Aggregatore di feed

In the USA in 1997–2009, influenza and RSV in total killed 30,400 people per year. Such common viral infections are well worth curing as soon as possible.

Focus on the Viral Infection, Then on the Complications

Covid brought an explosion in respiratory virus research. This is explained in part by the fact that covid is caused by a respiratory virus that’s relatively potent. Most severe cases, for instance, feature destructive clotting.

Even so, covid and common colds both start with virus buildup in the respiratory system and then cause further complications, in the lungs and elsewhere. Also, covid and common colds both are more deadly to people who are elderly or have complicating conditions.

Since covid and common colds have features in common, and covid has further severe effects, covid can be taken as a generally worst case. Prevention and treatment suitable for covid should be conservatively more-than-sufficient for common colds.

From the outset, it clearly was impossible to meaningfully slow the spread of the covid-producing SARS-CoV-2 virus across whole networks of people. It was far-more practical to instead prevent covid disease development or worsening.

People prevented covid disease development by using safe, inexpensive, widely-available vitamins, supplements, and other treatments to build up immune function, lessen viral loads, and augment immune function. To build up immune function, people took vitamin D in advance in a good-enough form, in large-enough amounts, for long enough. To lessen viral loads, people didn’t wear masks and further breathed plenty of fresh air, and used nasal sprays and mouthwashes. To augment immune function, people took ionophores like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or quercetin, all of which transport zinc into cells, and in combination took enough zinc.

Overall, treatments were tailored to the disease phases, as outlined in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Covid time course and treatment

Treatments first primarily limited virus replication, and then primarily prevented or limited inflammation and further disease. Similar approaches work well on other similar-enough diseases.

After a Texas child tested positive for measles and then died, her also-infected four younger siblings and two 4-month-old twin cousins responded well to similar safe, widely-available treatments suitable for measles. Measles depletes vitamin A, and cod liver oil served as a high-quality source. These children’s measles was in measles’s respiratory phase, and budesonide steroid inhaler was very beneficial.

Admit We Have Problems Practicing and Learning

Figure 1 is from a series of prevention and treatment guides prepared by the Independent Medical Alliance. Such leading clinical practice and teaching is being suppressed by establishment groups.

Two of IMA’s seven exceptional founding members, Paul Marik and Pierre Kory, had their board certifications revoked by the American Board of Internal Medicine. IMA senior fellow Mary Talley Bowden helped a hospitalized desperately-ill man’s wife get a court order to get him ivermectin, and tried to get ivermectin administered to him, but this was prevented and the man died. Bowden was then sued by the Texas Medical Board. The distinguished lead author of the first published early outpatient treatment protocol for covid, Peter McCullough, had his board certification revoked by ABIM. Independent clinicians’ prescriptions for generic antivirals have been going unfilled in hospitals and pharmacy chains.

Independent clinicians and customers have been working around pharmacists’ interference with medical practice and liberty by getting prescriptions filled in some independent pharmacies and in many compounding pharmacies. State legislators have made ivermectin over-the-counter with a pharmacist’s consents in Tennessee and with no exceptions in Arkansas and Idaho, and they’re considering bills in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia. They’re considering banning mRNA therapies for humans in Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, New York, South Carolina, and Texas.

Use Basic Controls that Are Simple and Powerful

The key disputes involve two groups. One group is pharma, plus most government people, health‑payment providers, hospitals, large practices, and pharmacy chains. The other group is independent clinicians and customers, plus a few government people and pharmacists.

Pharma’s approach and independents’ approach differ greatly in safety, efficacy, and cost, as encapsulated by Figure 2.

Figure 2. Pharma approach vs. independent approach

Pharma develops branded treatments by learning from small, centralized trials—first of safety, then of efficacy. This process builds in high costs and long delays.

Independents use mechanistic understanding to apply possible treatments to both existing and new uses. They start with safety data that’s sufficient to support wide use, and that’s often far-more extensive than the data for new pharma branded treatments. They keep monitoring safety in use, and they also monitor efficacy in use. Independents’ mix of branded, generic, and other therapies is more varied. With this decentralized approach, independents discover quickly and adapt quickly, saving lives and improving health.

Aircraft carrier flight-deck crews have demonstrated high reliability by not relying on redundant operations or layers of supervision but instead keeping responsibility simple and clear, and empowering people. Clinicians face analogous real-time demands. They do well when they create for themselves a similar decentralized structure.

Vaccines and mRNA therapies appear to at minimum worsen immune responses: they reduce some crucial helpful responses, and they increase some serious harmful responses. Relying instead on less-immune-disruptive state-of-the-art preventions and treatments would very‑advisably first do no harm. In the meantime, though, autism, other historically-rare serious diseases, and turbo cancers—all of them terrible burdens on life and health—remain on the rise.

Remarkably, independents trying safe, inexpensive, widely-available treatments at small-scale on clinical cases are seeing impressive, highly-promising results on cancers. Imagine if independents could help people in case after case their whole careers, by practicing using the products they already have at hand and using more products as producers make them available.

At the end of My Cousin Vinny, Mona Lisa Vito playfully teased that succeeding in case after case would be a nightmare. We need decentralized independents to be a dream come true.

The post Common Cold Now Cured. Scale Up, Branch Out appeared first on LewRockwell.

One of the most challenging things for me throughout my time in the medical field has been watching children become neurologically damaged by vaccines, and the widespread blindness of the medical profession to this issue.  Unfortunately, because so much money has been spent to engineer the societal belief that vaccines do not cause autism, anyone who asserts otherwise is immediately subject to widespread ridicule, to the point it’s mostly a lost cause to convince medical professionals vaccines aren’t always safe. Sadly, in many cases, the only thing that can open their eyes is their own child being severely injured.

Since one of the central reasons the autism-vaccine link has always been dismissed is that there’s no established mechanism to explain how vaccines could cause autism, this article will focus on that question and why there has been so much resistance to understanding what is behind the autism epidemic.

Note: this is a significantly revised and updated version of a previously published article.

Direct to Consumer Advertising

I believe much of the blindness to the toxicity of vaccines was a result of Clinton’s 1997 decision to have the FTC allow direct pharmaceutical advertising to consumers. There are a lot of issues with this practice (the USA and New Zealand are essentially the only countries that allow it), and one effect it had was putting financial pressure on networks not to air stories critical of pharmaceuticals once they had become dependent on their advertising revenue.

Prior to this shift, news programs that were critical of vaccination would periodically be aired and were pivotal in awakening the public to the dangers of vaccination. Consider, for example, this 1978 program that was aired about a rushed experimental vaccine that ended up injuring a significant number of participants (and never would be aired today).

Note: while severe reactions (Guillain-Barré Syndrome) officially occurred in 1 in 100,000 people, when the vaccine came out, we saw numerous people it happened to, so I am relatively sure that figure greatly understates the actual harm.

In contrast, despite millions of people being severely injured or killed by the COVID vaccines and immense public interest in the topic, there was virtually no reporting in the mass media about the harms the vaccines were causing. Sadly, that is just one of many illustrations of how corrosive pharmaceutical advertising dollars are. For example:

•RFK Jr. was close friends with the chairman and CEO of Fox News. RFK Jr. has repeatedly shared that Ailes was very supportive of RFK Jr. producing a segment on the dangers of mercury in vaccines, but ultimately was forced to scrap the production because the majority of Fox’s advertisements came from the pharmaceutical industry (e.g., 17-18 of the 22 advertisements on a typical nightly news show).

•The only Fox News host who actively spoke out against the COVID vaccines was Tucker Carlson (as he was able to leverage his position as the most popular news anchor in America to air his opinions), but was fired immediately after he aired a scathing critique of how our media had sold out the American people for Pfizer and Moderna.”

Andrew Wakefield

Whenever the subject of vaccination and autism is raised (particularly within medical circles), you will immediately be told (often in a condescending manner) some variant of the following:

Andrew Wakefield was a dishonest doctor who was bribed by lawyers to torture children and publish a fraudulent and deeply flawed study that falsely linked vaccines to autism. His abhorrent actions deeply violated the profound trust we place in scientists, and tricked people into believing vaccines cause autism. Remarkably, even though his study has been totally discredited and he lost his medical license for the gross misconduct he committed, his fraudulent study cemented the lie that vaccines cause autism, and despite all the data we publish, nothing can undo the profound damage Wakefield did to science so nothing like this must ever happen again.

While most things do not get under my skin, this has become because of how nauseating it is to hear it repeatedly. This, in turn, touches on a key point. One of the most common ways the corporate propaganda apparatus (known as the Public Relations or PR industry) persuades the public is by sculpting the narrative best suited for swaying public opinion and then blasting it on every media platform while any opposing viewpoint is forbidden from being aired. These lies then become entrenched and everyone starts to independently repeat them as though the idea were their own (e.g., we witness one of the most over-the-top PR campaigns in history to sell the COVID-19 vaccines and before long much of the populace was zealously espousing its nonsensical talking points).

Since Wakefield’s study was published in 1998 (a year after pharmaceutical television advertising became permissible), it was able to initially gain immense traction in the press (as the media had not yet been bought out), but a few years later, when that monopoly had established itself, it was instead debunked on every platform.

Note: Sharyl Attkinson, a popular national news anchor for CBS and an Emmy-Award winning journalist shared that in the early 2000s, the pharmaceutical industry, feeling the pressure negative coverage of disastrous vaccination programs was creating for them, lobbied to prevent future negative coverage, and after this happened, it became impossible for her to air well produced segments which were critical of any vaccine initiative

In my eyes, there are three critical points to understand from Wakefield’s experience.

First, it cemented the lie that no one had ever thought to associate vaccination with brain injuries prior to Wakefield’s study (and hence that all subsequent associations were a product of Wakefield tricking them into seeing a connection that wasn’t there). As the 1982 news program shows, this is clearly not true and likewise the reason Wakefield did the study was because he was approached by parents who already thought vaccines caused their child’s autism.

More importantly, if you read through the early medical literature (prior to vaccine injuries becoming a taboo subject), many doctors over the decades had reported brain damage and characteristic neurological injuries (e.g., cranial nerve palsies) following vaccination that mirror what we see in vaccine-injured children now—many of which can be found within this excellent book by an eminent bacteriologist that summarized that early (forgotten) literature.

The Hazards Of Immunization (1967) by Sir Graham Wilson 2.01MB ∙ PDF file – Download —

Second, it gave a very clear warning to every academic journal and researcher to never consider publishing anything that was critical of vaccination (as otherwise they would be raked over the coals for decades by the entire media apparatus like Wakefield was). This worked as intended (e.g., many scientists have confided to public figures that they know that autism is linked to vaccination but cannot publicly study it) and since Wakefield’s study, virtually no studies have been conducted on vaccine injuries, and of those that were, none could ever be published in a “reputable” journal. Likewise, it cemented the lie the few doctored studies that get through are immediately removed (whereas for example, trial participants and clinical investigators for the HPV and COVID vaccines repeatedly provided proof fraudulent data was published but the academic journals never even issues a correction).
Note: Wakefield’s study was published in one of the world’s top medical journals (The Lancet). Given how controversial the subject was, it was virtually guaranteed that an exhaustive peer review was conducted of his findings and that The Lancet chose to publish the study not because “Wakefield tricked them” but rather because his data was valid and did not claim anything more than what his data clearly showed.

Third, Wakefield determined a process that appeared to be contributing to the disease process in autism and that many have since found was effective in addressing the condition. However, rather than being considered, it was blackballed and forgotten.

Do Vaccines Cause Autism?

One of the primary purposes of propaganda campaigns is to defend things that are logically indefensible, and since there are a limited number of ways to pull that off, you will gradually begin to see the ways this is accomplished. This in turn is why many were able to see through the marketing campaign used to sell the COVID vaccines, and more importantly, why so many lost their trust in the childhood vaccines they had never questioned before.

For example, if you look at the vaccine-and-autism question, a few major issues emerge:

•While many parents have observed their healthy children suddenly regress and become severely impaired immediately after a vaccine (with the regression occurring in a characteristic and replicable manner), to my knowledge, there are no reported cases of rapid autistic regressions happening immediately prior to a vaccination.

I have met a fair share of people with identical experiences to the parents in this audience.

I suspect that in the near future we will see the same for those with COVID-19 injuries, and like before, almost everyone will deny they exist. pic.twitter.com/o9EtKcTgCs

— A Midwestern Doctor (@MidwesternDoc) December 26, 2022

In contrast, the most common argument used to dismiss a link between vaccines and autism is that “autism tends to emerge at the same age vaccines are given, so the association parents perceive is coincidental, which Andrew Wakefield tricked them into seeing.” If this were indeed true, there would be a roughly even distribution of autism cases before and after vaccination rather than what we actually observe.

2. Over the past 50 years, there has been an exponential increase in the rates of autism (e.g., it’s gone from affecting 1 in 10,000 children to 1 in 31). This rapid increase suggests something is causing it, and more importantly, that it is absolutely urgent for us to figure out what that something is as each autism case is immensely costly to society. This is not sustainable once it starts to affect a significant number of children. However, rather than identify that cause, the scientific community, for decades, has simply said “we need more research” to figure out what it is (while simultaneously declaring it is definitely not vaccines despite vaccines being by far the most probable culprit).”

Note: while I believe the strongest case can be made for vaccines causing the autism epidemic, there are a few other factors (e.g., excessive prenatal ultrasounds) that data suggest may also play a contributing role.”

3. The most common explanation given for the explosion in autism is that “it’s genetic,” and as the years go by and billions are spent on autism research, more and more genes are identified that are associated with autism. This train of thought, however, ignores:
•Despite all that research, the “autism gene” has never been found.
•If autism suddenly became over 100 times more common in 1-2 generations, it is impossible that this could have been due to a genetic shift.
•In addition to this rapid change arguing for an environmental toxin (rather than genetics) causing the autism epidemic, many of the genes “linked to autism” share the common thread of increasing one’s sensitivity to environmental toxins.
Note: Peter Hotez is often used as a media attack dog to discredit anyone linking vaccines to autism and frequently cites his book “Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism” as an authoritative debunking of any links between the two. I read Hotez’s book and noticed that he never proved his claim (rather, he just said it didn’t make sense to him how autism could be anything except genetic) and described a classic sign of vaccine encephalitis (a continual, very loud, and piercing cry) prior to his daughter’s autistic regression.

4. While many studies are published debunking the link between vaccines and autism, they never directly assess the question. Independent studies (whose validity is always questioned) continually find an indisputable link between the two (along with vaccination being linked to many other chronic illnesses). A schism like this would argue for a robust trial to settle the question (e.g., a randomized one that compared a group of vaccinated and unvaccinated children from birth), but each time that is proposed, it’s shot down because “it’s not ethical to withhold lifesaving vaccines from children” when the next best alternative is proposed (access to the CDC’s database that compared vaccinated children to unvaccinated children), for some reason, that too is always shot down.
Note: in one instance, a CDC whistleblower came forward and showed that after the CDC conducted a study to disprove the link between autism and vaccines, when they discovered it actually caused autism, the study was doctored to conceal this.

All of this hence suggests vaccines are strongly linked to autism and helps to explain why both the media and much of the Democratic leadership went hysterical after RFK Jr. stated he planned to conduct robust studies to determine what was actually causing the autism epidemic.

Note: For those interested in learning more about how vaccines cause autism, I would strongly recommend reading Steve Kirsch’s article. He does a good job of concisely presenting some of the most compelling evidence (e.g., specific cases where vaccination was irrefutably linked to autism and the hundreds of papers on the subject).

Read the Whole Article

The post Why Do Vaccines Cause Autism? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Joseph T Salerno.

FOX News

 

The post NBA legend Phil Jackson rips league for scheduling games on religious holidays appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Gail Appel.

See here.

 

The post If VDS Wanted to Destroy America… appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Neocon Knives Out For SecDef Hegseth appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Gail Appel.

Grow a spine and deport them already. On the basis that they offend the Spanish people and Western culture.

Europe is near collapse. It’s not an exaggeration. It’s suicide by obeisance.

See here.

 

The post Muslims Sue Spain Over Holy Processions -Claim They Offend Islam appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Ginny Garner.

Global Research

 

The post 85 Million Person Study: Stroke, Heart Issues Linked to Covid Shots appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Antiwar.com

 

The post DHS Revokes Visas of Over 1,500 Students, None Charged With Any Crimes appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks. John Smith.

Antiwar.com

 

The post Blessed Are the Warmakers? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith.

Antiwar.com

 

The post Letter: As British Jews We Can No Longer Stay Silent on the War in Gaza appeared first on LewRockwell.

With the death of Pope Francis, here are some crucial items below to read and seriously reflect upon while awaiting the papal conclave in Rome to be conducted at the Sistine Chapel where the new pontiff will be chosen.

The papal conclave, where cardinals elect a new pope, is expected to begin in Rome in early May 2025, likely within 15-20 days after Pope Francis’ death.

In these extraordinary, apocalyptic times, my own candidate for the position of the new pontiff is Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano.

Archbishop Vigano was born on January 16, 1941 in Varese, Italy. He was ordained a priest on March 24, 1968 and incardinated in the Diocese of Pavia (Italy). He has a doctorate in both canon and civil law (utroque iure). His Excellency started his service in the Diplomatic Corps of the Holy See as Attaché in 1973 in Iraq and Kuwait. In 1976 he was transferred to the Apostolic Nunciature in Great Britain, and from 1978 until 1989 worked at the Secretariat of State of Vatican City. On April 4, 1989 he was nominated Special Envoy with the functions of Permanent Observer to the European Council in Strasbourg. He was consecrated an archbishop on April 26, 1992 and made Titular Archbishop of Ulpiana. He was nominated Apostolic Pro-Nuncio in Nigeria, on April 3, 1992. On April 4, 1998 he was nominated Delegate for the Pontifical Representations. Archbishop Viganò served as Secretary General of the Governorate of the Vatican City State from July 16, 2009 until September 3, 2011. On October 19, 2011 Pope Benedict XVI appointed him Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, a post he held until his retirement in April of 2016.

Hilaire Belloc: “Europe will return to the Faith, or she will perish. The Faith is Europe. And Europe is the Faith.”

Lord of the World, by Robert Hugh Benson (.pdf version)

Robert Hugh Benson (1871-1914) was the youngest son of Edward White Benson, Archbishop of Canterbury, and younger brother of Edward Frederic Benson. In 1895, he was ordained a priest in the Church of England by his father who was then Archbishop of Canterbury. After many years of questioning and soul-searching he was received into the Roman Catholic Church in 1903. He was ordained a Catholic priest in 1904 and named a Monsignor in 1911. This book, written in 1907, is Benson’s dystopic vision of a near future world in which religion has, by and large, been rejected or simply fallen by the wayside. The Catholic Church has retreated to Italy and Ireland, while the majority of the rest of the world is either Humanistic or Pantheistic. There is a ‘one world’ government, and euthanasia is widely available. The plot follows the tale of a priest, Percy Franklin, who becomes Pope Silvester III, and a mysterious man named Julian Felsenburgh, who is identical in looks to the priest and who becomes “Lord of the World.” “The one condition of progress…on the planet that happened to be men’s dwelling place, was peace, not the sword which Christ brought or that which Mahomet wielded; but peace that arose from, not passed, understanding; the peace that sprang from a knowledge that man was all and was able to develop himself only by sympathy with his fellows…”

Benson was sent to Cambridge to write and serve as a priest chaplain to the Catholic community. Later, he was allowed to live on his own to devote himself to writing. A prolific author, he traveled extensively, writing and lecturing. Benson wrote many apologetic works, including The Religion of the Plain Man, Paradoxes of Catholicism, and Confessions of a Convert. He was also a bestselling novelist, writing The Holy Blissful Martyr Saint Thomas of Canterbury, Come Rack! Come Rope!, and The Necromancers. The dystopian novel Lord of the World is his best-known work.

Apocalypse Now, By Harry W. Crocker III

Story of Satanic Fashion Show Staged Inside a Church Almost Directly Out of 1907 Apocalyptic Distopian Novel, Lord of the World

The post +With the Death of Pope Francis, While Awaiting the Forthcoming Conclave in Rome Set to Choose the New Pontiff, Here Are Some Items to Seriously Read and Reflect Upon in These Extraordinary, Apocalyptic Times appeared first on LewRockwell.

Parents are rightly concerned about what is happening in our “public” schools. Crazed “educators” are encouraging impressionable children to “transition” to another sex, as if such a thing was possible. Students are taught that sexual promiscuity is a good thing. They are brainwashed to accept socialist attacks on our free enterprise system.

What can we do about this disaster? The Trump Administration and anti-woke Governors like Ron deSantis have tried to solve the problem by issuing directives to the schools to eliminate the noxious programs and give parents more say-so about what their children are taught. But teachers who have been indoctrinating our children are well-entrenched, and it will be extremely difficult to curb their baleful influence.

No matter how much good these efforts accomplish, they fail to deal with the real problem, and that is the existence of “public” education itself. Schools run by the state are inherently institutions that propagandize what the state wants schoolchildren to learn. As the great Murray Rothbard explains: “The key issue in the entire discussion is simply this: shall the parent or the State be the overseer of the child? An essential feature of human life is that, for many years, the child is relatively helpless, that his powers of providing for himself mature late. Until these powers are fully developed he cannot act completely for himself as a responsible individual. He must be under tutelage. This tutelage is a complex and difficult task. From an infancy of complete dependence and subjection to adults, the child must grow up gradually to the status of an independent adult. The question is under whose guidance, and virtual ‘ownership’ the child should be: his parents’ or the State’s? There is no third, or middle, ground in this issue. Some party must control, and no one suggests that some individual third party have authority to seize the child and rear it.”

For Rothbard the choice between these options is a “no-brainer.” “It is obvious that the natural state of affairs is for the parents to have charge of the child. The parents are the literal producers of the child, and the child is in the most intimate relationship to them that any people can be to one another. The parents have ties of family affection to the child. The parents are interested in the child as an individual and are the most likely to be interested and familiar with his requirements and personality. Finally, if one believes at all in a free society, where each one owns himself and his own products, it is obvious that his own child, one of his most precious products, also comes under his charge.” Rothbard’s point is a clear application of the basic principles of libertarianism.

If the state takes over schooling, this is a clear violation of the parents’ rights. “The only logical alternative to parental ‘ownership’ of the child is for the State to seize the infant from the parents and to rear it completely itself. To any believer in freedom this must seem a monstrous step indeed. The rights of the parents are completely violated, their own loving product seized from them to be subjected to the will of strangers.”

But there is, if anything, an even more fundamental issue at stake. Children need freedom in order to develop their powers to live their lives, but the State is inherently a violent institution that suppresses individuality. “The rights of the child are violated, for he grows up in subjection to the unloving hands of the State, with little regard for his individual personality. For each person to be ‘educated,’ to develop his faculties to the fullest, he needs freedom for this development. But the State! The State’s very being rests on violence, on compulsion. As a matter of fact, the very feature that distinguishes the State from other individuals and groups is that the State has the only (legal) power to use violence. In contrast to all other individuals and organizations, the State issues decrees which must be obeyed at the risk of suffering prison or the electric chair. The child would have to grow up under the wings of an institution resting on violence and restriction. What sort of peaceful development could take place under such auspices?”

What will the State teach? You might think that this would depend on the kind of state it is, and to some extent this is true. Schools under Trump will differ from those under brain-dead Joe Biden. But there is nevertheless an underlying pressure that leads the State to impose uniformity and to teach obedience to the government. “Furthermore, it is inevitable that the State would impose uniformity on the teaching of charges. Not only is uniformity more congenial to the bureaucratic temper and easier to enforce; this would be almost inevitable where collectivism has supplanted individualism. With collective State ownership of the children replacing individual ownership and rights, it is clear that the collective principle would be enforced in teaching as well. Above all, what would be taught is the doctrine of obedience to the State itself. For tyranny is not really congenial to the spirit of man, who requires freedom for his full development Therefore, techniques of inculcating reverence for despotism and other types of ‘thought control’ are bound to emerge. Instead of spontaneity, diversity, and independent men, there would emerge a race of passive, sheep-like followers of the State. Since they would be only incompletely developed, they would be only half-alive. This is the logical goal of the Statists in education. The issue which has been joined in the past and in the present is: shall there be a free society with parental control, or a despotism with State control? We shall see the logical development of the idea of State encroachment and control.”

You might object that Rothbard is being dogmatic. Is he trying to deduce what must happen, rather than be sensitive to the actual course of events? Of course not! Rothbard was a great historian, and his theoretical account aligns with what actually happened: “America began, for the most part, with a system of either completely private or with philanthropic schools. Then, in the nineteenth century, the concept of public education changed subtly, until everybody was urged to go to the public school, and private schools were accused of being divisive. Finally, the State imposed compulsory education on the people, either forcing children to go to public schools or else setting up arbitrary standards for private schools. Parental instruction was frowned on. Thus, the State has been warring with parents for control over their children.”

Rothbard wrote before the horrors of today’s wokery , but with his unrivalled genius, he anticipated them: “Not only has there been a trend toward increased State control, but the effects of this have been worsened by the very system of equality before the law that applies in political life. There has been the growth of a passion for equality in general. The result has been a tendency to regard every child as equal to every other child, as deserving equal treatment, and to impose complete uniformity in the classroom. Formerly, this had tended to be set at the average level of the class; but this being frustrating to the dullest (who, however, must be kept at the same level as the others, in the name of equality and democracy), the teaching tends more and more to be set at the lowest levels. Since the State began to control education, its evident tendency has been more and more to act in such a manner as to promote repression and hindrance of education, rather than the true development of the individual. Its tendency has been for compulsion, for enforced equality at the lowest level, for the watering down of the subject and even the abandonment of all formal teaching, for the inculcation of obedience to the State and to the group, rather than the development of self-independence, and for the deprecation of intellectual subjects. And finally, it is the drive of the State and its minions for power that explains the ‘modern education’ creed of ‘education of the whole child’ and making the school a ‘slice of life,’ where the individual plays, adjusts to the group, etc. The effect of this, as well as all the other measures, is to repress any tendency for the development of reasoning powers and individual independence; to try to usurp in various ways the ‘educational’ function (apart from formal instruction) of the home and friends, and to try to mold the ‘whole child’ in the desired paths. Thus, ‘modern education’ has abandoned the school functions of formal instruction in favor of molding the total personality both to enforce equality of learning at the level of the least educable, and to usurp the general educational role of home and other influences as much as possible.”

On one point, though, Rothbard underestimated the menace. He said that “since no one will accept outright State ‘communization’ of children, it is obvious that State control has to be achieved more silently and subtly.” State control under the Left has not been silent or subtle, and this has provoked  the recent backlash.

We can all enthusiastically agree with Rothbard’s message: “For anyone who is interested in the dignity of human life, in the progress and development of the individual in a free society, the choice between parental and State control over the children is clear.” Let’s do everything we can to end “public” education!

The post The Menace of ‘Public’ Education appeared first on LewRockwell.

In the spring of 2020, many churches in the United States closed down. They were told to. I am willing to forgive that behavior. In fact, I think I’m commanded to forgive that behavior.

I get it. People were scared. Maybe a week you stay closed until you come to your senses. Maybe two weeks, because they assured us it took only two weeks to slow the spread.

It took a special kind of wrong to close down the church and to keep it closed. When Easter 2020 came, I was sure every church would open again.

I was wrong.

Though I forgive those who closed, I have a very special place in my heart for those who never closed down. Pastor Tony Spell of Baton Rouge, Louisiana is one such person. Not long ago, I sent the following to Pastor Spell. Please allow me to share it with you.

====

Dear Pastor Spell,

In the spring of 2020, I was hungry for God. I knew that something was wrong when they closed down all the churches in San Francisco where I lived and where I still live today.

I was coming out of a past of atheism and knew that I needed to be in church. I was going to the wrong churches, but I knew that I was better in church on Sunday mornings than sitting at home. Many of the churches even virtue signaled with big signs outside their churches and virtue signaled in the media about how upright they were for closing down. There was a shocking level of pride in what they were doing.

Some of the San Francisco churches that closed down during the Ides of March 2020 remain closed to this day. I have yet to find a pastor in San Francisco who did not close down.

What I did in response to that — I have no question that it was at the leading of the Holy Spirit — is that I bought a hymnal online and started having my own private services on the steps of the church closest to my home. It was just me and God. It was quietly done. Someone standing ten feet from me would not have known I was having a worship service.

I knew no church that stayed open. I knew no Christian who wanted the churches to stay open. And on Resurrection Sunday, I was most sad. As far as I was concerned, if there was any day the churches needed to be open it was that one.

The churches proudly remained closed.

I called the several local pastors I knew asking them if I could just be in a corner of the sanctuary as they held their Resurrection Sunday services that would be broadcast on Zoom that day. None of them agreed. I don’t know why I was so ardent about being in the sanctuary and not at home, but I was. Something felt so wrong about it.

There were brave pastors in California who didn’t close down, but I didn’t know about them. The media gave you, Pastor Spell, such a difficult time in the lead up to Resurrection Sunday 2020.

I have no question that the stories were meant to intimidate you and to try to move the authorities into intimidating you. The stories were meant to tattle on you. But little did they know that through those attacks on you, God was encouraging me in the things of Him. He was showing me what it looked like when a Christian stood up. Every story I read about your church staying open encouraged me. I read dozens of them. There were likely hundreds of attack stories against you in the days leading up to Easter 2020.

And then Monday morning came. And I could not find a single follow-up story about you and your congregation. There was total silence, as if all those journalists had never written about you. In unison, they seemed to feel no obligation to write a follow-up about you, not even a negatively slanted followed up. Only silence. That was all I could find.

This proved to me how disingenuous the media was in covering the topic of your church preparing to stay open Resurrection Sunday 2020. Their coverage was not about notifying the public about what was taking place in the world. It really was about intimidating you, tattling on you, and trying to get local authorities to bully you into submission.

But you did not submit to that. Thank you for that.

Monday morning the media was silent. I woke up early that morning in San Francisco, eager to know if you had stayed open or been intimidated. The media was silent.

Finally, I couldn’t wait any longer and I called your church to inquire, perhaps that Monday or possibly the day after. I called your church, expecting to leave a voicemail that might get returned, but a gentleman with such a polite and kind way about him answered the phone.

I briefly introduced myself as a supportive person watching the story in the media. I asked if your church had gathered for services the day before.

The man, as polite as can be, said something simple and clear like, “We are Christians. We gather every Sunday.”

I understood. The answer was, yes. I thanked the man and went on with my day, greatly inspired.

You refused to close on Resurrection Sunday. You were the glaring example in the media. Thank you Pastor Spell. Thank you.  Thank you to you and to your church.

You were a ray of hope for me in dark, dark San Francisco. In the darkest days of 2020, you were a ray of hope for me all the way across the country in San Francisco and you could not have known that.

All you likely knew is that you were being obedient to the Lord. I want to thank you for your obedience.

Eight months later in November 2020, I found my way into the first California church I knew of that did not close down. There were others that did not close down; I just didn’t know about them. I just didn’t know. It was a gift of grace from God in my life that this former atheist, this former renegade against the Lord was brought into a church that never closed down, in November of 2020, was being brought into a church where the Bible was being preached.

Walking into that church that Sunday and on the Sundays that followed changed my life.

That place three-and-a-half hours away from my home became my church and has remained my church these past four years. I gave my life to the Lord there. I was baptized there.  I have grown so much in my walk with Christ. I’ve even found myself called out into the mission field from that church, called to a rather unorthodox mission field but a mission field nonetheless. How good the Lord has been to me.

Each Sunday if I am in California I drive the three-and-a-half hours to my church. It means a great deal that this church I attend never closed down. It means a great deal to me that you never closed down, Pastor Spell, that Life Tabernacle never closed down.

You were such a bright light for me in dark San Francisco, and I am so grateful for you and for the choices you made that spring. Thank you.

This Sunday, I believe I will finally be able to make my way to your church. I know I will not be likely to meet you in such a big congregation and I would not even want to take your attention from your parishioners if I could meet you. I am just so very grateful to be able to step foot in your church these five years later. I send this as a note just to say thank you to you Pastor Spell, to your wife, to your staff, to your deacons, and to your congregation for staying open. There has likely been much pain, and much hardship that has come from your decision. I just really want to say thank you.

I did not know how to read the Bible as I do now. I did not know how to pray as I do now. I did not know how to wait on the Lord or to seek His will l as I do now. There are many other ways I know now to encourage myself in the Lord, but in the spring of 2020, I did not know all of those things. I felt very alone. And your actions were the ray of hope I needed. The Lord used you — praise the Lord — to encourage me in Him. And I just want to say thank you to you and your congregation for your obedience.

Allan Stevo

====

What I Found

When I stepped foot in that church, I found a place that was thriving. I found a place that sought to build community and to end reliance on the poison of government handouts. I saw 50 school buses that go far and wide, dedicated to not leave a person behind. I just got a glimpse, and I knew I was seeing what the Church was meant to be.

The stories of his irresponsibility in staying open were delivered to me by reporters from New York and Los Angeles. Nasty remarks about him were inserted into the reporting of American newspapers big and small. His own words were delivered to me by tabloids like The Daily Mail and The Sun in England, known sensationalist tabloids that were somehow doing better and fairer reporting than the newspapers of record.

I saw a congregation focussed on God, the Bible, and the gift of Jesus on the Cross. Once I saw it, I understood why the example shined so brightly all the way to San Francisco, so brightly that the hateful reporting, the threats, the intimidation from government and media could not darken that light. They were just there living the life they believed they were called to live and were doing so no matter what the outside world had to say about it.

What Can Each One Of Us Learn From Their Example?

I had never met the man, or watched a sermon. I never knew a thing about him other than the hateful coverage I read in the newspapers. But from Baton Rouge, Tony Spell was a shining light in the darkest days of the lockdowns. He could not have known the impact he was having on me. And I suspect I am not the only one who was encouraged in the Lord by Spell’s example. While all the men of God I knew went to run and hide, there was Tony Spell.

And in his example there is a principle to teach, whether you be Christian or not. The principle is this: Do your best in every moment and don’t worry about what anyone else is saying about you.

We can do no other. Life is unpredictable. You never know who you are touching and to what degree. You do not need to. Just do the best and hold yourself to a high standard.

How do you know that standard? If you ask me, it is in lots of prayer, lots of time in the Bible, a heart focused on hearing from God, and doing the work He calls you to do. I believe that is what Spell did as the weight of society came down upon him and demanded he bow the knee.

He did not bow.

So you do your best, you operate uprightly, you speak the truth diligently, you don’t give quarter to lies.

Will you be imperfect at that? Yes. We are only human. But doing that still remains the goal.

You do your best no matter what anyone else says.

Thank you to Tony Spell. Thank you to all the lions who stood firm in 2020.

The post Five Years Ago This Easter, What Were You Doing? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Imagine being famous for saying something you never said seven centuries after your death.  What has come to be known as Occam’s razor — “entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity” — has been attributed to English philosopher and theologian William of Occam (1287-1347), though he never used those exact words in his writing.  According to conceptually.org,

Occam’s razor (also known as the ‘law of parsimony’) is a philosophical tool for ‘shaving off’ unlikely explanations. Essentially, when faced with competing explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest is likely the correct one.

Occam’s principle has been reformulated many times before and after Occam himself presented it, beginning with Aristotle (“Nature operates in the shortest way possible”), but the value of parsimonious explanations in some form has been preserved up to the present as an invaluable tool of explanation.  Einstein is credited with expressing it as “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”  Da Vinci recommended mimicking Nature in whose works “nothing is wanting, and nothing is superfluous.”  And since WW II, in keeping with the principle itself, KISS (“Keep it simple, stupid”) has become the modern world’s acronym for it.

The theory describes a desirable goal in any undertaking — everything necessary, nothing superfluous.  With this in mind, how should we evaluate the Federal Reserve System?  Is it a streamlined agency purporting to provide the American economy with all its monetary needs?  Did it replace a flawed system that was causing havoc?  Was it an improvement over anything the economy has ever had?  Since an economy includes people who work and trade, was there a public outcry for monetary reform?

To answer these questions we need to look at the Fed’s goals, and for those we find on its slick website a straightforward statement: The Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, provides the nation with a safe, flexible, and stable monetary and financial system.  If we dig a little we find under “The Fed Explained” the 11th edition of its purposes and functions, though it’s no longer called that.  Also, for those who are upset over the Fed’s private character, note that the top level domain is .gov, not .org, .com, or .net.

Going further, under the section labeled “Who We Are” we learn that

The Federal Reserve System performs five key functions that serve all Americans and promote the health and stability of the U.S. economy and financial system.

The first two functions are (1) conducting the nation’s monetary policy, and (2) promoting financial system stability.  By scrolling a little we learn that a committee of 12 voting members from around the System  “serve on the Federal Open Market Committee and help set crucial U.S. monetary policy.”  Presumably they keep foremost in mind the ideals of a safe, flexible, and stable monetary and financial system.

Although “safe” can be interpreted various ways, it might refer to the FDIC’s role in the economy in the event of a bank failure.  Its website tells us “Your deposits are automatically insured to at least $250,000 at each FDIC-insured bank.”  The government created the FDIC in 1934, 20 years after the Fed became active.  How safe were depositors’ money before 1934?

The Fed was the brainchild of the big Wall Street banks, particularly J. P. Morgan & Co., who wanted a lender of last resort and a more elastic currency.  Neither of these goals could be achieved without the power of the federal government, which is why the Fed is not a purely market arrangement but a coercive cartel established by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  To ensure the Fed controlled the elasticity of the money supply, which mostly meant inflating it, the legislation granted the Fed a monopoly of the note issue.  Though Fed notes were initially designated as lawful money, they were not awarded legal tender status until 1933, following FDR’s criminalization of gold ownership.

Gold had always been money, with paper currency understood as receipts for money, not money in itself.  From the depositors’ perspective any gold left at the bank was his and could be acquired in full any time the bank was open.  Yet according to the government, adherence to gold redemption was the primary reason for the economic chaos in 1933 because people were “hoarding” it — they were pulling it out of banks and securing it somewhere else.

In the world of central banking the gold standard was, as Keynes had called it in 1924, a barbarous relic.  In his A Tract on Monetary Reform, he writes:

If we restore the gold standard, are we to return also to the pre-war conceptions of bank-rate, allowing the tides of gold to play what tricks they like with the internal price-level, and abandoning the attempt to moderate the disastrous influence of the credit-cycle on the stability of prices and employment?

It wasn’t the “tides of gold” that caused the problems, it was bank deception called fractional reserve banking. You think your money’s still in the bank?  Not if enough of you try to redeem it at once.  When that happens we have the unique experience of bank runs and bankers go nuts.

Ironically, it was Keynes who had shown only a few years earlier a highly perceptive understanding of banking fraud in the Economic Consequences of the Peace, Chapter Six:

By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.

The racket he describes is infinitely easier with fiat money in the hands of a central bank like the Fed. Keynes, incidentally, was highly leveraged in the stock market when he changed his mind about “the process of inflation.”

Conclusion

Should we conclude then that the Fed is far from the parsimonious answer to credit cycles and bank panics?  Does it violate Occam’s razor?  We didn’t need an FDIC before the Fed, why does it require one now?  Why does the Fed have the privilege of legal counterfeiting while the rest of us don’t?  Why is gold anathema to central banks in practice while they hoard it on the sly?

Finally, does the Fed reign over a monetary system that is safe, flexible, and stable?  Not if you believe its stated objectives.  If the Fed isn’t the answer, then what is?

With government granting privileges to banks and for other reasons, we have never had honest money or honest banking.  We need both and can get both if we spread the word and get government out of the way.  As I’ve quoted often because it’s both true and incisive,

“If a domestic money consists of a commodity, a pure gold standard or cowrie bead standard, the principles of monetary policy are very simple. There aren’t any. The commodity money takes care of itself.” — Milton Friedman, “Monetary Policy: Theory and Practice“

The post Does the Fed Shave With Occam’s Razor? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Tried and true cures for what ails were replaced by some clever “scientific” sleight of hand over a century ago.  Now it’s back, baby, for those who can cut through the mountains of pharma-ganda and heal themselves with forbidden know-how.  Humans who once lived in harmony with nature were tricked into worrying over life threatening disease to promote a load of magic-beans and phony pills by greedy shamans,…for largely preventable conditions and natural ancient remedies.  Their minds were “salted” with a few modern successes in trauma and acute medicine while the drug trade mined their gold.

Symptoms Are Not DISEASES!

***Realize that disease is a result of 1. defective nutrition, 2. toxins/metals/drugs/infections, 3.sedentary lifestyle habits,… and most importantly 4. mental/emotional states. (period)

***All life runs on electron energy!

***Metabolic ATP output + absorbed/ingested antioxidant electrons – oxidative/inflammatory electron deficit = systemic voltage .

***Inflammation = Oxidative Stress (low voltage) = Disease

Various symptoms arise on the basis of root causes resulting from imbalances in this simple equation.

All it takes is knowing which oxidative factors like empty foods, vegetable oils, metals, pesticides, plastics, lack of sunshine exercise and unhappiness gobble life energy/chi/voltage.

Media networks are all about invoking death/disease consciousness to maintain egoic anxiety in order to maintain psychological power over the masses, reinforce official narratives, sell drugs, vaccines and extraneous shit. See this. 

Pharma-ganda strikes gold every time they label symptoms as diseases and come up with a profitable drug to treat a downstream effect of an imbalance in the above equation.

Tobacco, Cannabis and Mushrooms.  For at least the last 12,000 years of the most “recent” epoch of human life, these substances have been used both ceremonially and medicinally. Each has scientifically shown therapeutic value, yet each has been demonized or made “illegal” by government regulation in response to Medical authority.

Tobacco/nicotine is more frowned upon today than leprosy, being blamed for every disease in the book.  Nicotine itself is of great health value and antidote to fatigue, but commercial cigarettes are contaminated with pesticides and additives while the tobacco plant itself grabs heavy metals. Since nicotine blocks ACE-2 receptors, covid spike proteins are toast; why smokers fared better from the virus and nicotine is recommended for long covid. Dementia and other neurological-dysfunctions also receive benefits.

Christ on a cracker; people freak at a whiff of second hand smoke yet breathe deep the gathering gloom of polluted air responsible for millions of deaths a year. Smokers are shamed as disease takes the rap for a multitude of chemicals released by protected industries!

Cannabis/marijuana is another neuro-healer in its many forms from gummies and smoking to potent RSO resin taken orally or transdermally which destroys cancers and a long list of other terminal diseases. Search “Rick Simpson’s Oil.”

Psylocibin mushrooms and mescaline derived from peyote cactus, like LSD show clinical success in cases of depression and PTSD owing to the dissociative properties of a “trip” and users rising above egoic fears. See this.  Microdosing has become popular among bummed-out housewives and vets suffering PTSD.

Vitamin C, MSM/DMSO and methylene blue have been around for many decades, yet their usages have been censored and eclipsed in the public mind in favor of highly profitable drugs. These help restore cell function by cancelling free-radicals, increasing oxygen penetration, circulation, immune strength and DNA expression via increasing the metabolic output of essential ATP electrons; the energy required for all natural body functions. Vitamin C alone is protective of mitochondria and when combined with collagen maintains connective tissues which conduct e- charge/chi throughout the body.  Pharmaceuticals may provide temporary symptomatic relief, but fail to address root causes hidden in deficient cell voltage. Drugs simply disable “dashboard lights” through downstream chemical interventions.

H2O2 hydrogen peroxide, MSM sodium chlorite, Vitamin C megadose or IV, UV blood irradiation and O3 ozone are being used in some nifty ways.  These are powerful oxidizers that destroy pathogens, cancers and cell debris.  Each has a unique method of DIY application, but IV infusions are limited to any number of holistic clinics.

N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC) stimulates glutathione production, a major internal sulfur based antioxidant which protects cell structures from free radical damage and supercharges macrophage performance to rid the system of “garbage” collected by neutrophils. Macrophages must have electron voltage to produce H2O2 to destroy the pathogens collected by neutrophils,…and when macrophage “incinerators are underpowered, neutrophils back-up, signal killer T-cells to stand down blocking immune function leading to pneumonias and sepsis. Interestingly, large infusions of Vitamin C electrons are highly effective against deadly sepsis through the “Marik Protocol.”  Nebulized NAC or oral capsules also thin mucus, prevent dry cough and do wonders for sinus/lung health.

O2 Oxygen! Ya can’t live without it! Oxygen therapies are not new, but their widespread use for many conditions does not fit the profit driven healthcare system or currently have FDA approval. What better way to quickly boost metabolism and cell voltage! See this.

Proteolytic enzymes.  Pineapple and papaya (bromelain/papain) are traditional food sources, add soy based nattokinase and a powerful earthworm extract lumbrokinase and we have four tools to dissolve fibrin films, plaques and scar tissues.  Infections hide from immune cells protected by these fibrin films formed as a result of inflammatory responses to insult and a tumor’s oxygen-repulsive acid mantle created by cancer’s poor electron output.

After a few months of using lumbrokinase, the skin on my arms and legs erupted expelling a lifetime of cuts, scrapes, plant poisons and stings. This caused months of intense itching as these scars came to the surface. A hairdryer to the rescue!  This earthworm “juice” has been used in Asia to reduce women’s fibroids and I can only assume other plaques and fibrins were erased?

Foods;  Before paleo was a thing, I was a hunter gatherer fisherman farmer.  Seafoods from clean waters, wild animals and plant foods grown on mineral rich live soils, raw milks,… and the sunshine and physical exertion of that lifestyle dominated my early years.  Compare that to modern fast foods and factory monkey-chow thanks to chemical agriculture and the “wonders” of food technology.  Through the hypnotic training of simian TV, the “monkey-see monkey-do” principle kicked in big time. Paid peer pressure easily had ’em all eating corn flakes and twinkies!

Real foods have become scarce commodities due to chemical agriculture/monocropping/soil destruction and industrial processing.  Wild and organic items must be sought-out, are pricey and largely unavailable on urban food deserts.  Common processed foods in America are stripped of electron energy and so deficient in vitamins and minerals, contain additives, metals and pesticides, and are the reason savvy individuals learn to supplement what is missing in their diets.  Vitamins C&D, B vitamins, and magnesium are widespread deficiencies.  Heavy metals, Roundup/glyphosate, atrazine, fluorine compounds, etc., etc. are cumulative toxins, generate free-radicals, steal electron energy and must be detoxed before health can resume.  See this.

Since we are bombarded by media marketing and industrial propaganda most folks have little cognitive association with science and reality!

I can only provide “Interstate Exits” and a general roadmap to truth and your personal awareness.  You must take each “Exit” to explore these subjects, personal applications, skip “common beliefs” and Medical system lies to arrive alive.  Then one can take appropriate actions and learn effective usages of simple cheap safe substances.  One can take therapeutic items orally, sublingually, topically/transdermally, via nebulizer or IV in alternative holistic clinics. Be sensitive to bodily signals, only you know how you feel so play it by ear until success happens; you struck the root and symptoms fall away.

When blindsided by a serious illness, most folks, through a false sense of urgency, go with standard system treatments without being exposed to safer less expensive alternatives.  RFK Jr. is all over informed consent throughout the medical establishment.  One is more likely to be truthfully informed by a used car salesman than the average hospital or MD.

Just look at ACAM.org physician finder or search holistic practitioners and view the many protocols offered at alternative clinics.  You will see a spectrum of IV infusions (Vitamin C/NAC/glutathione/RALA), hyperbaric oxygen sessions, UV blood irradiation, acupuncture, Chiropractic and various other modalities.

You may want to print-out this post and begin to research these preventatives and remedies.  If illness strikes, you can resource the many “escape routes”.

Peruse these respected sources;

Orthomolecular.org

Riordan Clinic

Dr. Thomas Levy

A Midwestern Doctor

Dr. Mercola

Weston A. Price Foundation

Earthclinic.org

How-to entries and youtubes on each of these therapeutics

The post What Was Old Is New Again; In a Nutshell appeared first on LewRockwell.

Electronics, Volume 38, Number 8, April 19, 1965

The future of integrated electronics is the future of electronics itself. The advantages of integration will bring about a proliferation of electronics, pushing this science into many new areas.

Integrated circuits will lead to such wonders as home computers — or at least terminals connected to a central computer — automatic controls for automobiles, and personal portable communications equipment. The electronic wristwatch needs only a display to be feasible today.

But the biggest potential lies in the production of large systems. In telephone communications, integrated circuits in digital filters will separate channels on multiplex equipment. Integrated circuits will also switch telephone circuits and perform data processing.

Computers will be more powerful, and will be organized in completely different ways. For example, memories built of integrated electronics may be distributed throughout the machine instead of being concentrated in a central unit. In addition, the improved reliability made possible by integrated circuits will allow the construction of larger processing units. Machines similar to those in existence today will be built at lower costs and with faster turn-around.

Present and future

By integrated electronics, I mean all the various technologies which are referred to as microelectronics today as well as any additional ones that result in electronics functions supplied to the user as irreducible units. These technologies were first investigated in the late 1950’s. The object was to miniaturize electronics equipment to include increasingly complex electronic functions in limited space with minimum weight. Several approaches evolved, including microassembly techniques for individual components, thinfilm structures and semiconductor integrated circuits.

Each approach evolved rapidly and converged so that each borrowed techniques from another. Many researchers believe the way of the future to be a combination of the various approaches.

The advocates of semiconductor integrated circuitry are already using the improved characteristics of thin-film resistors by applying such films directly to an active semiconductor substrate. Those advocating a technology based upon films are developing sophisticated techniques for the attachment of active semiconductor devices to the passive film arrays.

Both approaches have worked well and are being used in equipment today.

The establishment

Integrated electronics is established today. Its techniques are almost mandatory for new military systems, since the reliability, size and weight required by some of them is achievable only with integration. Such programs as Apollo, for manned moon flight, have demonstrated the reliability of integrated electronics by showing that complete circuit functions are as free from failure as the best individual transistors.

Most companies in the commercial computer field have machines in design or in early production employing integrated electronics. These machines cost less and perform better than those which use “conventional” electronics.

Instruments of various sorts, especially the rapidly increasing numbers employing digital techniques, are starting to use integration because it cuts costs of both manufacture and design.

The use of linear integrated circuitry is still restricted primarily to the military. Such integrated functions are expensive and not available in the variety required to satisfy a major fraction of linear electronics. But the first applications are beginning to appear in commercial electronics, particularly in equipment which needs low-frequency amplifiers of small size.

Reliability counts

In almost every case, integrated electronics has demonstrated high reliability. Even at the present level of production — low compared to that of discrete components — it offers reduced systems cost, and in many systems improved performance has been realized.

Integrated electronics will make electronic techniques more generally available throughout all of society, performing many functions that presently are done inadequately by other techniques or not done at all. The principal advantages will be lower costs and greatly simplified design — payoffs from a ready supply of low-cost functional packages.

For most applications, semiconductor integrated circuits will predominate. Semiconductor devices are the only reasonable candidates presently in existence for the active elements of integrated circuits. Passive semiconductor elements look attractive too, because of their potential for low cost and high reliability, but they can be used only if precision is not a prime requisite.

Silicon is likely to remain the basic material, although others will be of use in specific applications. For example, gallium arsenide will be important in integrated microwave functions. But silicon will predominate at lower frequencies because of the technology which has already evolved around it and its oxide, and because it is an abundant and relatively inexpensive starting material.

Costs and curves

Reduced cost is one of the big attractions of integrated electronics, and the cost advantage continues to increase as the technology evolves toward the production of larger and larger circuit functions on a single semiconductor substrate. For simple circuits, the cost per component is nearly inversely proportional to the number of components, the result of the equivalent piece of semiconductor in the equivalent package containing more components. But as components are added, decreased yields more than compensate for the increased complexity, tending to raise the cost per component. Thus there is a minimum cost at any given time in the evolution of the technology. At present, it is reached when 50 components are used per circuit. But the minimum is rising rapidly while the entire cost curve is falling (see graph below). If we look ahead five years, a plot of costs suggests that the minimum cost per component might be expected in circuits with about 1,000 components per circuit (providing such circuit functions can be produced in moderate quantities.) In 1970, the manufacturing cost per component can be expected to be only a tenth of the present cost.

The complexity for minimum component costs has increased at a rate of roughly a factor of two per year (see graph on next page). Certainly over the short term this rate can be expected to continue, if not to increase. Over the longer term, the rate of increase is a bit more uncertain, although there is no reason to believe it will not remain nearly constant for at least 10 years. That means by 1975, the number of components per integrated circuit for minimum cost will be 65,000.

I believe that such a large circuit can be built on a single wafer.

Two-mil squares

With the dimensional tolerances already being employed in integrated circuits, isolated high-performance transistors can be built on centers two thousandths of an inch apart. Such a two-mil square can also contain several kilohms of resistance or a few diodes. This allows at least 500 components per linear inch or a quarter million per square inch. Thus, 65,000 components need occupy only about one-fourth a square inch.

On the silicon wafer currently used, usually an inch or more in diameter, there is ample room for such a structure if the components can be closely packed with no space wasted for interconnection patterns. This is realistic, since efforts to achieve a level of complexity above the presently available integrated circuits are already underway using multilayer metalization patterns separated by dielectric films. Such a density of components can be achieved by present optical techniques and does not require the more exotic techniques, such as electron beam operations, which are being studied to make even smaller structures.

Increasing the yield

There is no fundamental obstacle to achieving device yields of 100%. At present, packaging costs so far exceed the cost of the semiconductor structure itself that there is no incentive to improve yields, but they can be raised as high as is economically justified. No barrier exists comparable to the thermodynamic equilibrium considerations that often limit yields in chemical reactions; it is not even necessary to do any fundamental research or to replace present processes. Only the engineering effort is needed.

In the early days of integrated circuitry, when yields were extremely low, there was such incentive. Today ordinary integrated circuits are made with yields comparable with those obtained for individual semiconductor devices. The same pattern will make larger arrays economical, if other considerations make such arrays desirable.

Heat problem

Will it be possible to remove the heat generated by tens of thousands of components in a single silicon chip?

If we could shrink the volume of a standard high-speed digital computer to that required for the components themselves, we would expect it to glow brightly with present power dissipation. But it won’t happen with integrated circuits. Since integrated electronic structures are two-dimensional, they have a surface available for cooling close to each center of heat generation. In addition, power is needed primarily to drive the various lines and capacitances associated with the system. As long as a function is confined to a small area on a wafer, the amount of capacitance which must be driven is distinctly limited. In fact, shrinking dimensions on an integrated structure makes it possible to operate the structure at higher speed for the same power per unit area.

Day of reckoning

Clearly, we will be able to build such componentcrammed equipment. Next, we ask under what circumstances we should do it. The total cost of making a particular system function must be minimized. To do so, we could amortize the engineering over several identical items, or evolve flexible techniques for the engineering of large functions so that no disproportionate expense need be borne by a particular array. Perhaps newly devised design automation procedures could translate from logic diagram to technological realization without any special engineering.

It may prove to be more economical to build large systems out of smaller functions, which are separately packaged and interconnected. The availability of large functions, combined with functional design and construction, should allow the manufacturer of large systems to design and construct a considerable variety of equipment both rapidly and economically.

Linear circuitry

Integration will not change linear systems as radically as digital systems. Still, a considerable degree of integration will be achieved with linear circuits. The lack of large-value capacitors and inductors is the greatest fundamental limitations to integrated electronics in the linear area.

By their very nature, such elements require the storage of energy in a volume. For high Q it is necessary that the volume be large. The incompatibility of large volume and integrated electronics is obvious from the terms themselves. Certain resonance phenomena, such as those in piezoelectric crystals, can be expected to have some applications for tuning functions, but inductors and capacitors will be with us for some time.

The integrated r-f amplifier of the future might well consist of integrated stages of gain, giving high performance at minimum cost, interspersed with relatively large tuning elements.

Other linear functions will be changed considerably. The matching and tracking of similar components in integrated structures will allow the design of differential amplifiers of greatly improved performance. The use of thermal feedback effects to stabilize integrated structures to a small fraction of a degree will allow the construction of oscillators with crystal stability.

Even in the microwave area, structures included in the definition of integrated electronics will become increasingly important. The ability to make and assemble components small compared with the wavelengths involved will allow the use of lumped parameter design, at least at the lower frequencies. It is difficult to predict at the present time just how extensive the invasion of the microwave area by integrated electronics will be. The successful realization of such items as phased-array antennas, for example, using a multiplicity of integrated microwave power sources, could completely revolutionize radar.

Reprinted  from Olivier.Hammam.com.

The post Cramming More Components Onto Integrated Circuits appeared first on LewRockwell.

Caesar, like the poor, is always with us. So is Judas. And so are the disciples of Christ. The Tyrant, the Traitor, and the Martyr. These three types of men form the very threads from which the tapestry of history is woven.

Caesar and his followers come in many philosophical shapes and many ideological guises, but they are always animated by the same spirit of secularism, the same spirit of worldliness. They idolize the spirit of the age, the zeitgeist, and they are always at war with the Holy Spirit, the Heiliger Geist. In the 19th century, the followers of Caesar were formed by the fashionable philosophies of Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche. In the 20th century, these philosophies morphed into the ideological monsters of Marxism and Nazism, the former inciting communist revolutions in many parts of the world and the latter possessing the German soul with diabolical pride. The Nazis, following the example of the Italian Fascists, adopted the Roman salute, the open-hand raised aloft as a sign of loyalty to Adolf Hitler, the New Caesar, and to the Thousand Year Reich, the New Empire, that Hitler had promised and proclaimed.

In response to the rise of the new secularist monsters, Pope Pius XI condemned both the Nazis and the communists. In two encyclicals, issued a week apart in 1937, he condemned the Nazi government in Germany for its persecution of Catholics, its racism and anti-Semitism, and for its tribal neo-paganism. In the encyclical against communism, he attacked the evils of Marxism in general and Soviet communism in Russia in particular. “Society is for man and not vice versa,” he insisted, condemning communism for reversing this right order.

Pope Pius XII, who succeeded Pius XI, ascended to the papal throne as the world descended into war. His first encyclical, Summi Pontificatus, issued shortly after the war had begun, condemned the Nazi and Soviet invasion of Poland, which had caused Britain to enter the war in Poland’s defense, as well as condemning anti-Semitism and totalitarianism. The courage of the pope, considering that he was himself living in the midst of Mussolini’s Fascist Italy, is exemplary.

Such courage was present to an even greater degree in the midst of Hitler’s Germany. We think immediately of those Catholic martyrs who were executed by the Nazis and subsequently canonized by the Church, St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross (Edith Stein) and St. Maximilian Kolbe. Their praises are rightly sung and prayers are rightly said for their powerful intercession. Far fewer will think of a lesser-known martyr, Blessed Otto Neururer, who was beatified by St. John Paul II in 1996.

Otto Neururer was born in the Austrian Tyrol on the Feast of the Annunciation (March 25) in 1881. He was the twelfth and youngest child of devoutly Catholic parents. At the age of 21, following the call to the priesthood, he entered the seminary and was subsequently ordained in 1907. A little over thirty years later, in March 1938, the Nazis annexed Austria, subsuming it within the Third Reich.

In the same year, Fr. Neururer advised a young woman not to marry a divorced man whom he knew to be a serial adulterer and congenital liar. After the woman informed the man of her conversation with Fr. Neururer, the man denounced the priest to the local Nazi authorities. A week before Christmas in 1938, Fr. Neururer was arrested and charged with “slander to the detriment of German marriage.”

Three months later, he was sent to Dachau, the first of the concentration camps established by the Nazis, where he was imprisoned with other priests in what was known to camp authorities as the “priests’ barracks.” After six months in one concentration camp, he was transferred to another, Buchenwald, at which the infamous “Hangman of Buchenwald,” Martin Sommer, routinely tortured prisoners.

The “crime” for which Fr. Neururer would ultimately be sentenced to death was the baptizing of a fellow prisoner. He was ordered to be taken to the punishment block where he was effectively tortured to death. He was stripped naked and then hanged upside down. It would take him 34 hours to die. A fellow prisoner, Alfred Berchtold, who witnessed Neururer’s final torture, reported that he never complained, mumbling prayers until he lost consciousness.

Blessed Otto Neururer died and earned his martyr’s reward on May 30, 1940. He was 59 years old. He would be the first priest to be martyred by the Nazis but by no means the last. Over the next five years, more than 2,600 Catholic priests would be killed on the orders of those who owed their allegiance to the new Caesar. Unlike St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, St. Maximilian Kolbe, and Blessed Otto Neururer, they have not been officially recognized by the Church.

These true soldiers of Christ are unsung heroes, to be sure. If they are in Heaven, we can be assured of their prayers. If they are not in Heaven, they can be assured of the prayers of Blessed Otto Neururer, the protomartyr of the Nazi Persecution. May he pray for them. May we pray for them. And may he pray for us.

This originally appeared on Crisis Magazine.

The post Nazi Stormtroopers Versus the Soldiers of Christ appeared first on LewRockwell.

When did Jesus say it was acceptable to starve the poor, slaughter women and children while turning a blind eye to the suffering of the weak? The answer, of course, is never. Yet for years, a vocal strain of American Christian Zionist leaders have supported policies that do precisely that—enabling the starvation and slaughter of Palestinians while underwriting broader wars that have decimated ancient Christian communities across the Middle East. How did we arrive at a place where those who claim to follow the Prince of Peace justify such unchristian horrors?

The Biblical call for compassion is clear: Leviticus 23:22 commands, “When you harvest the crops of your land, do not harvest the grain along the edges of your fields, and do not pick up what the harvesters drop. Leave it for the poor and the foreigners living among you.” This is a divine directive to care for the vulnerable, not an optional gesture. James, the brother of Jesus, is yet more emphatic: “Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you” (James 1:27). What kind of religious leaders cheer the bombing of Gaza’s widows and orphans, left destitute by policies supported by American and Israeli leaders? Decades of war propaganda have numbed many Americans to the atrocities committed in their name. Yet a growing awareness is stirring both here and abroad.

American Christian Zionist leaders often frame their support for Israel as a divine mandate, dismissing Palestinian suffering as collateral damage in a prophetic plan. Pastor Robert Jeffress declares, “The Bible says this land belongs to the Jewish people — period… God has pronounced judgment after judgment in the Old Testament to those who would ‘divide the land,’ and hand it over to non-Jews.” Likewise, Pastor John Hagee insists, “You’re either for the Jewish people or you’re not.” But where in the Gospels do we find Jesus exalting land rights or ethnic loyalty over human lives? Why did Jesus tell his fellow Jews to be like the Good Samaritan if not to call all people out of their tribalism? The only time He spoke of snakes was to call the Pharisees a “brood of vipers” (Matthew 23:33), condemning their ethnonationalism that blinded them to His message of nonviolence and forgiveness of enemies. He urged, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matthew 9:13), a rebuke to those who prized vengeance and power over compassion. Did He not say, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and instruct us to “turn the other cheek”? How do religious leaders who celebrate military might over mercy square with the Messiah who dined with sinners and healed the outcast?

The fruits of this ideology are death and destruction. For decades, some American Christian Zionist leaders have backed Israel’s destructive actions, often at the expense of the very people Jesus called us to protect. They support the decades-long blockade of Gaza, where malnutrition haunts the population, and the wider wars in Iraq and Syria, which have all but erased Christian communities dating back millennia. In Syria, America’s decade-long support for “moderate insurgents”—coupled with the theft of Syrian oil, much of it shipped to Israel—helped topple the government. Now, Al Qaeda affiliates hold sway in parts of that land. Who benefited? Not the Syrian Christians and other religious minorities who are being killed, displaced, and fleeing for their lives.

And then there’s the inconvenient truth about Hamas. For years, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facilitated funding to Hamas through channels like Qatar, a policy aimed at keeping Palestinians divided and weakening the Palestinian Authority. The State of Israel, with American Christian Zionist leaders’ applause and U.S. support, has trained, equipped, and empowered Hamas to serve its own strategic ends. Decades of this cynical game have propped up a terrorist group that Israel and its allies now use as a pretext to justify slaughtering Gazan children by the thousands. How can Christians reconcile killing innocents for the actions of a monster they helped enable? Worse still, many believe Netanyahu’s government may have had foreknowledge of Hamas’s October 7 attack plan yet allowed it to proceed, amplifying the tragedy to justify further escalation of the abuse of Gazans.

God made a covenant with Abraham, promising his descendants a legacy (Genesis 12:2–3). But the Apostle Paul clarifies this promise in Galatians 3:16: the covenant finds its fulfillment in Jesus. Many well-meaning Christians, however, were misled into believing otherwise by the questionable biblical interpretations of Cyrus Scofield. In certain circles, his 1917 edition of the Scofield Reference Bible was very influential.

What would Jesus do if asked to condone the terrorist actions involved in Israel’s founding? The 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel by the Irgun, killing 91 people under the guise of a “liberation” struggle, or the 1948 Deir Yassin massacre, where Zionist militias slaughtered over 100 Palestinian villagers to terrorize others into flight—would He bless such bloodshed? And what of the Nakba, the catastrophic expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes that same year, leaving them refugees in their own land? Israel’s first prime minister David Ben-Gurion himself acknowledged in 1918, “We have no reason to assume that the inhabitants of the country who remained after the destruction of the Second Temple were uprooted. On the contrary, the Jewish farmer, like his neighbors, clung to the soil and continued to live in the land, eventually adopting Christianity and later Islam.” If even Israel’s founding father recognized the deep roots of Palestine’s people, how can Christians justify their dispossession? Jesus, who wept over Jerusalem and called for mercy, would surely mourn the dispossessed, not celebrate their displacement.

Read the Whole Article

The post What Would Jesus Do? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Now, a new low in degeneration has been reached. The EU is banning homage to those who defeated Nazism.

The European Union is warning European leaders not to attend the 80th anniversary of Victory Day in Moscow on May 9.

Ostensibly, the rationale for such a ban is that Russia is allegedly waging a war against Ukraine and threatening the rest of Europe, according to the EU. That’s one way of seeing it.

Another way of seeing the matter is that the conflict in Ukraine is a proxy war sponsored by the EU and NATO to defeat Russia, eight decades after Nazi Germany failed to do it. The Euro elites who have come to dominate policymaking share the same fascist mentality. No wonder, then, that they are against attending the 80th anniversary event in Moscow next month. They need to sully that event by way of covering up their despicable politics.

The event marking the defeat of Nazi Germany and fascism in Europe is a massively important historical date for the entire world. Eighty years ago, on May 9, 1945, the Soviet Red Army crushed the Nazi regime in Berlin thereby ending the most horrific war in human history.

Up to 27 million Soviet citizens – perhaps more – gave their lives in the epic struggle to defeat Nazi Germany and its fascist European allies, including Vichy France, Italy, Hungary, Finland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Russia holds the honor of liberating Europe from the evil of fascism. By comparison, the other anti-fascist allies of the United States and Britain lost less than 5 per cent of the casualties that the Soviet citizens endured.

It is fitting that many international leaders are attending the Victory Day parade in Moscow this year. They include China’s Xi Jinping and India’s Narendra Modi.

Many others, however, will not be in Moscow, which is lamentable. The American President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer should be present to pay respects to the soldiers and civilians who sacrificed their lives. Deplorably, the toxic politics that have poisoned relations between Western states and Russia have rendered such participation impossible.

What is all the more appalling, however, is the explicit ban on European leaders attending the celebrations in Moscow.

This week, Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s Commissioner for Foreign Affairs, issued a warning that any politicians who went to Moscow would face severe consequences. Kallas, who was formerly the prime minister of the tiny Baltic state of Estonia, was appointed last year as the EU’s most senior official on foreign policy.

One of those defying orders is Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico. He rebuked Kallas for daring to tell him, as the leader of a sovereign nation, where and where not to go. He added: “I will go to Moscow to pay respects to thousands of Red Army soldiers who died liberating Slovakia.”

Fico was elected on a platform calling for friendly relations with Russia and an end to the NATO proxy war in Ukraine. He has consistently opposed sending more military aid to the Kiev regime. Last year, Fico survived an assassination attempt in which he was shot by a gunman motivated by pro-Ukraine politics.

Of particular note, the European Union’s sanctions on politicians attending the Victory Day commemoration in Moscow are targeting candidate states joining the 27-member bloc. Kallas threatened that their candidacy could be cancelled. They include the Balkan nations of Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, as well as Moldova and Georgia.

Nevertheless, Serbian President Aleksander Vučić stated that he would be going to Moscow despite intense pressure from Brussels. “We are proud of our struggle against fascism, and that was the key reason why I accepted the invitation,” said Vučić. He spoke, however, of the sinister leverage on his government.

“It seems to me that the sky is about to fall on my head due to the pressure surrounding the trip to Moscow,” said the Serbian president, who added that his country was being destabilized by outside agitators.

The unseemly controversy over the Victory Day parade in Moscow serves to highlight the growing malevolent tendencies of the EU.

Increasingly, the bloc’s centralization of political power is becoming more authoritarian and hostile towards Russia. Any dissent among the EU members questioning the bloc’s support for the proxy war in Ukraine is ruthlessly suppressed with threats of political and economic sanctions.

The EU leadership, under Russophobic autocrats like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, is implicated in suppressing elections in Romania, Moldova and Georgia to prevent parties that are calling for an end to the war in Ukraine and better relations with Russia.

The recent dubious prosecution in France of nationalist politician Marine Le Pen, who has been critical of NATO’s proxy war, is another baleful example of the EU moving to crush dissent.

It is startling how much the EU has come to operate like a fascist bloc. Policy decisions about funding a NeoNazi regime in Ukraine to fight a proxy war against Russia are being made by Russophobic elites with no democratic accountability.

Ironically, the European Union, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012, has transformed into a militaristic axis in which the civilian economy is being subordinated to an inordinate drive for war, allegedly to confront Russian aggression.

For several years, the EU has been drifting towards this nefarious manifestation. The bloc is run by people like Von der Leyen whose German politician father had Nazi affiliations. Baltic States that are erecting monuments to Nazi collaborators are now over-represented in the policymaking offices of the EU.

It is appropriate – albeit abhorrent – that the bloc is today allied with a NeoNazi regime in Kiev that honors Ukrainian fascists like Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych and many others who collaborated with the Third Reich in their extermination of millions eight decades ago.

A shameful milestone was the passing of a resolution by the European Parliament in 2019 equating the Soviet Union with Nazi Germany in allegedly starting World War Two. Russia condemned that political revisionism.

Now, a new low in degeneration has been reached. The EU is banning homage to those who defeated Nazism.

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

The post European Union Bans Commemorating the Defeat of Nazi Germany appeared first on LewRockwell.

Many people, including me, are still not sure what Trump’s revolution – in trade, international relations and in his fight against the U.S government at large – is all about.

Trump, it seems, sees that the current path the U.S. is on, with ever increasing deficits and debt, is unsustainable. He and his people argue that the dollar as a reserve currency is doing more harm than good for the country. They point to the decrease in manufacturing as the main symptom of a larger disease.

They believe it is necessary to destroy the old system before a new, more glorious one, can arrive. They know that the process will be painful for many but hope for a better outcome on a new trajectory. (There is also a motive of personal profit.)

Alastair Crooke is alluding to all that when he writes (also here):

The Trump ‘shock’ – his ‘de-centring’ of America from serving as pivot to the post-war ‘order’ via the dollar – has triggered a deep cleavage between those who gained huge benefit from the status quo, on the one hand; and on the other, the MAGA faction who have come to regard the status quo as inimical – even an existential threat – to U.S. interests.
…
Vice-President Vance now likens the Reserve Currency to a “parasite” that has eaten away the substance of its ‘host’ – the U.S. economy – by forcing an overvalued dollar.

Just to be clear, President Trump believed there was no choice: Either he could upend the existing paradigm, at the cost of considerable pain for many of those dependent on the financialised system, or he could allow events to wend their way towards an inevitable U.S. economic collapse. Even those who understood the dilemma the U.S. faces, nonetheless have been somewhat shocked by the self-serving brazenness of him simply ‘tariffing the world’.

Trump’s actions, (as many claim), were neither ‘spur of the moment’, nor whimsical. The ‘tariff solution’ had been pre-prepared by his team over recent years, and formed an integral part to a more complex framework – one that complemented the debt-reduction and revenue effects of tariffs, by a programme to coerce the repatriation of vanished manufacturing industry back to America.

Trump’s is a gamble that may, or may not, succeed: …

A similar argument can be found here:

Even though Trump explained the logic of the tariffs as an attempt to correct the trade imbalance between the US and the rest of the world, White House officials [(archived)] outlined the expected goals behind the tariffs in more detail. They described these goals as concentrating economic forces nationally to “push for structural changes to the global economy to rectify challenges that are difficult to overcome, including high tariffs globally, currency and tax policies, intellectual property theft, and even health and labour standards”. Ultimately, Trump aims to reshape the global economic order by prioritising America’s national interest through this wide range of tariffs.
…
Trump fully understands the consequences of his policies. America’s “aggressive unilateralism”, which started in the 1980s with Ronald Reagan, has now peaked. Trump isn’t an outlier; he embodies the genuine interests of a waning superpower, whose policies mirror the conflicting and shifting global reality he navigates. Trump’s 2nd administration is poised to instigate a major crisis and widespread devastation worldwide to prevent its inevitable downfall. Their rise to power and the ensuing actions merely reflect the profound structural and historical changes occurring in the international political economy and the global power architecture.

There are also such headlines

Trump’s in-the-know plan to demolish the US economy – Asia Times
Trump insider claims demolition plan will necessarily ‘decimate millions of investors’ while reset will bring ‘greatest wealth creation’ ever seen

I do not know if those are Trump’s real intentions or if all such talk is just obfuscation to hide the immense insider dealing and looting that is coming along with it. The later might very well be its sole purpose.

As Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism sees it:

[W]e are in the midst of a revolution, one run by reactionaries trying to cement the advantaged position of the rich and further immiserate the rest of the population. I warned from the outset that the only way to make sense of the Trump policy blitz was that he and his allies intended to created a Russia-in-the-1990s level crisis so as to facilitate elite asset grabs.

She is on board with Michael Hudson in this. Hudson …

.. explains why the seemingly novel part, the heavy use of tariffs, represents continuity of neoliberal and libertarian policies, of reducing the role of government in commercial and private life. He contends they therefor have perilous little to do with “rebuilding” America and are intended to allow the super-rich to extract even more from ordinary citizens.

Trump is not alone in doing this. There is a swarm of multi-billionaires around him who are pushing for it:

A sector of the U.S. capitalist class is now openly in control of the ideological-state apparatus in a neofascist administration in which the former neoliberal establishment is a junior partner. The object of this shift is a regressive restructuring of the United States in a permanent war posture, resulting from the decline of U.S. hegemony and the instability of U.S. capitalism, plus the need of a more concentrated capitalist class to secure more centralized control of the state.

Trump is slashing the budgets of many vital institutions and, via Elon Musk’s DOGE, eliminating their means to function and to measure outcome. He is enriching himself by building a cryptocurrency empire while destroying its regulators.

While this is mostly a fight at home there is an strong international component to it. As Brian Berletic provides:

The US is preparing to subject its own population as well as those of its supposed “allies” to immense long-term economic, social, and political pain. The cost-of-living crisis in the US will only grow worse. The US hopes that it can endure economic pain and disruption at home and abroad better than the emerging multipolar world can. Multipolarism’s survival will depend on proving otherwise.

And therein lies the trouble for Trump. The looney tunes trade policy will be felt in China and elsewhere. But the pain level in the U.S. will be much higher. Other government will provide for their populations while the Trump administration has no intent do similar at home.

His tariffs against China will have similar consequences as the European sanctions on Russia. The targeted country will have no problem to handle the onslaught while the initiators will deeply hurt their own polities.

Reprinted with permission from Moon of Alabama.

The post Survival Or Looting? What Trump’s Revolution Is Really About appeared first on LewRockwell.