into Hernández's public social media, and found the teacher called for a "FORCEFUL cultural revolution," particularly against American "whiteness" and "white supremacy."

He has signaled that he was including lessons on communist theory in his classroom.

For example, to engage young children in his lens of society, Hernandez said they should be shown the movie "A Bug's Life" followed by a lesson on "proletariat revolution," meaning a social revolution in which the working class attempts to overthrow the bourgeoisie.

"A lot of people call me a 'unicorn.' I am not an anomaly. I am a testament to the work we still have to do; this is sacred; this is powerful; this is necessary. I tell my students the truth," he said, according to his notes from a Memphis rally in September 2021 which was reviewed by Fox News. [read more]

Actually, not too shocking. The Left is gradually being taken over by the Marxists. They are losing their soul. And humanity.

Tuesday, August 11, 2026

Trump’s Immigration Enforcement Really Is Slashing Violent Crime

From The Federalist.com (July 9):

Is crime falling? Some conservatives, notably Steve Bannon, argue that Americans should ignore the FBI’s crime statistics showing record drops in violent crime. The murder rate last year fell to the lowest rate ever recorded, and the violent crime rate is clearly at the lowest in many decades. But Bannon recently declared that “nobody believes” FBI crime data or its director, Kash Patel, adding: “I don’t want to hear any more statistics about how crime’s coming down.”

That skepticism overlooks an important distinction.

The FBI has made mistakes in the past, particularly in its active shooter reports and hate crime data. Some police departments have also failed to report complete crime data to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. But those problems do not explain the concerns with the measure of overall crime.

The real issue is understanding what different crime measures actually tell us. Past problems with the FBI’s measure of crimes reported to police do not mean anyone manipulated the data. Nor do they mean that last year’s reported decline in crime — or the declines so far this year — are inaccurate.

The United States has two primary measures of violent crime. The FBI tracks crimes reported to police. The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) estimates both reported and unreported crime. Researchers have known for decades that most crimes never reach the police. Victims report only about 40 percent of violent crimes and roughly 30 percent of property crimes.

The media focuses almost exclusively on FBI crime data. Before 2020, FBI data and the NCVS generally moved in the same direction. During the Biden administration, however, they sharply diverged. While reported violent crime fell by about 8 percent, total felony violent crime measured by the NCVS surged 59 percent — the largest four-year percentage increase since the survey began more than five decades ago.

Several factors explain that gap. Whether victims report crimes depends heavily on whether they believe police will catch and punish offenders. As cities reduced police staffing through budget cuts, retirements, and, in some places, “defund the police” policies, arrest rates declined. Lower arrest rates gave victims less reason to report crimes.

Some police departments also made reporting more difficult. In some jurisdictions, 911 operators asked whether the offender was still at the scene. If the answer was no — as it almost always was — they instructed victims to visit a police station later to file a report. Simply calling 911 does not place a crime in the FBI’s statistics; an officer must complete an official report. When governments make reporting more burdensome, some victims understandably decide it isn’t worth the effort.

Fortunately, many of those policies have been reversed.

Although reported crime has declined, we will not know whether total crime also fell in 2025 until the Bureau of Justice Statistics releases the next NCVS this September.

Even so, there is good reason for optimism.

Reducing crime is not complicated. Governments must make crime riskier by increasing arrests and convictions, imposing longer prison sentences, and allowing law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. The news on each of those fronts has been encouraging.

FBI arrests surged in 2025, rising 184 percent over 2024 levels. Total FBI arrests — a broader category that includes many joint operations with state and local agencies — increased by 197 percent.

Voters also replaced several George Soros-backed prosecutors in jurisdictions such as Los Angeles and San Francisco with district attorneys who prosecute criminals more aggressively and seek tougher sentences. Across the country, President Trump’s U.S. attorneys have also pursued criminals far more aggressively than their predecessors. In Washington, D.C., for example, the Biden administration’s U.S. Attorney declined to prosecute 67 percent of those arrested. Under U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, that figure has fallen to just 4 percent.

Nor is it a coincidence that the record influx of illegal immigrants during the Biden administration coincided with a sharp increase in violent crime. It is equally unsurprising that crime has fallen as deportations have increased. Deportation records show that 70 percent of illegal immigrants deported during the Trump administration had either criminal convictions or pending criminal charges in the United States. Even those who avoid arrest understand that any contact with law enforcement could lead to deportation, giving them a strong incentive to stay off the police’s radar and avoid committing additional crimes.

Finally, the number of adults carrying concealed handguns has risen sharply, with the latest survey data showing a 5-percentage-point increase in concealed carry over the past year and a half.

Americans shouldn’t blindly accept crime statistics, but they need to understand what the different numbers actually measure. The FBI’s numbers show that reported crime has fallen dramatically, while the NCVS will tell us this September whether total violent crime has also declined. Stronger law enforcement, more aggressive prosecution, and greater accountability provide good reasons to expect that the encouraging trend in reported crime reflects a real improvement in public safety. [source]

Good to know!  Glad that illegal migrant crime is going down. It’s bad enough when America’s own citizens are committing crime—we don’t need to add to the crime stats.

Monday, August 10, 2026

Trump ATF Scraps Dozens of Gun Rules in Sweeping Rollback

From Newsmax.com (July 5):

The Trump administration is dismantling more than three dozen federal firearms regulations, ending a zero-tolerance policy against wayward gun dealers, easing scrutiny of stabilizing braces, and clearing a path for some Americans with a history of mental illness to buy firearms, part of what officials call the broadest rewrite of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives rules in the agency's history.

The rollback, executed under President Donald Trump's Executive Order 14206 on Second Amendment rights, was formally launched April 29, when acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and newly confirmed ATF Director Robert Cekada unveiled 34 notices of final and proposed rulemaking.

Officials called it the most comprehensive regulatory reform package in ATF history. Cekada was confirmed by the Senate hours earlier and signed off on the changes within an hour of taking office.

The package raises the legal bar for stripping a federal firearms dealer of a license, requiring evidence that the dealer knew it was breaking the law.

It formally rescinds the Biden-era pistol brace rule, which has already been blocked in much of the country by federal courts.

It narrows the Biden administration's "engaged in the business" rule, which was designed to force more sellers at gun shows and online marketplaces to run background checks, a measure gun-control advocates called a partial closure of the so-called gun show loophole.

Other proposalswould allow some Americans previously flagged for mental health reasons or an inability to manage their finances to purchase firearms.

On Friday, the ATF unveiled further changes, including a proposal to trim fingerprinting requirements for National Firearms Act applications.

Under the plan, individual applicants would submit a single fingerprint card instead of two and could verify identity with a photo ID rather than a passport-style photo. The rule is scheduled for publication in the Federal Register on July 6, opening a comment period through Oct. 5.

The administration is simultaneously challenging state gun laws in court.

On Wednesday, the Justice Department sued California over Assembly Bill 1127, which bars sales of Glock-style pistols with a cruciform trigger bar that officials say can be readily converted to fully automatic fire, and over the state's Handgun Roster, which restricts which models may be sold.

It also sued Virginia and the Virginia State Police over Senate Bill 749, which criminalizes the sale or transfer of AR-15-style rifles and magazines holding more than 15 rounds. The department earlier filed similar challenges to semiautomatic rifle bans in the District of Columbia in December and Colorado in May.

Blanche said the rules had been written "without any real understanding of how firearms businesses operate, how lawful gun owners actually handle their firearms, or what truly improves public safety."

Gun control advocates rejected that framing. Kris Brown, president of Brady, told The New York Times the moves take the country "back 100 years" and are "decimating A.T.F.'s ability to regulate this industry." [source]

Another win especially for gun rights advocates! 

Sunday, August 09, 2026

Transhumanism is a Christian Heresy (and a False Gospel)

From Break Point.org (Aug. 1, 2025):

One of the clearest proofs that Christianity addresses the fundamental problems of humanity is the bizarre lengths to which non-Christians will go to address those same problems without Christ. For example, tech billionaire Peter Thiel, former CEO of PayPal, recently went on Ross Douthat’s “Interesting Times” podcast to discuss AI, Mars, immortality, and other light topics. The conversation was genuinely interesting, especially when Douthat asked, “Should the human race continue?” Thiel paused and said “um” and “I don’t know” quite a few times.

“This is a long hesitation!” observed Douthat, laughing nervously.

Finally, Thiel explained that humanity should survive, but that there are problems in need of solving. Chief among those is death, he said, which transhumanists have long hoped to conquer via a “radical transformation” of the human body into an “immortal body.”

The problem with efforts like transgenderism, in Thiel’s opinion, isn’t that they change bodies too radically, but not radically enough: “[W]e want more transformation than that. … We want you to be able to change your heart and change your mind and change your whole body.” Thiel then pointed to Christianity and its doctrines of Redemption and Resurrection as precedent for the transhumanist idea of total self-transformation and conquest of death. Maybe, he hinted, the two philosophies aren’t so different.

Douthat, a Roman Catholic, pushed back, pointing out that according to Christianity, God does the transforming. “The person,” Douthat said, “who tries to do it on their own with a bunch of machines is likely to end up a dystopian character.” Do-it-yourself immortality is, at best, “a heretical form of Christianity.”

Theil’s fundamental assumption, which is foreign to the Bible and Christianity but common among tech futurists and transhumanists, is that our minds are more important and fundamental than our bodies. Our “true selves” are our minds and separable from who we are physically.

Not only is this assumption a rehashed version of the ancient heresy of Gnosticism, it also creepily resembles the philosophy of the evil National Institute of Coordinated Experiments (or N.I.C.E.) from C.S. Lewis’ That Hideous Strength. In the story, Dr. Filostrato hopes to cleanse the world of organic life, replacing trees, birds, and even human bodies with machines. He even proposed something akin to uploading human consciousness.

That’s not to say that transhumanists like Thiel are involved in an intergalactic conspiracy run by demons speaking through a disembodied Head, as in the book. At least not knowingly. But the transhumanist’s urge to overcome human limits, become more machine-like, and live forever is eerily similar. As is their rhetoric.

It’s also notable that, unlike anti-humanists on the Left, transhumanists assume the human race is worth preserving. Elon Musk, for example, thinks it’s our duty to have as many babies as possible, by any means necessary. He also thinks that humans should be the ones to colonize other planets. In a sense, he acknowledges that humans are exceptional, in a way at least similar to how Scripture describes humans.

Yet, his view of human exceptionalism has a “you will be like God” promise to it, and a sense that all human problems are technical glitches to be overcome by innovation and engineering. So, our mortality can be solved through “radical transformation” of our bodies. Our fragile fertility can be solved through IVF. Our lack of knowledge can be solved through AI, and our limits can be overcome by the technologies pioneered by Thiel and others like him.

Theil’s company Palantir was named, without any apparent irony, after the “seeing stones” in The Lord of the Rings that corrupt all who gaze into them.

Humans were made in the image of God and, as such, were made to be like Him and live forever. Death is “the last enemy,” and our longing for immortality is core to who we are. Perhaps this is why transhumanist promises are so compelling. However, we were made to do and receive all this through God, not our own ingenuity.

Transhumanism, it turns out, is indeed a Christian heresy, an ideology that rightly identifies the problems of a fallen world. But it seeks to overcome them with a false gospel of technological godhood, rather than the true gospel of salvation through Christ.

God willing, Thiel’s openness to Christianity and his conversations with Christians will move him to accept his need for Christ. Until then, believers should be fully aware that the transhumanist gospel is a false one. Only Christ can change our hearts, change our minds, and change our whole bodies … not a tech billionaire. [source]

Transhumanists fear death. Their ego (living forever) might come into play too.

Another article on transhumanism:

Our Transhumanist, Sci-Fi Future Has Arrived. But You’re Not Going To Like It

Friday, August 07, 2026

Why Progressives Love Government “Experts”

From FEE.org (June 9, 2022):

In twenty-first-century America, ordinary people are at the mercy of well-paid, unelected government experts who wield vast power. That is, we live in the age of the technocrats: people who claim to have special wisdom that entitles them to control, manipulate, and manage society’s institutions using the coercive power of the state.

We’re told these people are “nonpolitical” and will use their impressive scientific knowledge to plan the economy, public health, public safety, or whatever goal the regime has decided the technocrats will be tasked with bringing about.

These people include central bankers, Supreme Court justices, “public health” bureaucrats, and Pentagon generals. The narrative is that these people are not there to represent the public or bow to political pressure. They’re just there to do “the right thing” as dictated by economic theory, biological sciences, legal theory, or the study of military tactics.

We’re also told that in order to allow these people to act as the purely well-meaning apolitical geniuses they are, we must give them their independence and not question their methods or conclusions.

We were exposed to this routine yet again last week as President Joe Biden announced he will “respect the Fed’s independence” and allow the central bankers to set monetary policy without any bothersome interference from the representatives of the taxpayers who pay all the bills and who primarily pay the price when central bankers make things worse. (Biden, of course, didn’t mention that central bankers have been spectacularly wrong about the inflation threat in recent years, with inflation rates hitting forty-year highs, economic growth going negative, and consumer credit piling up as families struggle to cope with the cost of living.)

Conveniently, Biden’s deferral to the Fed allows him to blame it later when economic conditions get even worse. Nonetheless, his placing the economy in the hands of alleged experts will no doubt appear laudable to many. This is because the public has long been taught by public schools and media outlets that government experts should have the leeway to exercise vast power in the name of “fixing” whatever problems society faces.

The Expert Class as a Tool for State Building

The success of this idea represents a great victory for progressive ideology. Progressives have long been committed to creating a special expert class as a means of building state power. In the United States, for example, the cult of expertise really began to take hold in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and it led directly to support for more government intervention in the private sector. As Maureen Flanagan notes in “Progressives and Progressivism in an Era of Reform,”

“Social science expertise gave political Progressives a theoretical foundation for cautious proposals to create a more activist state…. Professional social scientists composed a tight circle of men who created a space between academia and government from which to advocate for reform. They addressed each other, trained their students to follow their ideas, and rarely spoke to the larger public.”

These men founded new organizations—such as the American Economics Association—to promote this new class of experts and their plans for a more centrally planned society. Ultimately, the nature of the expert class was revolutionary. The new social scientists thought they knew better than the patricians, religious leaders, local representatives, and market actors who had long shaped local institutions. Instead,

Progressives were modernizers with a structural-instrumentalist agenda. They rejected reliance on older values and cultural norms to order society and sought to create a modern reordered society with political and economic institutions run by men qualified to apply fiscal expertise, businesslike efficiency, and modern scientific expertise to solve problems and save democracy. The emerging academic disciplines in the social sciences of economics, political economy and political science, and pragmatic education supplied the theoretical bases for this middle-class expert Progressivism.

The Progressive impulse for expertise-based rule was perhaps exemplified by the Progressive transportation planner Emory Johnson, who advocated for a strong federal executive branch that would be resistant to political pressure while relying on the supposedly “scientific” judgments of government planners and other bureaucrats. Johnson

explicitly took up the question of the role of expertise in the American state…. he maintained that success relied upon what he termed “executive functions.” He sought to empower the federal government’s executive branch as experts’ natural home.1

In the Progressive view, business leaders and machine politicians lacked a rational and broad view of the needs of society. In contrast, the government experts would approach society’s problems as scientists. Johnson felt this model already somewhat existed in the Department of War, where Johnson imagined the secretary of war was “quite free from political pressure and [relied] on the counsel of the engineers.” Johnson imagined that these science-minded bureaucrats could bring a “really economic and scientific application” of policy. [read more]

Thursday, August 06, 2026

Why Do Some Countries Stay Poor?

From Peter Jacobsen on FEE.org (Aug. 23, 2023):

Accounting for "The Wealth of Nations."

This week for Ask an Economist, I have a question from a reader named Mark. He says,

“I’ve worked with immigrants that recently moved to the US, and workers still living in their native country and working for me remotely.

My experience is that they’re on average, much harder working and more skilled (even in technical fields) than my American colleagues. The foreigners work hard, making no excuses, grateful for the work, and take every opportunity to better themselves. Americans, on the other hand, demand much higher wages, complain about the work, and make little effort to improve themselves.

Since the people from many of these poor countries are better workers, why are their home countries so poor? Immigrants on average start more businesses and do better in the US than US born citizens. With all their skills and ambition, it seems their home countries ought to be significantly richer than the US cities, yet this isn’t the case. What’s the cause of these countries’ poverty?”

Mark asks perhaps the single-most important question in the history of economic thinking. Why do some countries grow rich while others stay poor?

A Long History of Answers

In 1776, Scottish philosopher Adam Smith published perhaps the most influential work in the history of political economy: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

This book, usually referred to as “The Wealth of Nations,” tries to answer the question Mark poses. Since then, wealthy countries have grown much wealthier, some poor countries have grown wealthier, but there are a substantial number of countries lagging behind.

Before we get into the right answer, we should spend some time talking about some popular wrong answers.

Economist Bill Easterly has done a great job chronicling some of these wrong answers in his book The Elusive Quest for Growth.

Easterly’s point in the book is simple. Throughout the late 20th century and into the 21st century, the United States and other countries have attempted to trigger economic growth in poor countries. These attempts have failed.

Easterly discusses three failed panaceas which experts believed would trigger development: investment, population control, and education. Before looking at each once, though, consider the unifying theme here. Developed countries tend to have higher levels of investment, lower birth rates, and more education. From this, experts have tried to infer that if these conditions are replicated in poorer countries, then development will follow.

This strategy has failed. It turns out these factors are more a consequence of growth than a cause. Let’s look at each failed panacea.

1. Investment

In the 1950s, experts began to believe that simply having machines and financial capital to take on big projects would make countries rich. This belief, ironically, was based on the (false) success of the Soviet Union. Soviet production numbers were going through the roof, and for decades economists believed they would overtake the US. Why?

The Soviet Union was industrializing through forced savings. By reallocating private resources to large industrial investments, it appeared the USSR was able to shock the economy into early industrialization. It turns out that this growth was illusory, as economist Murray Rothbard rightly predicted, leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

But the Soviet Union fooled many economists in the 1950s, so the model of centrally planned growth via investment took off. The belief was that because poor countries were in such dire situations, citizens had no ability to save. Without saving there is no growth. A vicious cycle was preventing growth.

So developing countries could fix this by giving the required investment for countries to have sustained growth. This investment would increase incomes, which would increase savings, and spur on permanent natural growth. Easterly calls this the financing gap approach.

The approach failed, though. Models failed to live up to their predictions, and poor countries were not made rich via air-dropped investments. The reason for the failure is the same reason noted by Rothbard in his analysis of the Soviet economy. Production is a means to the ends of consumption. If your production is not linked meaningfully to the well-being of consumers via the knowledge of prices, profit, and loss, then it will not lead to any sustained growth.

Central planners attempted to create production for its own sake, leading to the misallocation of capital and natural resources. Investment alone is not enough—you must have the right investments.

2. Education

A natural next plan for development experts was education. If increasing production via physical capital was not enough, maybe increasing knowledge or human capital would do the trick. Easterly chronicles how education development policy dominated from the 1960s to the 1990s.

The results did not bear out on this either. Easterly chronicles how study after study finds little to no correlation between education and economic growth. One study shows that as the education explosion happened in poor countries, the growth rate of income in these countries actually fell. This is exactly the opposite of what we’d expect if education theories were true. Another study found that for countries that grow 1% faster than average, education could only explain 0.06% of that in terms of growth in human capital.

Easterly points to several other types of studies which show a simple, consistent result: education does not create economic growth.

……

The Best Answer

So if all these answers are wrong, what is the right answer? Let’s go back to Adam Smith, and take a look at his famous conclusion. Why do countries become rich according to Smith?

“Little else is required to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things.”

Smith is arguing that the ultimate cause of growth in a country stems from its institutions. In other words, the rules that govern your daily economic activity are at the bottom of the different growth outcomes we face in our world.

Another way to frame this is that in order for a country’s economy to grow, the citizens need economic freedom or access to private property rights.

When people have private property, they can use, sell, or rent out their property. This leads to a few results. First, people have an incentive to maximize the value of their property. If you own a house, you want to keep it in good condition because letting it fall apart means you lose some money. Private ownership incentivizes responsibility.

Furthermore, when people are able to sell their goods, prices form for those goods. Prices reflect the value of a good or service relative to other things, and embody societal knowledge about the good. When an oil rig breaks down in the ocean, oil becomes more scarce. We don’t have to be told oil is more scarce to curb our consumption. The rising price causes us to curb consumption whether we know it or not.

Prices also allow firms to do accounting to determine their profit or loss. If a firm makes a profit off of a sale, this tells them consumers valued the final product more than the value of the inputs used to create it. This process of transforming less valuable inputs into more valuable outputs is at the center of economic growth. To paraphrase the economist Peter Boettke: without ownership of the various goods used in production, there can be no markets for them. Without markets for these goods, there are no prices. Without prices, there can be no economic calculation.

So institutions which are economically free are the cause of economic growth. The data bear this out. Economists James Gwartney and co-author Robert Lawson pioneered the Fraser Institute’s “Economic Freedom of the World Index.” The Index measures how free the economies of different countries are and uses that information to examine the connection between freedom and flourishing. What they find fits perfectly with the theory here. Economically free countries are richer and healthier than unfree countries.

Economist Peter Leeson also examines the evidence in a paper titled “Two Cheers for Capitalism?” His conclusion?

“According to a popular view that I call ‘two cheers for capitalism,’ capitalism’s effect on development is ambiguous and mixed. This paper empirically investigates that view. I find that it’s wrong. Citizens in countries that became more capitalist over the last quarter century became wealthier, healthier, more educated, and politically freer. Citizens in countries that became significantly less capitalist over this period endured stagnating income, shortening life spans, smaller gains in education, and increasingly oppressive political regimes. The data unequivocally evidence capitalism’s superiority for development. Full-force cheerleading for capitalism is well deserved and three cheers are in order instead of two.”

In The Elusive Quest for Growth, Easterly has one other insight that merits our attention on this question. Easterly points out how much of the United States government’s focus on development in the late 20th century was really an attempt to win allies against the Soviet Union.

This is extremely ironic, considering that the US government was essentially incorporating Soviet style central planning to attempt to bring about growth in these developing countries.

Instead, it would have been better to follow a US-style pursuit of economic growth. Institutions which enable economic growth are the true driver of wealth creation. Once you enable individuals to freely compete and cooperate, the power of human ingenuity does the rest. [read more]

Food for thought. Lessons the Left never gets--especially the "easy taxes" part.

Wednesday, August 05, 2026

U.S. Space Command Warns Russia Planning ‘Space Pearl Harbor’ With Nuclear Weapon in Orbit (VIDEO)

From The Gateway Pundit.com (Apr. 18):

Russia is reportedly developing a nuclear weapon designed to be deployed in space that could cripple global communications and cause widespread disruption.

General Stephen Whiting, head of U.S. Space Command, has admitted that Washington is “very concerned” about plans to place a nuclear anti-satellite weapon into orbit.

“They are thinking about placing in orbit a nuclear anti-satellite weapon that would hold at risk everyone’s satellites in low Earth orbit, and that would be an outcome that we just couldn’t tolerate,” Whiting said.

The weapon could be used to destroy large numbers of satellites in low Earth orbit, potentially taking out communications systems, GPS networks and parts of the global internet.

A detonation in orbit could damage or destroy up to 10,000 satellites, roughly 80 percent of those currently in space.

Officials have described the potential attack as a “space Pearl Harbor.”

Whiting said the threat forms part of a broader pattern of Russian activity in space, including widespread GPS and satellite communication jamming.

“The problem with GPS jamming is it’s being done in a way that’s affecting civil aviation in eastern Europe and across southern Europe,” he said.

“When we put at risk civilian airliners full of citizens just trying to go on business or holiday, that’s incredibly problematic.”

The general said Russia is seeking ways to counter what it sees as Western military advantages by targeting space-based systems.

“They look at the United States, they look at NATO and they see an overmatch there of conventional arms,” Whiting said.

“And they believe that novel ways of trying to undermine the United States and NATO, such as by neutralizing our space capabilities, helps them to level the battlefield.”

The proposed weapon would violate the Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits placing nuclear weapons in orbit.

U.S. officials have been aware of the threat for at least two years, with intelligence first briefed to Congress in 2024.

Whiting warned that space is increasingly becoming a central domain for future conflict.

“The next big war will likely be a war that starts in space,” he said.

He also urged allies to increase defense spending in the sector, noting that Britain currently spends less than one percent of its defense budget on space capabilities. [source]

Hope not, then again not surprising. The Chi-Coms are probably thinking along the same lines too.

Another threat in orbit:

‘There are threats in orbit’: Space Force chief sounds alarm over Chinese, Russian space assets

Tuesday, August 04, 2026

Trump Pardons 9 in Federal Emissions Cases

From Newsmax.com (July 3):

President Donald Trump on Friday pardoned 11 people, including some convicted in federal emissions cases, saying they were victims of what he called the Biden administration's "Weaponization and Stupidity" in punishment for "fixing their car."

Trump announced the pardons in a Truth Social post, declaring that the six had been unfairly prosecuted and imprisoned under then-President Joe Biden.

"It is my Great Honor to have just signed Pardons for six people who were persecuted by the Biden Administration, and were in, or being sent to, prison, for 'fixing their car,'" Trump wrote earlier in the day before the White House made an official announcement. "While I know this sounds ridiculous, it is nevertheless a fact, and part of the Weaponization and Stupidity that our Country had to endure during four long years of Sleepy Joe Biden.

"I AM SETTING THEM ALL FREE, RIGHT NOW!"

Trump's Friday ⁠pardons also included Adam Kinan, ⁠vice chairman ⁠of the Staffing Advisory Group, who ‌had been sentenced to prison in 2006 with business partner and ‌Washington ​lobbyist Jack Abramoff ‌for wire fraud.

The pardons come as the administration continues to roll back federal environmental enforcement priorities and what it describes as politically motivated prosecutions.

"President Trump is the ultimate decider on any clemency-related actions," a White House official told CBS Newsahead of the pardons.

Last year, Trump pardoned Wyoming mechanic Troy Lake, who served seven months in prison for violating federal emissions laws after disabling pollution-control equipment on diesel engines.

"We think this type of case is an example of government overreach," attorney Stewart Cables told CBS. "That's why we are trying to get these pardons."

Earlier this year, Todd Blanche, who at the time was deputy attorney general, ordered federal prosecutors to drop the remaining criminal cases involving aftermarket "defeat devices" used to modify diesel emissions systems, saying the move would "ensure consistent and fair prosecution under the law, as well as to ensure the best use of [Justice] Department resources."

Trump also signed a June 29 executive order directing the Environmental Protection Agency to deprioritize civil enforcement involving emission-control tampering.

According to CBS, Trump is also weighing other clemency requests, including one from music producer Sean "Diddy" Combs, who is serving a federal prison sentence of just over four years at Fort Dix, New Jersey, after his conviction last year on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

He was acquitted of the more serious charges of sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy.

Administration sources told the outlet no decision has been made.

Grammy Award-winning rapper Pras Michel of the Fugees and Malaysian financier Jho Low are also reportedly seeking presidential pardons. [source]

Good for President Trump. 

Monday, August 03, 2026

Trump drops election integrity bombshells, urges passage of SAVE America Act

From Just the News.com (July 16):

On Thursday at the White House, President Donald Trump addressed the nation and presented new evidence detailing multiple security breaches in elections he said were concealed by a self-proclaimed "shadow government" and the Biden administration.

"Another official inside the FBI wrote that she was running 'a shadow government' to keep intelligence about China's election meddling from becoming known," he said, during a primetime address from the White House.

The Chinese hacked while the Democrats denied

According to Trump and subsequent documents to be released Thursday, in the spring and summer of 2020, the intelligence community (IC) began detecting the Chinese illegal acquisition of voter databases. At the time, the number of voter files was in the tens of millions.

The documents reportedly reveal that there was a concerted and conscientious effort by the IC not to tell the president (Trump at the time), Congress, or the American people.

Because nothing was done by former President Joe Biden's administration to stop the Chinese activities, the number of voter files hacked went from 10 to 20 million in 2020 to roughly 220 million by 2023.

China targets Trump to damage the election

Furthermore, evidence shows that China was activating certain interference methods to specifically target Trump, as the IC was telling Trump and the American people the opposite.

The IC report, declassified and released by former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines, concluded that China did not interfere, as it “considered but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome of the US Presidential election.”

Since the spring and summer of 2020, on at least five occasions, intelligence reports have revealed that U.S. election voting machines could be hacked by a foreign power because of specific vulnerabilities.

In the summer and fall of 2020, the IC watched a foreign adversary, Venezuela, move from theoretically hacking the machines to creating a practical plan that would accomplish it. The plan was apparently so good that a post-election hand-audit would not have been able to detect that the ballots had been changed.

The same vulnerabilities used to hack the machines and change ballots were recently tested by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which determined that those vulnerabilities still existed, according to that July report.

Roughly 278,000 non-citizens were found on voter rolls

To further investigate, DHS purchased 30 voter registration databases, which are available for purchase commercially, that Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice Harmeet Dhillon was unable to compel states to hand over.

DHS was unable to purchase those files from California, New York, New Jersey and a handful of other states. Through their investigation, they found that in mid-sized states, roughly 278,000 non-citizens are currently on voter roles. The non-citizens were identified through foreign social security numbers or foreign drivers' licenses.

Democrats fabricated ballots in Michigan to make quotas in 2020 elections

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has also interviewed numerous subjects who were canvassers hired by GBI Strategies. The Democratic National Committee is one of the largest funders of GBI Strategies, a Democrat-aligned voter registration and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) organization.

During the 2020 election, GBI reportedly received payments nearing $5 million from campaigns and committees. These canvassers, who were illegally paid per ballot, were allegedly instructed that if at the end of the day they had not met their quota of ballots signed and received, to sign ballots themselves.

According to the documents to be released, the Biden DOJ blocked the FBI from indicting anyone in these matters for four years following the 2020 election. Reportedly, the FBI and the Michigan State Police never investigated beyond Michigan and slow-walked any further probes.

Amanda Head is White House Correspondent for Just The News. You can follow her here. [source]

Of course, the Chi-Coms wanted Biden to win. Just like Putin wanted Hillary Clinton to win too. Both candidates are easy to manipulate. One other thing, Senate pass the SAVE America Act already.

Other articles on the speech:

Sunday, August 02, 2026

Transhumanism is a Christian Heresy (and a False Gospel)

From Breakpoint.org (Aug. 1, 2025):

One of the clearest proofs that Christianity addresses the fundamental problems of humanity is the bizarre lengths to which non-Christians will go to address those same problems without Christ. For example, tech billionaire Peter Thiel, former CEO of PayPal, recently went on Ross Douthat’s “Interesting Times” podcast to discuss AI, Mars, immortality, and other light topics. The conversation was genuinely interesting, especially when Douthat asked, “Should the human race continue?” Thiel paused and said “um” and “I don’t know” quite a few times.

“This is a long hesitation!” observed Douthat, laughing nervously.

Finally, Thiel explained that humanity should survive, but that there are problems in need of solving. Chief among those is death, he said, which transhumanists have long hoped to conquer via a “radical transformation” of the human body into an “immortal body.”

The problem with efforts like transgenderism, in Thiel’s opinion, isn’t that they change bodies too radically, but not radically enough: “[W]e want more transformation than that. … We want you to be able to change your heart and change your mind and change your whole body.” Thiel then pointed to Christianity and its doctrines of Redemption and Resurrection as precedent for the transhumanist idea of total self-transformation and conquest of death. Maybe, he hinted, the two philosophies aren’t so different.

Douthat, a Roman Catholic, pushed back, pointing out that according to Christianity, God does the transforming. “The person,” Douthat said, “who tries to do it on their own with a bunch of machines is likely to end up a dystopian character.” Do-it-yourself immortality is, at best, “a heretical form of Christianity.”

Theil’s fundamental assumption, which is foreign to the Bible and Christianity but common among tech futurists and transhumanists, is that our minds are more important and fundamental than our bodies. Our “true selves” are our minds and separable from who we are physically.

Not only is this assumption a rehashed version of the ancient heresy of Gnosticism, it also creepily resembles the philosophy of the evil National Institute of Coordinated Experiments (or N.I.C.E.) from C.S. Lewis’ That Hideous Strength. In the story, Dr. Filostrato hopes to cleanse the world of organic life, replacing trees, birds, and even human bodies with machines. He even proposed something akin to uploading human consciousness.

That’s not to say that transhumanists like Thiel are involved in an intergalactic conspiracy run by demons speaking through a disembodied Head, as in the book. At least not knowingly. But the transhumanist’s urge to overcome human limits, become more machine-like, and live forever is eerily similar. As is their rhetoric.

It’s also notable that, unlike anti-humanists on the Left, transhumanists assume the human race is worth preserving. Elon Musk, for example, thinks it’s our duty to have as many babies as possible, by any means necessary. He also thinks that humans should be the ones to colonize other planets. In a sense, he acknowledges that humans are exceptional, in a way at least similar to how Scripture describes humans.

Yet, his view of human exceptionalism has a “you will be like God” promise to it, and a sense that all human problems are technical glitches to be overcome by innovation and engineering. So, our mortality can be solved through “radical transformation” of our bodies. Our fragile fertility can be solved through IVF. Our lack of knowledge can be solved through AI, and our limits can be overcome by the technologies pioneered by Thiel and others like him.

Theil’s company Palantir was named, without any apparent irony, after the “seeing stones” in The Lord of the Rings that corrupt all who gaze into them.

Humans were made in the image of God and, as such, were made to be like Him and live forever. Death is “the last enemy,” and our longing for immortality is core to who we are. Perhaps this is why transhumanist promises are so compelling. However, we were made to do and receive all this through God, not our own ingenuity.

Transhumanism, it turns out, is indeed a Christian heresy, an ideology that rightly identifies the problems of a fallen world. But it seeks to overcome them with a false gospel of technological godhood, rather than the true gospel of salvation through Christ.

God willing, Thiel’s openness to Christianity and his conversations with Christians will move him to accept his need for Christ. Until then, believers should be fully aware that the transhumanist gospel is a false one. Only Christ can change our hearts, change our minds, and change our whole bodies … not a tech billionaire. [source]

Transhumanists fear death. Their ego (living forever) might come into play too.

Another article on transhumanism:

Our Transhumanist, Sci-Fi Future Has Arrived. But You’re Not Going To Like It

Friday, July 31, 2026

How Bad Were Recessions before the Fed? Not as Bad as They Are Now

From Mises.org (June 28, 2022):

With a recession looming over the average American, the group to blame is pretty obvious, this group being the central bankers at the Federal Reserve, who inflate the supply of currency in the system, that currency being the dollar. This is what inflation is, the expansion of the money supply either through the printing press or adding zeros to a computer screen. It has gotten so bad that in the last twenty-two months, 80 percent of all US dollars in existence have been printed, from $4 trillion in January 2020, to $20 trillion in October 2021.

This is always how recessions start: the expansion of easy money, the creation of bubbles, and heightened prices caused by the devaluation of the currency supply. But recessions occurred long before the Fed’s establishment in 1913.

Were these market failures, as many are taught to believe, or were they still the fault of a central bank or government policy? How bad were pre-Fed recessions? Did they rival the Great Depression or 2008?

The Continental Dollar

During the days of the American Revolution, the Continental Congress convened to figure out how to finance the Revolution. In June 1775, Congress issued six million paper currency notes known as continental dollars in order to pay for the new army and the supplies needed to fight a war. Those who supported the Revolution would jump in line to support this new fiat currency, as it was the patriotic thing to do.

By 1780, the amount of continentals in circulation had reached 241 million, and the continental had done its damage. The patriots who bought into the fiat dollar suffered the most, while people like David Hall, who by order of Congress was permitted to print out fiat bills, and the Loyalists, who kept their gold and silver specie were able to stay financially afloat.

The continental was turned back en masse, as it now held no value. Those who trusted the continental over gold were left with nothing. Certain Founding Fathers, after witnessing people’s livelihoods ruined by fiat paper money, decided to make provisions to make sure this mistake would not happen again.

Article 1 Section 10 of the US Constitution states:

No state shall make any thing but gold and silver coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.

This section would be violated throughout US history, from the Civil War to 1933, when President Franklin Roosevelt confiscated US citizens’ gold and prevented them from exchanging the dollar into gold.

It’s clear what caused the failure of the continental: Congress and printing presses. This, however, would not be the last economic problem that would face America, the next major downturn came in 1819.

The Recession of 1819

After the War of 1812, state-chartered banks and the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), which was established in 1816, expanded the money supply. Murray Rothbard’s book The Panic of 1819 notes how these state banks expanded the amount of banknotes from $46 million to $68 million in 1815. The problem was that banks printed more paper notes than there was gold specie to back them.

In fact, from 1817 to 1818, the SBUS expanded credit by 57 percent, outdoing the credit expansion in 1815–17, when it expanded credit by 25 percent. This credit expansion caused prices to rise in certain areas of the economy, such as agriculture and shipbuilding. All of these markets received the biggest loans that were granted by SBUS branches and state banks.

Eighteen eighteen spelled trouble for both the state banks and the SBUS: the money supply fell by 10 percent and there was a credit contraction of 41 percent. Foreigners and other citizens started to trade in their banknotes for specie, and many state banks refused to convert paper to gold as their gold reserves ran dry, as did the SBUS reserves.

Thomas Jefferson, who warned against central banking, gave his thoughts in a letter to John Taylor in 1816. Jefferson states:

And I sincerely believe with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; & that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.

His suspicion was confirmed when in 1819 a recession ignited by the inflationary policy and agriculture and turnpike workers’ wages fell 60–80 percent.

Despite this bank failure, markets were allowed to handle the recession, or the readjustment period. Because of this, the economy bounced back quite quickly. At the start of the recession, gross domestic product per capita only fell 1.1 percent, but from the latter half of 1819 until 1824, GDP per capita grew 1.5 percent. This was before urbanization, so many still lived on farms. Even though wages fell, the recession was still nowhere as bad post-Fed recessions like the one in 1929.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 put a 55 percent tax on all foreign imports, this practically eliminated all exports. Agriculture suffered the most. Tens of thousands of farms were closed and sold for as low as $50. At the beginning of 1920, there were 28,885 banks, and by 1933, roughly fifteen thousand remained, the Federal Reserve Board of 1937 noted that two-thirds of these banks were in towns with less than twenty-five hundred people and that the majority failed.

Wages may have dropped in 1819, but the economy bounced back. It did not drag for sixteen years, nor did thousands of farms and banks fail. [read more]

Thursday, July 30, 2026

Is It Time to Ban Electric Vehicles?

From Townhall.com (Aug. 15, 2023):

The New York Fire Department recently reported that so far this year there have been 108 lithium-ion battery fires in New York City, which have injured 66 people and killed 13. According to FDNY Commissioner Laura Kavanagh, "There is not a small amount of fire, it (the vehicle) literally explodes." The resulting fire is "very difficult to extinguish and so it is particularly dangerous."

Last year there were more than 200 fires from batteries from e-bikes, EVs and other devices.

A fire ignited at an e-bike shop and killed four people near midnight on the morning of June 20. Two individuals were left in critical condition. The fire commissioner has warned New Yorkers that such devices could be very dangerous and typically explode in such a way that renders escape impossible.

FDNY also reports that in just three years, lithium-ion battery fires have surpassed those started by cooking and smoking as the most common causes of fatal fires in New York City. It's happening all over the country as these blazes have become commonplace. Cars and e-bikes are randomly blowing up in driveways and garages.

Now let's be honest: 13 deaths in a city the size of New York with some 8 million people is hardly an epidemic. Regulations should always be based on a cost versus benefit calculation, or there would be no cars at all.

And yet the same scaremongers on the left who have zero tolerance and want bans for small risks when it comes to everything from swimming pool diving boards, gas stoves, plastic straws, vaping, fireworks and so on, have a surprisingly high pain threshold when it comes to people dying or suffering critical injured from "green" electric battery fires.

Or consider this: In 1965, Ralph Nader almost single-handedly helped ban the popular Chevrolet Corvair -- famous for its engine placed in the back trunk of the car. Nader's bestselling shock book "Unsafe at Any Speed" declared the car was deadly. But there was no real evidence of that claim, and to this day there are no reliable statistics on how many passengers -- if any -- died in Corvairs from rear-end accidents.

What is indisputable is that EVs will cause far more deaths than Corvairs ever did.

One other example: There have been more fatalities in just one city in a single year from lithium-ion batteries in cars than all the people who died from the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear plant accident -- which was zero.

Yet, after the accident, thanks to the environmentalists' fear campaign (with the help of the blockbuster anti-nuke movie "The China Syndrome"), no domestic nuclear plants were built for three decades. That is despite the fact that nuclear plants emit no greenhouse gases.

But with EVs, the greens are pushing aside any concerns about the collateral damage of deaths and injuries. Biden wants to mandate that nearly ALL new cars sold in the U.S. be EVs by 2032. If that happens, many thousands of Americans may die or will be inured from electric vehicle fires.

All this is especially hypocritical because once upon a time the left's mantra was "no trading blood for oil." Now they are willing to trade blood in exchange for getting Americans to stop using oil. An irony of all this is that because of all the energy needed to produce windmills, solar panels and electric batteries, new studies are showing that the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to this "net zero" transition is close to zero. It turns out, green energy causes some pollution, too.

For the record, I'm not in favor of the government banning EVs or e-bikes or just about anything. I just believe that we should make policy decisions based on real and factual risk assessments, not false scares and sensationalism.

As for the future of EVs, maybe it's time for Ralph Nader to write a sequel to "Unsafe at Any Speed." [source]

I don't know about banning them, but electric vehicles aren't the environmental savior the Left thinks they are.

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Florida woman forced to forfeit lotto prize after USPS loses ticket

From Fox News.com (Sept. 30, 2020):

A Florida woman says she was forced to forfeit her lotto prize after the US Postal Service lost her winning ticket in the mail.

Sue Burgess, of Hernando County, said she was thrilled to discover earlier this summer that she snagged $1,000 in the state’s Second Chance Lottery game, news station WFLA.

“I was elated. It was like winning a million dollars to me,” Burgess told the outlet.

But at the time, she couldn’t claim her winnings at any of the local lottery offices since they were closed due to the pandemic.

She followed the state lottery’s instructions and went to the post office to send in her ticket via certified mail, the outlet reported.

Burgess said the ticket, however, never made it to the lottery office in the one-week time frame required to claim the prize.

Her tracking information last showed the ticket in transit on Aug. 12 at a Tallahassee post office, WFLA reported.

“They said, ‘We have not received this ticket.’ They said, ‘No ticket, no prize,’” said Burgess, whose prize money went to an alternate winner.

Burgess said she’s frustrated because she could’ve left her ticket in a dropbox at a local lottery office, but she believed that certified mail was the safer and more efficient option.

“That’s why you choose certified mail,” Burgess said. “With COVID, I understand the mail is a little bit slow. But for safety sake, certified mail usually has priority.”

Six weeks later, the winning ticket is still unaccounted for.

The USPS apologized to Burgess and said it’s working with the state lottery to help her cash out her prize.

“We apologize to this specific customer for any inconvenience they may have experienced,” the postal service said.

“In this specific instance, we are continuing to work with the lottery office to confirm receipt of the mailpiece.”

The Florida Lottery said it’s not responsible for mistakes made by the postal service, though it will make an exception for Burgess and pay out her prize if the package shows up postmarked by the original deadline, WFLA reported.

“Ms. Burgess’ situation is an unusual circumstance and, to our knowledge, no other winner has experienced a similar issue,” the lottery said.

“Because the Lottery did not receive Ms. Burgess’ ticket within the seven-day claim period, an alternate winner was selected and paid. However, if Ms. Burgess’ package arrives at Florida Lottery Headquarters with a date stamp prior to the original expiration date, our Claims Processing department will process and pay her claim.” [source]

That’s too bad. I hope the Lottery finally receives her ticket.

Tuesday, July 28, 2026

EXCLUSIVE: George Soros Gave $250K to British Group Working To Censor Conservative News Sites and ‘Kill Musk’s Twitter’

From Free Beacon.com (Nov. 17, 2025):

The left-wing philanthropy funded by George Soros, Open Society Foundations (OSF), bankrolls a British nonprofit that works to censor conservative news websites and social media companies, including through a plot to "kill" Elon Musk’s X by pressuring advertisers and investors to boycott the company.

OSF gave $250,000 last year to the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) for "general support," according to the Soros charity’s grant database. The CCDH, under the guise of stopping "the spread of online hate and disinformation," has pressured social media companies’ investors and advertisers to censor supposed "disinformation" or other content it deems to be offensive.

The organization, founded by former Labour Party operative Imran Ahmed in 2018, has also pressured tech companies to pull advertisements from the conservative websites the Federalist and the Daily Wire over allegedly racist content.

The grant, which has not been reported, could resurrect a longstanding battle that Musk has waged with both the CCDH and Soros. Musk has accused Soros of "crimes against humanity" and funding groups involved in violent protests across the country this year. And he has called the CCDH a "criminal organization" and said he was "going after" the group’s donors over its efforts to harm X’s finances.

Last year, the CCDH quietly organized a campaign to "kill Musk’s Twitter" by pressuring advertisers to cut ties with the company, according to memos published by Racket News. The CCDH, which the watchdog group Capital Research Center calls a "UK-based censorship advocacy group," met with 16 congressional offices to discuss Musk’s lawsuit against the organization, and held "policy engagement" meetings with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.). The nonprofit also lobbied American policymakers toward the creation of an "independent digital regulator," according to Racket News.

While the CCDH has criticized most social media companies for failing to curtail extremism, the organization has been particularly hostile toward X since Musk purchased the site, formerly known as Twitter, in October 2022. Musk, who pledged to end censorship on the platform after purchasing the site, sued the CCDH in July 2023 over a report from the group that claimed hate speech had spiked on X since Musk’s takeover.

The revelation of the Soros grant helps answer longstanding questions about the CCDH’s funding. In 2023, Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) subpoenaed the CCDH for a list of its donors as part of an investigation of the firm’s alleged collusion to censor social media platforms.

The CCDH does not voluntarily disclose its donors. But some organizations have revealed contributions to the nonprofit. The Skoll Fund, the private philanthropy of former eBay president Jeff Skoll, gave $415,000 to the CCDH in 2023, according to tax filings. The Silicon Valley Community Foundation, a donor-advised fund that manages charitable contributions on behalf of anonymous donors, contributed $403,175 to the CCDH in 2023. The CCDH received $2.1 million in revenue in 2023, the year of its most recent tax filing.

The grant revelation comes as the Trump administration sets its sights on the Soros operation and the CCDH. President Donald Trump called over the summer for Soros and his son Alex, the chairman of OSF, to be investigated for allegedly funding violent riots across the country. The Soroses have denied the allegation. [read more]

The Spooky Dude drama continues...

More Soros stories: