Lew Rockwell Institute

Have you ever noticed how whenever you see someone promoting hatred toward Muslims, nine times out of ten it will be someone who supports Israel? There’s a reason for that.

Zionists promote Islamophobia because convincing westerners to hate Muslims is easier than convincing them to love Israel.

Support for Israel is a hard sell. On paper it’s just a shitty, evil country full of shitty, evil people, and has no redeeming qualities as a state. Nobody can explain how it’s an important ally in a way that makes sense; all the problems they claim it helps solve are problems Israel itself creates with the help of western backing. Unless you’re a devout Jewish Zionist or Christian Zionist there’s nothing about the modern state of Israel you’d naturally be inclined to support.

That’s why you’ll see high-profile Israeli social media accounts fearmongering about the growing Muslim populations in Europe, for example. You wouldn’t think it would be any of Israel’s concern if there are a lot of Muslims in Belgium or whatever, but it is in Israel’s political interests to keep westerners fearful and disdainful toward members of the Islamic faith.

We’re seeing more and more of this as Israel increasingly alienates western centrists and progressives, relying more and more heavily on support from the western right. As the narrative that a poor persecuted religious minority needs to have its own homeland loses traction with its intended audience, we’re seeing it increasingly replaced with the narrative that them there Muslims need killin’, yeehaw.

Israel makes everything gross. It makes the world more violent, more sociopathic, and more hateful. The entire state is sustained by nonstop violence and hatred. It’s a malignant tumor on the flesh of our species.

__________________

The best way to make sure you see everything I write is to get on my free mailing list. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Click here for links for my social media, books, merch, and audio/video versions of each article. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

The post Zionists Push Islamophobia Because It’s Easier Than Getting People To Like Israel appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Trump administration has slashed federal spending for democracy promotion efforts around the globe. That rollback of U.S. meddling is perhaps the most positive foreign-policy reform of the Trump presidency.

Since 1946, the U.S. government has intervened in more than a hundred foreign elections to assist its preferred candidate or party. Democracy is so important that the U.S. government refuses to stand idly by when foreign voters go astray. Rather than delivering political salvation, U.S. interventions abroad more often produce “no-fault carnage” (no one in Washington is ever held liable).

In 1983, Congress created the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). In 1984, Congressman Hank Brown (R-CO) provided a single sentence that should have nullified NED’s right to exist: “It is a contradiction to try to promote free elections by interfering in them.” In a 1985 piece for the Oakland Tribune, I hailed NED as “one of the newest, most prestigious boondoggles on the Potomac.” But there were plenty of scoffers early on: “NED has been called many things — an International Political Action Committee, the Taxpayer Funding of Foreign Elections Program, and a slush fund for political hacks who like to travel to warm climates in cold weather. In less than two years, NED has lived up to all these epithets.” My op-ed concluded, “The sooner NED is abolished, the cleaner our foreign policy will be.”

But that is a paltry argument compared to “jobs for the boys” —or perpetual government subsidies for Washington hustlers.

Guatemala 

U.S. democracy promotion efforts in Latin America have resembled a fairy tale or a bad LSD trip. In the 1980s, the Agency for International Development bankrolled a program “to motivate the people of Guatemala to participate in the electoral process.” The written materials for the program assured everyone that “All Guatemalans are Equal and Free.” The program distributed a pamphlet entitled, “How the State and Government Is Organized to Protect Our Lives and Work for the Development and the Good of All.” The Carnegie Institute’s Thomas Carothers noted that the titles the program used were “seemingly drawn from a Chinese reeducation campaign of the 1960s.” Uplifting fare on democracy was a hard sell because the Guatemalan government had just completed a genocidal crackdown that killed hundreds of thousands of Mayan Indians and suspected leftists.

Haiti 

No nation has received more prodemocracy interventions from the U.S. government during the past century than Haiti. In the early 1990s, Haiti’s elected ruler, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, became increasingly despotic, encouraging his supporters to kill opponents and critics by hanging burning automobile tires around their necks. The C.I.A. provided money and encouragement to a clique of Haitian generals who toppled Aristide in August 1991. Regardless of the C.I.A.’s role, the United States and the United Nations responded to the coup by slapping embargoes on Haiti, worsening the island’s economic misery and spurring thousands of Haitians to flee to Florida in leaky boats. In September 1994, President Clinton invaded Haiti, sending 20,000 troops in Operation Uphold Democracy to restore Aristide to power. Clinton hailed the efforts of American soldiers: “The work you’re doing is helping the Haitian people win their fight for freedom and democracy…. It’s proving to the world that the United States will stand up for democracy in our hemisphere.” Aristide became increasingly brutal and intolerant, though he managed to win reelection. In February 2004, an array of U.S. government-subsidized democracy promotion organizations helped spur another coup that left 100 people dead and toppled Aristide. Prior to the coup, Brian Dean Curran, the U.S. ambassador to Haiti, warned Washington that the federally subsidized International Republican Institute’s actions “risked us being accused of attempting to destabilize the government.”

Ukraine 

In 2004, the United States pulled out all the stops to help its favored candidate win a “free and fair” election in the Ukraine. In the two years prior to the election, the United States spent over $65 million “to aid political organizations in Ukraine, paying to bring opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko to meet U.S. leaders and helping to underwrite exit polls indicating he won a disputed runoff election,” according to the Associated Press. Rep. Ron Paul complained that “much of that money was targeted to assist” Viktor Yushchenko. Yet with boundless hypocrisy, President George W. Bush had proclaimed that “any [Ukrainian] election … ought to be free from any foreign influence.” The United States intervened again to rig Ukrainian politics in 2014. The U.S. meddling helped sow the seeds of the Russia-Ukraine war that commenced in 2022.

Afghanistan

In his 2005 inaugural address, President George W. Bush proclaimed that the United States would “seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.” While Bush’s invocation thrilled Washington, the rest of the world paid more attention to his support for any tyrant who joined his war on terror.

In 2009, President Barack Obama traveled to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, where he announced plans to send more troops to Afghanistan to save Afghan democracy. Shortly after Obama’s West Point speech, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, sent in troops to bring democracy to a village named Marja in southern Afghanistan.

Shortly before the assault began, McChrystal announced: “We’ve got a government in a box, ready to roll in.” In the same way that the U.S. government plopped Hamid Karzai into Afghanistan in 2002 as its “democratic” leader, the U.S. military brought in Afghan emigre Abdul Zahir to serve as Marja’s new governor. The Washington Post noted that Zahir was touted as “a respected elder from the Alozai tribe, a landowner who lived in Marja in his youth…. U.S. Marines and civilian advisers in Marja have given him money and protection in an attempt to persuade a wary population to follow him.” Zahir’s accession hit a bump after it leaked out that he had spent four years in prison for attempting to murder his stepson while living in Germany. The Washington Post noted: “U.S. officials in Afghanistan said Zahir’s criminal conviction did not undermine their confidence in his ability to govern.” Zahir never received popular support and was murdered at a local meeting the following year.

Libya 

President Obama was supposed to redeem the honor of U.S. foreign policy. In 2011, Obama portrayed the U.S. bombing of Libya as a triumph of democratic values. After Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi was killed, Obama speedily announced that Libyans “now have the opportunity to determine their own destiny in a new and democratic Libya.” But violence spiraled out of control and claimed thousands of victims (including four Americans killed in Benghazi in 2012). Similarly, Obama administration officials invoked democracy to justify arming quasi-terrorist groups in Syria’s civil war, worsening a conflict that killed hundreds of thousands and created millions of refuges.

Egypt

But the Obama team, like prior administrations, did not permit its democratic pretensions to impede business as usual. After Egyptian protestors toppled dictator Hosni Mubarak, Obama pledged to assist that nation “pursue a credible transition to a democracy.” But the U.S. government disapproved of that nation’s first elected leader, Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi. After the Egyptian military deposed Morsi in 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry bizarrely praised Egypt’s generals for “restoring democracy.” Similarly, many Ethiopians were horrified when Obama visited their country in 2015 and praised its regime as “democratically elected” — despite a sham election and its brutal suppression of journalists, bloggers, and other critics.

American zealotry for spreading democracy fails to recognize how democracy in many places has become simply another form of oppression.

Philippines 

In some nations, election victories legitimize destroying voters en masse. This is exemplified by the Philippines, where the government killed 7,000 suspected drug users and dealers, including several mayors. After President Rodrigo Duterte publicly declared in 2017 that he would be “happy to slaughter” three million drug users, Trump phoned him and, according to a leaked transcript, said, “I just wanted to congratulate you because I am hearing of the unbelievable job [you’re doing] on the drug problem.”

Many so-called democracies nowadays are simply elective despotisms. Elections abroad are often herd counts to determine who gets to fleece the herd. Many democracies have become kleptocracies where governing is indistinguishable from looting.

Democracy versus freedom

Selecting leaders by ballots instead of bullets does little to prevent oppression. Economist Friedrich Hayek observed in 1960, “Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one’s government is not necessarily to secure freedom.” The lessons of the domino-like collapse of democracies in the 1920s and 1930s were largely forgotten by the 1990s. Even the current round of democratic demolitions has failed to awaken people to the folly of trusting elections to safeguard their rights and freedom.

James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers that the great difficulty in framing a government is to “first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” Democracy has been wildly oversold in the past century as the cure for Madison’s second dilemma. Politicians are far easier to elect than to control. Fostering the illusion of consent makes it easier for rulers to shackle their victims. As Sen. John Taylor warned in 1821, “Self-government is flattered to destroy self-government.”

In many nations, sham rights complement sham elections. Constitutions are “mere scraps of paper” that rulers shred at their convenience. Who determines whether citizens enjoy the rights they are promised? The same politicians who profit from violating them. The Rwanda constitution, for instance, declares, “Freedom of the press and freedom of information are recognized and guaranteed by the State.” And government agents were still free to kill anyone who criticizes President Paul Kagamea, who has ruled Rwanda with an iron fist since 2000.

Nations are increasingly descending into “rights-free democracy” — which is simply despotism with a facade of popular approval. A bogus election is worse than no election at all, as far as leashing politicians. The state gains legitimacy while reformers lose hope.

At this point, ballots are bolstering more tyrants than they are toppling. In much of the world, elections have become sops that rulers throw to their victims. What is the point of referendums that merely provide a one-day faux intermission on oppression? While Ethiopia, Uzbekistan, and Egypt epitomize the bastardization of balloting, many nations with venerable democracies also serve up election charades to citizens.

Around the world, people are recognizing that rotating political scoundrels in high offices achieves little or nothing. Unfortunately, falling support for democracy does not necessarily signal a decline in political gullibility. While many citizens have become wary of campaign promises, they remain easy prey for other demagoguery.

Once the U.S. government began trumpeting the spread of democracy, it was inevitable that “democracy” would be defined down to gin up more applause lines for presidential speeches. Unfortunately, because most Americans are ill-informed on foreign affairs, presidents can pirouette as saviors even for brazen foreign hoaxes. Invoking democracy provides a Teflon coating for almost any intervention abroad by the U.S. government.

It remains to be seen whether President Trump will fulfill his promises to end U.S. democracy promotion shams. But bribery and bombing are poor ways to export freedom. U.S. endorsements of spurious foreign elections should make Americans think twice about trusting official verdicts on our own elections. What if our politicians decide to give the American people “government in a box,” Marja-style? Or have they done that already?

This article was originally published in the October 2025 issue of Future of Freedom.

The post Will Trump End Sham Democracy Promotions? appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Great Depression of 1929 stands as one of the most significant economic crises in modern history, casting a long shadow over the global financial landscape. Sparked by a catastrophic stock market crash in October, this era of intense economic turmoil led to widespread unemployment, poverty, and social unrest. In the United States, millions lost their jobs, homes, and savings, forcing families to confront an uncertain and often dire future. This article delves into the factors that precipitated the Great Depression, its profound impact on American society, the government responses that shaped economic policy, and the global ramifications of this devastating crisis. By understanding these aspects, we can glean valuable lessons that inform current economic practices and prepare us for future economic challenges.

The Causes of the Great Depression

The Great Depression did not arise in a vacuum; it was the result of a confluence of several factors that had been brewing throughout the 1920s. To fully understand the causes of the Great Depression, it is essential to look at the economic environment of the 1920s, commonly referred to as the “Roaring Twenties.” This period was marked by significant economic growth, technological advances, and an unprecedented rise in consumer culture. However, this prosperity was built on shaky foundations, and cracks were starting to appear.

One of the primary catalysts for the Great Depression was the rampant speculation in the stock market. During the late 1920s, an increasing number of Americans began investing in stocks, often borrowing money to purchase shares in hopes of quick profit. This speculative bubble was characterized by inflated stock prices that did not reflect the actual value of the companies. The euphoria surrounding stock investments created an unsustainable market driven by the belief that prices would continue to rise indefinitely. Unfortunately, this led to an inevitable collapse when the bubble burst in October 1929, resulting in a dramatic stock market crash that sent shockwaves throughout the economy.

Bank failures also played a crucial role in deepening the economic crisis. With the collapse of the stock market, many banks faced immense financial pressure as their clients rushed to withdraw their savings, fearing for their financial security. The banking system, which had become over-leveraged during the boom years, was unable to withstand the sudden surge of withdrawals. By 1933, approximately 9,000 banks had failed, wiping out billions in savings and further destabilizing the economy. The loss of confidence in the banking system exacerbated the financial crisis, leaving consumers with little access to credit and diminishing their ability to spend, which in turn led to decreased production and even more layoffs.

International trade issues also contributed to the economic downturn. In an attempt to protect American industries, the U.S. government enacted the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930, which raised tariffs on hundreds of imported goods. Although the intention was to bolster the domestic economy, the result was a significant decrease in international trade. Other nations retaliated by imposing tariffs on American goods, leading to a cascading effect of reduced trade volumes and increased economic isolationism. The combination of these protective measures further deepened the global economic crisis, proving counterproductive to the very goals they sought to achieve.

Additionally, economic disparities and the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few created an unstable economic environment. While the upper echelons of society reaped the benefits of the booming economy, a significant portion of the population struggled to make ends meet. This disparity in wealth led to reduced consumer spending, which is a vital component for economic growth. Without a robust consumer base, businesses struggled to maintain production levels, leading to layoffs and further economic contraction.

In summary, the causes of the Great Depression were multifaceted and interconnected. The speculative practices of the stock market, bank failures, international trade barriers, and growing economic inequality all played significant roles in leading the world into one of its darkest economic periods. By examining these causes, we can draw lessons not only about financial prudence but also about the importance of a balanced economic system that supports all citizens, rather than a select few.

The Impact of the Great Depression on Society

The ramifications of the Great Depression extended far beyond economic collapse; they reshaped the social fabric of the United States. As unemployment soared, many families faced dire financial straits. By 1933, unemployment rates had skyrocketed to approximately 25%, leaving millions of Americans without jobs and many more struggling to survive on meager means. This widespread financial despair led to significant social challenges, including increased rates of homelessness, malnutrition, and mental health issues.

The plight of the unemployed was visible in cities and towns across the nation. Shantytowns, often referred to as “Hoovervilles” after President Herbert Hoover, sprang up as displaced families sought shelter in makeshift huts. These communities became symbols of the suffering and hardship endured during this era. Families often found themselves living in extreme poverty, with many children going hungry or forced to drop out of school to support their families. The loss of a stable home environment had long-lasting effects on the health and education of these children, many of whom would experience generational poverty as a result.

Furthermore, the Great Depression had a profound effect on the American psyche. The sense of insecurity and hopelessness permeated society, as people grappled with the loss of their dreams and aspirations. The stress of financial instability contributed to a rise in mental health issues, including anxiety and depression. Families were torn apart by financial difficulties, with some individuals resorting to desperate measures, including theft or begging. The collective trauma experienced during this period would leave scars that echoed throughout psychological studies and societal dynamics in subsequent decades.

Social movements also began to emerge in response to the crises created by the Great Depression. Workers organized strikes and protests, demanding fair wages and better working conditions. Labor unions became more prominent as workers sought to protect their rights in an increasingly volatile job market. For many, invoking the power of collective bargaining became a means of survival. This surge in labor activism ultimately contributed to significant changes in labor laws and workers’ rights in the years that followed.

The Great Depression also prompted shifts in public attitudes toward government intervention in the economy. Prior to this period, many believed in a laissez-faire approach, where the government primarily took a hands-off stance regarding economic affairs. However, the scale of the crisis led many to advocate for a more active role for the government in providing support for those in need. This shift in public opinion laid the groundwork for future social safety nets and government programs that aimed to assist those facing economic hardship.

In conclusion, the impact of the Great Depression on society was profound and multifaceted. The economic collapse not only led to widespread unemployment and poverty but also altered the way individuals viewed work, government, and their place within society. The lessons learned during this tumultuous time continue to resonate today, emphasizing the importance of social safety nets, economic equality, and the resilience of the human spirit in the face of adversity.

The Government response to Great Depression and how policies changed

In the wake of the Great Depression, the U.S. government faced intense pressure to respond to the profound economic crisis that had gripped the nation. Under the leadership of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who took office in March 1933, the government implemented a series of sweeping reforms and policies collectively known as the New Deal. These initiatives aimed to provide immediate relief to the unemployed, to stimulate economic recovery, and to implement lasting reforms to prevent future economic collapses.

One of the cornerstone programs of the New Deal was the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), established in 1933. This program aimed to provide jobs for young men while simultaneously addressing environmental conservation efforts. Participants in the CCC worked on projects ranging from reforestation to building parks and trails, enabling them to support their families while also contributing to national recovery efforts. By the time the program came to an end, millions of young men had benefited from the CCC, gaining work experience and developing skills that would serve them for a lifetime.

Another critical aspect of the New Deal was the creation of the Public Works Administration (PWA), which aimed to stimulate the economy by investing in large-scale public works projects. The PWA funded the construction of infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, and bridges, creating jobs for thousands and laying the groundwork for future economic growth. These projects not only provided immediate employment but also contributed to long-term improvements in public services and infrastructure.

The Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) was also established to provide financial assistance to states for direct relief programs. This initiative allowed states to distribute funds to those most in need, ensuring that the most vulnerable populations received support in a timely manner. FERA marked a significant shift in government policy toward direct intervention in alleviating poverty and provided a model for future entitlement programs.

In addition to these relief programs, the New Deal included regulatory reforms aimed at stabilizing the financial system. The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 separated commercial banking from investment banking, creating a barrier to limit risky financial practices that had contributed to the economic collapse. The establishment of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sought to regulate the stock market and protect investors from fraudulent practices, restoring public confidence in the financial system.

Furthermore, the New Deal brought about reforms in labor rights with the passage of the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) in 1935. This legislation guaranteed the rights of workers to organize, join unions, and engage in collective bargaining. This marked a significant shift in labor relations, as it provided a legal framework for workers to negotiate better wages and working conditions. The act resulted in a surge of union membership and empowered workers in their fight for labor rights.

The New Deal also included social welfare programs, such as the Social Security Act of 1935, which established a social safety net for the elderly, unemployed, and disabled. By providing financial support to vulnerable populations, the Social Security Act marked a significant transformation in the government’s role in economic security, providing a foundation for the modern welfare state.

While the New Deal faced criticism from various quarters, including conservative politicians and those who argued it expanded government power too far, the overall response to the Great Depression reflected a paradigm shift in how the government perceived its role in the economy. The efforts initiated under the New Deal laid the foundation for a more interventionist government and contributed to the eventual recovery from the Great Depression.

In conclusion, the government’s response to the Great Depression through the New Deal was multifaceted and transformative. Through a series of innovative programs and policies, the government sought to address the immediate needs of a struggling population while implementing reforms to safeguard against future economic crises. The legacy of the New Deal continues to shape discussions around economic policy and the role of government intervention, highlighting the importance of adaptable responses in times of crisis.

Raed the Whole Article

The post Lessons from the Economic Catastrophe of 1929 appeared first on LewRockwell.

Forget about barbarian propaganda. What really matters, historically, is that the Ancient Silk Roads as well as Xinjiang may well be the ultimate crossroads of civilizations. Along Central Asia, they are the (beating) heart of the Heartland.

ON THE SOUTHERN SILK ROAD – Silk is the stuff of legend. Literally. At first manufactured only in China, silk historically was not only a luxury product but a monetary unit: a key element of trade and export revenues.

In 105 B.C., a first-ever Chinese diplomatic mission landed in Persia, then dominated by the Parthians, who also occupied Bactria, Assyria, Babylon and parts of India. Under the four-century long Arsacid dynasty – contemporary of the Han in China – the Parthians at the time were the essential middlemen of transcontinental trade. Chinese and Parthians sat down to discuss – what else – business.

The Roman Empire faced some serious trouble with the Parthians – between the massive defeat of Crassus in Carrhae in 53 B.C. and the victory of Septimus Severus in the year 202. In between, silk hit Rome. Big time.

The first time Roman soldiers saw silk was in the battle of Carrhae. Legend rules that the silk banners deployed by the Parthian army, their scintillating appeal making serious noise under the fierce winds, frightened the Roman cavalry: talk about the first instance of silk contributing to accelerate the decline of the Roman Empire.

Well, what matters is that silk perpetrated nothing less than an economic revolution. The Roman Republic and then Empire had to export gold like there’s no tomorrow to get their silken ways.

Parthian rule was followed by Sassanid Persia. They reigned until the mid 7th century – their empire stretching from Central Asia to Mesopotamia. For quite a while the Sassanids incarnated the role of great power between China and Europe – up to the conquests of Islam.

Silk Road, the ancient Chinese way: from Xian to Alexandria, not Rome. Photo: P.E.

So imagine, at the start of the Christian era, bolts of silk moving overland all along across the Silk Road spectrum. What’s fascinating is that Rome and China never (italics mine) entered in direct contact – for all the vast cast of characters (merchants, adventurers, fake “ambassadors”) that tried.

In parallel, a Maritime Road was also in play – already in effect during the times of Alexander The Great; it later became the Spice Route. That was how Chinese, Persians and Arabs reached India.

Since the Han dynasty, the Chinese reached not only India but also Vietnam, Malaysia and Sumatra. Sumatra soon developed as a key maritime entrepot, with Arab vessels arriving non-stop. In a more long-distance vein, it was the discovery of the rules of the monsoon – in the first century B.C. – that allowed the Romans to also reach the western shores of India.

So silk arrived in Rome by land and sea, via loads of different middlemen. And yet Rome never knew anything about the origin of silk, nor went further than the Greeks in their wobbly knowledge of the distant, mysterious land of Seres.

I went down to the (Pamir) crossroads

After the mid-1st century, the Kushan empire, actually Indo-Scythian, gets a protagonist role in southern Central Asia, in what was known then as Eastern Turkestan. The Kushan, rivals of the Parthians in the role of messengers of international trade, not only facilitated the spread of Buddhism but also Gandhara – Greco-Buddhist – art (some originals are still to be found today, at exorbitant prices, in art galleries in Hong Kong and Bangkok).

And yet, further on down the road, the rules of the game never substantially changed: two great Silk Road poles – Sassanid Persia and Byzantium – involved in a real, cutthroat industrial war with silk right in the middle. The secret of silk manufacturing had already been leaked to South Asia.

This trade war got even more complicated with the onslaught of Turk tribes across Central Asia, and the emergence of a trade kingdom in Sogdiana (with Samarkand at the center).

By the mid-7th century, the Tang dynasty recovered control over parts of the Silk Road ruled by Tarim basin kingdoms. That was an absolute must for business to go on – because caravan routes traversing these kingdoms encircled, and bypassed, by north and south, the fear-inducing Taklamakan desert, as they still do today.

Tang China wanted absolute control all the way at least up to the Pamir mountains where, in the legendary stone tower relentlessly described by adventurers but never really located with 100% certainty, Scythian, Parthian and Persian caravans met Chinese caravans to trade that precious silk plus several other commodities.

The stone tower: Tashkurgan Fort, the landmark between China and the rest of Eurasia. Photo: P.E.

The stone tower mentioned by top geographers such as Ptolemy is actually Tashkurgan Fort in the Pamir mountains: ultra-  strategic, straddling the Silk Road, and nowadays a top tourist attraction very close to the Karakoram highway.

The stone tower is the symbolic landmark between the Chinese world and the rest of Eurasia: to the west is the Indo-Iranian world.

I traveled the Pamir Highway in Tajikistan back-to-back before Covid interrupted everything. This time our mini-caravan crossed Pamir lands along and around the Karakoram highway on the way to the China-Pakistan border: that is now prime China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) territory, a key plank of BRI.

On the road in the Karakoram – the Pamir way. Photo: P.E.

It’s the Pamirs that in Ancient Silk Road times allowed reaching the oasis of Kashgar. The Pamirs tie a gigantic mountainous knot between the western limits of the Himalayas, the Hindu Kush and the southern slopes of the Tian Shan.

The twists and turns of the Panlong Ancient Road, in Pamir lands. Photo: P.E.

This has always been the key crossroads between the triangular trade uniting northern India, eastern Central Asia – with China nearby – and western Central Asia, with the steppes not so far away.

China meets Islam: a great, historical “what if?”

Silk, bearing serious value as a unit of capitalization and trade, had a much larger role than its usage. In Byzantium, silk was the object of an imperial monopoly. Everything was strictly regulated: professions, state ateliers where women worked, and customs. The state protected its monopoly via a fierce bureaucracy.

Meanwhile, the Maritime Road was booming. A Buddhist and maritime power, Srivijaya, controlled the ever-crucial Malacca strait out of the island of Sumatra. It’s under this configuration that Islam enters the Big Picture.

As much as History ruled that Rome and China would never meet directly along the Silk Road, it also ruled a stark separation between Islam and China. Or try to imagine if China, in the mid 8th century, had become a land of Islam.

The battle of Talas, in 751 – in what is today’s Kyrgyzstan – pitted China against the Arabs. And its result ended for good any Chinese whim of conquering Central Asia. Today, with the New Silk Roads/BRI, is another story – about Chinese trade/investment power projection all across the Heartland, and beyond.

Culture interpenetration: Bukhara meets Kashgar. Photo: P.E.

Back in the early 8th century, the key player was Umayyad dynasty General Qutayba ibn Muslim. He first conquered Bukhara and Samarkand; crossed the Ferghana valley; the Tian Shan mountains; and nearly reached Kashgar. The Chinese governor at the time, sensing that Qutayba might be about to take over Chinese lands, sent him a bag full of earth’s soil, a few coins and four princes as hostages. He calculated that’s how the Arab conqueror might not lose face, and leave the Middle Kingdom alone.

As incredible as it might seem, this arrangement lasted for half a century. Until the battle of Talas. Now compare it with Poitiers in 732 – one century after the death of Prophet Muhammad. We can certainly interpret Talas and Poitiers, together, as the two key landmarks of how Islam was on the verge of extending itself all cross Eurasia (including its European peninsula), creating a political-military empire from Rome to Chang’an (today’s Xian).

Well, it did not happen. Still, that’s one of the most extraordinary “what ifs” in History.

The importance of the battle of Talas – virtually ignored in the West, except in rarefied scholarly circles – is really larger than life.   Among other issues, it imposed a new circulation of techniques. The Arabs took away with them artisans, sericulture experts but also paper makers. Ateliers at first were set up in Samarkand. Later on, in Baghdad and all across the Caliphate.

So alongside the Silk Road, we saw the birth of a very busy Paper Road.

Deserts, mountains, oases – and no “slave labor”

Rolling down the highways across Xinjiang shooting a documentary after retracing the initial Ancient Silk Road from Xian to the Gansu corridor is an incomparable, historical time travel – as we may retrace in detail centuries of Central Asian turmoil all the way to the decline of some local pre-Islamic cultures by the 9th century. It’s a thrill to reconnect with the main actors: Uyghurs, Han Chinese, Sogdians, Indians, nomads, Arabs, Tibetans, Tajiks, Kyrgyz – and Mongolians.

An extraordinary Silk Road exhibition currently at the Gansu museum in Lanzhou. Photo: P.E.

The nomad groups thar proclaimed themselves heirs to the fierce Xiongnu came from the northwest of Mongolia and the Altai mountains. They incorporated several ancient nomads of western Central Asia during the 4th century, sharply remodeling the political and ethnic landscape.

The Xiongnu, on and off, pillaged parts of northern China – and were occasionally enticed into serious trade, offered tribute, or simply bribed to stay away. Actually the Xiongnu had a branch established in China and separated for at least two centuries from the previous ones:  they ended up taking Samarkand in the year 350. Later on, it’s the Turks that once again came from Mongolia (don’t tell Erdogan about it; he wouldn’t know), unifying the steppe in the 6th century, way before the arrival of Islam.

Arguably the key Silk Road imperative is the desert and oasis contrast/dichotomy.

The stark beauty of the fierce Taklamakan. Photo: P.E.

Deserts such as the Taklamakan and the Gobi, and several others, as well as arid steppes and mountains are among the most forbidding on the planet: these are the essential features of what amounts to roughly 6 million km2.

What is very rare in Central Asia is cultivated land (yet we can see a succession of cotton fields) or good pasture (we can see it in the Gansu corridor, and even in Pamir lands near the mighty Muztagh Ata). Still, deserts and mountains are at the heart of everything.

Good pasture in Pamir lands. Photo: P.E.

Some oases are of course more equal than others. Khotan is the most important oasis of the Southern Silk Road – not far from the immense, deserted Tibetan plateau. That’s fabulous for agriculture but most of all, courtesy of an alluvial cone, for precious stones, especially jade, supplied for over 2,000 years to every Chinese dynasty. Khotan spoke an Iranian language – close to those of ancient nomads Saka and Scythian, masters of the steppes.

The Chinese character for “silk” inscribed in jade in front of a factory in Khotan. Photo: P.E.

The kingdom of Khotan was a fierce rival of the oases further west, Yarkand and Kashgar. It was only intermittently under Chinese control. And may have been conquered by the Kushans in the 2nd century. Indian influence is omnipresent – as we still see in dress patterns and food in the Night Market. In the 3rd century Buddhism was already a major influence – featuring the most ancient testimonials in the Tarim basin.

The Silk Road, actually Roads, is of course The Buddhist Road. In Dunhuang, in the Gansu corridor, Buddhism was also popular  since the 3rd century: a famous local monk, Dharmaraksa, was the pupil of an Indian master. The Dunhuang Buddhist crowds were a mix of Chinese, Indian and Central Asian – once more testifying to the non-stop interpenetration of cultures.

The camel caravan in the era of booming domestic tourism, outside Dunhuang. Photo: P.E.

The Shakespearean “all the world is a stage” metaphor totally applies to the history of the Silk Road: all those actors from all corners of the Heartland historically were playing several roles, sometimes all in one go – an apotheosis of the favourite Xi Jinping-coined “people to people’s exchanges”. That’s the spirit of the Ancient and the New Silk Roads.

Playing the Uyghur blues. Photo: P.E.

We were fortunate enough to be on the road smack in the middle of the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

Among so many accomplishments by socialism with Chinese characteristics in Xinjiang in terms of sustainable development, the taming of the Taklamakan – or “sea of death” – is in a world class of its own.

We crossed the Taklamakan from the Northern Silk Road in Aksu to the Southern, near Keriya: and we experienced everthing from the impeccable highway bordered by the reeds composing the “China magic cube” – to keep the sands away – to some of the 3,046 km-long sand-blocking green belt, featuring plants such as the desert poplar and the red willow.

The Taklamakan has always been Sandstorm Central – a major threat to the succession of oases. The terrain all around the oases is hardcore: deserts, barren mountains, Gobi wasteland, poor soil, sparse vegetation, low rainfall, high evaporation, dry air.

Well, what we see today started even before the Go West campaign launched in 1999: since 1997, an array of central and state agencies, central state-owned enterprises, and 14 Chinese provinces and municipalities have sent a massive amount of funds and personnel to properly develop Xinjiang.

Now compare all that with original research shared at an academic conference on Xinjiang recently organized by the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Hong Kong University – my neighbors when I lived in the Fragrant Harbor. The research showed how British MI6 since the 1990s was instrumentalizing a minority of Uyghurs side by side with a massive global P.R. campaign with the explicit target of breaking China into three parts.

That evolved into the CIA-concocted “genocide” accusations of the past few years and of course “forced labor” masses barely surviving in concentration/re-education camps. In our extensive travels, guided by Uyghurs, we were dead set on finding slave labor in cotton fields along the Northern Silk Road or in the middle of the Taklamakan. Well, sorry: they don’t exist.

The propaganda though was essential to regiment loads of Uyghurs into ISIS, including their sizable contingent in Idlibistan now roaming free between Syria and the Turkish border. They wouldn’t dare coming back to Xinjiang and face Chinese intel.

Forget about barbarian propaganda. What really matters, historically, is that the Ancient Silk Roads as well as Xinjiang may well be the ultimate crossroads of civilizations. Along Central Asia, they are the (beating) heart of the Heartland. And now, once again, they are back as protagonists in the heart of History.

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

The post All the World Is a Stage Across the Ancient Silk Road appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Democrat Party needs to change its name as it certainly isn’t democratic.  The Democrats have shut down the government in order to prevent democracy from working.  By freezing the government, they are trying to prevent the MAGA agenda that the people voted for.  The Democrat’s method of operation is:  When you can’t steal the election, shutdown the government.

By making democracy dysfunctional, the Democrats are bolstering the power of the executive branch.  It is not possible to have a government as large as the one the Democrats have created and prevent it from operating.  The result is to move power to the executive.  

In order to function, democracy requires considerable unity.  If differences are too great, there cannot be compromise.  All of the Western “democracies” have reached that point.  European politics is fragmented.  No party can produce a majority government.  Consequently a coalition of parties has to be assembled whose purpose is to block the “wrong” coalition from governing or, more correctly, attempting to govern.  

In the US, still a two party system, it becomes impossible when one of the parties becomes ideological, as the Democrats have done.  The agenda of the Democrats is to transform the US into a Sodom & Gomorrah Tower of Babel in which all sexual preferences are normal and white racists are replaced by peoples of color.  DEI is how the Democrats symbolize this agenda. They have institutionalized it everywhere, even in science where research funding is provided on a DEI basis and not on the basis of the merit of the proposal.

A revolutionary party becomes insurrectionist, as we are witnessing today with Democrat mayors, city councils, governors, and federal judges resisting the deportation of the immigrant-invaders that the Democrats not only allowed in with their open borders policy but actually organized and financed the invasion with taxpayers’ money. See this.

The Democrats’ DEI ideology is anti-merit, which means that Democrats support legal privileges based on race, declared gender, and sexual preference.  It is the death of equality under the law and the resurrection of aristocratic privilege, only the privileges go to sexual perverts and darker-skinned peoples from outside the American tradition and mores.  In means the destruction of the country.

Senate Democrats Block Bill to End Government Shutdown for 11th Time.

The post The Destruction of America Is What the Democrats Stand For appeared first on LewRockwell.

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”—Thomas Jefferson

For a man supposedly intent on winning a Nobel Peace Prize, Donald Trump spends an extraordinary amount of time waging war, threatening to wage war, and fantasizing about waging war.

Notwithstanding his dubious claims about having ended “seven un-endable wars,” Trump has continued to squander the American people’s resources and moral standing by feeding the military-industrial complex’s insatiable appetite for war—preemptively bombing nuclear facilities in Iran, blowing up fishing boats in the Caribbean, and flexing military muscle at every opportunity.

Even the Trump administration’s version of “peace through strength” is filtered through a prism of violence, intimidation and strongman tactics.

It is the gospel of power, not peace—a perversion of both Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the U.S. Constitution.

Thus we find ourselves at this peculiar crossroads: a president hailed by his followers as an “imperfect vessel” chosen by God to save the church and restore Christianity—while they turn a blind eye to his record of adultery, deceit, greed, cruelty, and an almost religious devotion to vengeance and violence.

If anything captures Trump’s worldview, it is the AI-generated video he shared on social media: a grotesque fantasy of himself wearing a golden crown, flying a military fighter jet, and bombing a crowd of protesters with brown liquid feces.

This is the man who claims to be “saving God”?

Dismissed by his devoted base as harmless humor—a cheeky response to the millions nationwide who took part in the “No Kings” protests on Oct. 18—Trump’s crude fantasy of assaulting critics with fecal bombs nevertheless begs the question: Who would Jesus bomb?

That question, of course, is meant less literally than morally.

To answer it, we must first understand who Jesus Christ was—the revered preacher, teacher, radical, prophet and son of God—born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of America’s own police state.

When he came of age, Jesus had powerful, profound things to say, about justice, power and how we are to relate to one another. “Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” “Love your enemies.”

A revolutionary in both spirit and action, Jesus not only died challenging the police state of his day—the Roman Empire—but left behind a blueprint for resisting tyranny that has guided countless reformers and freedom fighters ever since.

Far from the sanitized, domesticated figure presented in modern churches, Jesus was a radical nonconformist who challenged authority at every turn. He spoke truth to power, defied political and religious hierarchies, and exposed the hypocrisy of empire.

Jesus rejected politics as a means to salvation. For Him, faith was not about seizing power but serving others—helping the poor, showing mercy even to enemies, and embodying peace, not war. He did not seek political favor or influence; He actively undermined it.

That is not to say He was passive. Jesus knew righteous anger. He turned over the tables of the money changers in the Temple because they had turned faith into profit and worship into spectacle.

Yet even in anger, He refused to wield violence as a tool of redemption. When His own arrest approached, He rebuked His followers: “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.”

The Beatitudes summarize His message: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” And when asked to name the greatest commandment, He answered simply: to love God with all one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as oneself.

In other words, we love God by loving our fellow human beings.

Jesus—the “Prince of Peace”—came not to destroy life but to restore it.

Which brings us to Donald Trump, the latest political “savior” anointed by Christian nationalists for whom the pursuit of a Christian theocracy now appears to outweigh allegiance to our constitutional democracy.

Seduced by political power to such an extent that the true message of Jesus has been taken hostage by partisan agendas, much of today’s evangelical movement has become indistinguishable from right-wing politics—defined by anti-immigrant and anti-homosexual rhetoric, material excess, sprawling megachurches, and a spirit of judgment rather than mercy.

Meanwhile, the wall of separation—between church and state, between moral authority and political coercion—is being torn down from both sides.

The result is a marriage of convenience that corrupts them both.

This is what happens when you wrap your faith in the national flag.

What is worse—far worse—than the Christian right selling its spiritual birthright for a political seat at Trump’s table is the blasphemy that has followed: the Gospel of Jesus replaced by the Gospel of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Within the White House, faith leaders gather to lay hands on Trump as he sits at the Resolute Desk, praising him for defending “religious freedom” for Christians—seemingly unconcerned that from that same desk he has signed death warrants for nearly every other freedom.

In the Pentagon, Trump’s Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, presides over prayer services where the name of Christ is invoked almost in the same breath as he boasts of preemptive strikes, righteous killings, and “peace through strength.”

Kristi Noem, the head of the Department of Homeland Security, prays in front of the cameras all the while boosting spending on military weapons for ICE by 700%, with significant purchases of chemical weapons and “guided missile warheads and explosive components.”

This is not Jesus’ Christianity—it is Christian nationalism: Christianity draped in the flag and wielding the weapons of war.

When leaders presume to act in God’s name, every drone strike becomes a crusade, every critic a heretic, every raid a holy war.

This is how war becomes a form of worship in the American empire.

What was once the Gospel of Peace has been replaced by a national creed that equates killing with courage, dominance with divine favor, and obedience with faith.

It is a blasphemous marriage of church and state—one that desecrates both Christ’s command to love one’s enemies and the Constitution’s mandate to keep religion free from the corruption of power.

Under Trump’s rule, this weaponized faith has found expression not only in rhetoric but in action.

It is there in the bombing of Venezuelan fishing boats—no declaration of war, no congressional authorization, no due process—men in small vessels labeled “enemy combatants” by fiat. It is there in the militarized ICE raids that tear families apart under cover of darkness. It is there in the persecution of journalists and dissidents accused of being anti-American. It is there in every detail of how, as one state senator warned, “the President is building an army to attack his own country.”

Each act is justified as righteous violence, sanctioned by a president who sees himself as both protector of the faithful and punisher of the wicked.

Yet beneath the veneer of divine mission lies the same old tyranny the Framers warned against: a ruler who mistakes executive power for divine right and turns the machinery of government into an instrument of holy war.

Both Jesus and the framers of the Constitution understood the same truth: faith and freedom cannot be imposed by force.

That is why the First Amendment forbids the government from establishing religion. The moment religion aligns itself with political power, it ceases to be faith and becomes ideology. The moment a president claims divine sanction for war, the republic ceases to be a democracy and becomes a theocracy of fear.

Driven by those concerns, the framers built a system designed to restrain ambition, limit vengeance, and guard against tyranny.

That constitutional system is being bulldozed before our eyes—just as surely as Trump is bulldozing his way through the White House, leaving wreckage in his wake.

And so we return to the question that started it all: Who would Jesus bomb?

The answer, of course, is no one.

Jesus would not rain destruction from the skies or bless the machinery of death. He would not mistake vengeance for virtue or domination for deliverance.

Jesus would heal the sick, welcome the stranger, and lift up the poor. He would drive the money changers from the temple, not sanctify the merchants of war.

Yet here we are.

Under Trump’s broadened definitions of “rebellion” and “domestic terrorism,” Jesus would be labeled a subversive, his name placed on a watchlist, his followers rounded up for “reeducation.” He preached compassion for enemies, defied authority, and stirred the crowds without a permit.

Were Jesus——a Palestinian refugee, a radical, and a revolutionary—to show his face in Trump’s American police state, he would fare no better than any of the undocumented immigrants being snatched up in the dead of night, stripped of any real due process, made to disappear into inhumane detention centers, and left to be tortured or die.

This is what happens when nations lose their moral compass: due process becomes a slogan, justice a privilege, and compassion a crime.

When even mercy is outlawed and truth branded subversion, the darkness is no longer metaphorical—it is moral.

It is midnight in America, a phrase evocative of Martin Luther King Jr.’s warning of a “midnight in the moral order.”

This is the time, King cautioned, when absolute standards pass away, replaced by a “dangerous ethical relativism.” Morality becomes a mere “Gallup poll of the majority opinion.” Right and wrong are reduced to the philosophy of “getting by,” and the highest law becomes the “eleventh commandment: thou shall not get caught.”

In this deep darkness, King said, there is a “knock of the world on the door of the church.”

That knock is a reminder, he warned, that the church “is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”

That knock still sounds today—steady, insistent, and largely unanswered.

It reverberates through religious institutions that mistake nationalism for faith and pulpits that confuse politics with piety. It calls us to rediscover the moral courage that resists tyranny rather than blesses it—to be, once more, the conscience of the state before the darkness becomes complete.

Whether we heed that call will determine what kind of nation we remain.

The time for silence has passed; the hour demands conscience.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, “we the people” must step up, speak up and speak out.

The tragedy of our age is not merely that presidents claim godlike power or that the citizenry themselves go along with it—it is that people of faith who should know better consent to it.

When Christians cheer the strongman who wraps himself in Scripture while shredding the Constitution—when they bow to the idol of safety, mistaking fear for faith—and when religious institutions fail to speak truth to power—we lose more than our freedoms.

We lose our moral and spiritual birthright.

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

The post Who Would Jesus Bomb? The Gospel According to the Military-Industrial Complex appeared first on LewRockwell.

A few years ago, a heated debate erupted over the publication of Mattias Desmet’s The Psychology of Totalitarianism in which he presented his theory of mass formation to describe how a large mass of people becomes susceptible to a hypnotic-like state of delusion. I found the book fascinating and persuasive, and it seemed to offer at least a partial explanation of why so much of mankind behaved in such an obviously irrational way during the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, Dr. Peter Breggin countered with the argument that the vast majority of people were not deluded—that is, they had not suffered a psychotic dissociation from reality. As Dr. Breggin saw it, the irrational behavior we observed in so many was a normal response to being terrorized, isolated, propagandized, and manipulated by government agencies and their accomplices in the mainstream media.

At the time this debate took place, it seemed to me that both Breggin and Desmet made valid points. The depraved governments of the world and their media partners were indeed waging a campaign of terror and propaganda on their peoples, and also singling out for destruction the dissidents who were trying to restore reason and prudence to public discourse.

However, it seemed to me that propaganda and PSYOPs alone were not sufficient to explain why some people were highly susceptible to these manipulations, while others were immune. Pondering this prompted me to rewatch Stanley Kubrick’s adaptation of Stephen King’s The Shining, about a frustrated, recovering alcoholic writer who is demonically possessed by the evil spirits that inhabit the Overlook Hotel in the Colorado Rocky Mountains.

I’d not watched the film in over twenty years, and was stunned by how effectively Kubrick captured the spiritual terror of the story. Virtually every shot captures two basic elements:

1). The susceptibility to evil in the frustrated writer, Jack Torrance.

2). The extreme evil that resides in the Overlook Hotel.

The trouble with Jack Torrance is that he doesn’t know himself. He is filled with desires and ambitions, but due to his inability, lack of discipline, and history of alcoholism, he cannot achieve the success he craves. His relationship with his wife and child is cold, and the audience senses he regards them as a burden and hindrance. Kubrick adds a subtle and perverse twist to his psychology in the film by having him look at a Playgirl magazine while standing in the lobby, waiting for his interview to be the hotel caretaker. You have to be paying very close attention to notice this, which gives it a subliminal quality.

Already in Jack’s interview, the hotel goes to work on him, as the interviewing managers go out of their way to emphasize that he will be tested by five months of extreme isolation after winter sets in. Revealing his essential lack of self-knowledge, Jack insists that isolation is precisely what he wants (so that he can write his novel).

As Jack and his family tour the hotel, multiple allusions are made to the extermination of the American Indians. There is also an extremely creepy scene in which the hotel cook, Richard Halloran, (played by Scatman Crothers) shows Mrs. Torrance and the boy Danny the hotel’s vast meat locker, the shelves of which resemble the wooden barracks in photographs of Nazi concentration camps. Again, you have to be watching very closely to notice these details, but they are definitely there.

In other words, the Overlook Hotel is a portal to hell, and in it resides all of humanity’s most terrible emotions—seething resentment, homicidal rage, the desire to dominate, control, and annihilate others.

And yet, only Jack is susceptible to the hotel’s evil. While his son Danny is able to see it, he isn’t seduced by it. Likewise, Jack’s wife—a simple, kind, and loving woman—is completely immune.

What are the qualities that make some immune to indoctrination while others remain highly susceptible to it? One could write an entire book about all the factors, but as food for thought, I suggest it has something to do with how much or how little we are given to the seven Cardinal Sins.

In Jack’s case, he suffers from Pride and the Wrath that arises when he cannot achieve his proud ambitions. In his mind, he is too good to be a mere schoolteacher, and he feels humiliated by the necessity of doing ordinary jobs to earn a living. Especially toxic is his impulse to blame others for his problems and to rationalize his rage.

When you closely examine the awful people who run our world today, you will notice that they are animated with pride and are quick to express wrath at those who oppose them. Lust, Greed, and Envy are also ubiquitous among this set.

Finally, we have our epidemic of extreme intellectual Sloth. In an 1822 letter, James Madison remarked:

A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.

If the U.S. is to remain a Constitutional Republic with limited government, “We the People” are going to need to do a much better job of arming ourselves with knowledge. An ignorant people is extremely easy to frighten and manipulate, which is why tyrants have always shown a keen interest in censorship and distracting the people they rule with garish entertainment that conveys no knowledge or moral ideas.

Reprinted with permission from Courageous Discourse.

The post Indoctrination: Susceptibility v. Immunity appeared first on LewRockwell.

A World Hungry for Love

We live in an age that has never been richer in information yet poorer in understanding.

People can communicate instantly across continents, but struggle to connect across the table.

We know the language of technology but have forgotten the language of the heart.

The paradox is everywhere. We have abundance without satisfaction, progress without peace, and knowledge without wisdom. Beneath our daily pursuits runs a quiet ache—the feeling that something essential has been lost. That something is love. Not the sentimental, marketed kind that fills our songs and screens, but the deeper force that gives life coherence, meaning, and direction.

Love is not a luxury. It is oxygen for the soul, the organizing intelligence of nature itself. It is both the beginning and the destination of every human journey.

What Love Truly Is

Love is the invisible current that connects all living things. It is not a commodity that can be earned or exchanged. It is not an emotion that rises and falls with circumstance. Love is the awareness of connection—the recognition that what lives in me lives in you, and in every creature, every cell, every star.

When we speak of “falling in love,” we are describing a temporary crack in the armor of separation. For a moment, the walls drop and we glimpse reality as it truly is: a unified field of energy and consciousness.

The spiritual traditions of the world, though differing in language, have always pointed to this truth. The Taoists called it harmony, the Buddhists compassion, the Christians God, the scientists coherence. All describe the same flow.

To love is to live in alignment with that flow.

Love does not demand—it allows.

Love does not possess—it honors.

Love does not divide—it integrates.

It is not blind; it sees clearly and still chooses connection.

Fear and Separation

If love is unity, fear is division.

Fear tells us we are alone and must protect ourselves at all costs. It whispers that there is not enough— not enough time, money, security, affection, or worth.

It is this belief in scarcity that turns nations against nations and hearts against hearts.

Every act of cruelty, greed, and deception has fear at its root.

Fear is love forgotten.

Our bodies even mirror this truth. When we feel safe and connected, the brain releases serotonin, oxytocin, and growth hormones—chemicals that strengthen the immune system and open the heart. When we are afraid, the stress hormones flood in: cortisol, adrenaline, norepinephrine. The heart constricts. The body prepares for battle or escape. We become less creative, less generous, less alive.

It is impossible to live fully while living in fear.

Reflection: In moments of anxiety, ask yourself: What would love choose here?

Conditioning and the Loss of Innocence

Every child is born radiant—open, trusting, and full of curiosity. A baby does not know how to hate, judge, or compare. But slowly, through the conditioning of family and culture, love becomes distorted.

We learn that affection must be earned, that approval is conditional. We hear “no” far more often than “yes.” We are rewarded for performance, not presence. Many grow up believing that love is transactional—something to be won through obedience, charm, or success.

A father who received “hard love” may pass it on to his children, believing he is strengthening them. A mother who was taught that emotion is weakness may withhold warmth, thinking she is preparing her child for life. Each generation inherits the unhealed wounds of the one before.

The result is a world of adults who are outwardly competent but inwardly starved for connection. They chase achievement, status, and distraction, mistaking these for love.

But love was never gone—it was only covered. 

Rediscovering the Source

Healing begins with remembering. Beneath every defense, every wound, every false identity, the current of love still flows. The work of life is not to create love but to remove the obstacles to its expression.

This remembering is both spiritual and physiological. The heart literally generates an electromagnetic field measurable several feet from the body. When we think loving thoughts, that field expands and synchronizes with others. When we harbor anger or resentment, it contracts.

We are transmitters of the frequency we call love.

To rediscover it, we must first quiet the noise of fear.

Practices for Remembering:

• Sit in stillness and breathe through the heart.
• Spend time in nature; let the rhythm of life reset your own.
• Speak truthfully, even when it trembles.
• Perform one act of kindness each day without seeking recognition.

These small practices rewire the nervous system for connection. They teach the body that it is safe to open again.

Love in the Body

Science now affirms what wisdom has always taught: love heals.

Studies show that compassion strengthens immunity, accelerates recovery, and even stimulates the growth of new brain cells. When we extend empathy to others, our own physiology transforms. The giver and receiver both flourish.

Dr. Bruce Lipton’s research on cellular biology revealed that cells exposed to nurturing environments thrive, while those in toxic surroundings wither. Humans are no different.

Love tells the body, You are safe. Grow.

Fear says, You are threatened. Defend.

In this way, love is not only emotional—it is biological. It is the organizing principle of life itself.

The Practice of Relationship

Love finds its most challenging and transformative classroom in relationship.

When two people open their lives to each other, they create a third entity—the relationship itself—which requires care, nourishment, and honesty.

Relationships reveal the truth about who we are. They mirror our wounds and invite our growth. If we approach them unconsciously, they repeat our past patterns of abandonment, control, or fear. If we approach them with awareness, they become sacred laboratories for awakening.

Love does not mean constant harmony. It means choosing connection even when discomfort arises.

It is the courage to remain open in the face of misunderstanding.

Healthy love looks like:

• Listening to understand rather than to win.
• Speaking with honesty rather than manipulation.
• Respecting boundaries while remaining available.
• Seeking growth instead of perfection.

Every argument offers a choice: defend the ego or nurture the bond.

The path of love always chooses the latter.

The Courage to Be Vulnerable

In a culture that equates vulnerability with weakness, opening the heart can feel dangerous. Yet vulnerability is the gateway to intimacy. Without it, love cannot breathe.

To say “I love you” is to expose the tenderest part of oneself. It is to stand without armor in a world that often rewards cynicism. But strength is not in the armor; it is in the willingness to take it off.

Men, especially, have been conditioned to hide emotion. They are told that real men do not cry, that sensitivity is shameful. Yet the science of tears tells another story. Emotional tears contain stress hormones; crying literally releases tension from the body. To weep is to cleanse, to heal, to make room for new life.

A person who can laugh deeply, weep openly, and forgive freely is not fragile—they are whole.

The Power of Compassion

Compassion is love in action. It begins when we recognize ourselves in another’s suffering. Compassion dissolves the illusion of separation by expanding our circle of care.

Every act of genuine kindness—every time we listen, comfort, or forgive—creates ripples that extend far beyond what we see. Neuroscience shows that compassion activates areas of the brain linked with joy and creativity. It reprograms us from survival to connection.

Compassion also has the power to transform society. Imagine political systems guided not by profit but by empathy, schools that teach cooperation instead of competition, economies that measure success by wellbeing rather than consumption.

These are not utopian fantasies—they are what love looks like at scale.

Reflection: What if compassion were our default mode instead of our emergency response?

The World Without Love

The absence of love is visible everywhere—in the hunger of children, in the isolation of elders, in the wars waged over imagined differences.

A nation that values wealth more than wisdom breeds poverty of the soul.

An economy that rewards greed creates emotional bankruptcy.

The teachers, healers, and quiet givers of the world remind us what is possible. When a teacher buys breakfast for a hungry child, when a neighbor checks on another after a storm, when forgiveness replaces revenge—these are small revolutions of love. They rarely make headlines, but they are what hold civilization together.

Without love, we become clever animals—efficient, ambitious, but lost.

With love, we remember why we are here.

Unconditional Love

Unconditional love is not sentimental approval or passive acceptance.

It is fierce, grounded, and wise. It sees through illusion but does not condemn. It allows freedom without abandoning truth.

To love unconditionally means to stop measuring worth—to see another as a soul in process rather than a project to fix. It means to release the need to control outcomes, to trust the intelligence of life itself.

The opposite of unconditional love is egoic love: “I love you as long as you love me.”

Egoic love bargains; real love blesses.

Living from Love

Love is not a mood to wait for; it is a muscle to develop.

We strengthen it through daily choice—choosing patience over reaction, empathy over judgment, generosity over grasping.

Each morning we can ask: Will I create fear today or love?

To live in love does not mean to avoid pain; it means to meet pain with awareness rather than resistance. Pain breaks open the walls that fear built. Many of life’s greatest awakenings come disguised as heartbreak.

Love is work. It requires attention, discipline, and humility. But it also rewards beyond measure.

When we act from love, we are aligned with the creative force of the universe itself.

Tools for Living in Love

Begin Each Day with Intention

Before rising, breathe deeply and affirm: “Today I choose love over fear.”

This single thought changes your physiology and sets the tone for the day.

Practice Active Appreciation

Notice what is right before fixing what is wrong. Gratitude shifts the brain’s chemistry toward optimism.

Slow Down

Rushing is a form of violence against the moment. Move with awareness; let each action be deliberate.

Communicate with Presence

Put down devices. Look into eyes. Listen not to reply but to understand.

Forgive Quickly

Forgiveness does not excuse behavior; it releases your bondage to it. It returns your energy to love.

Serve Without Agenda

Give time, attention, or kindness without seeking recognition. Love multiplies when shared freely.

Reconnect with Nature

The natural world vibrates with harmony. A walk in the woods, the sound of running water, the warmth of sunlight—all recalibrate the nervous system.

Meditate on the Heart

Visualize light radiating from your chest. Let it expand to fill the room, the neighborhood, the world.

Reflections for Practice

• When was the last time I chose fear over love?
• What does love feel like in my body—light, openness, ease?
• Who in my life needs forgiveness, and can I begin by forgiving myself?
• How would I speak, move, and decide if I remembered that love is who I am?

Write these reflections often. They are not questions to answer once, but doors to revisit again and again.

Love as the Universal Law

Love is not merely human; it is cosmic. Every atom in the universe dances in relationship with every other. The stars hold together by attraction; galaxies spin in communion. Life itself is a symphony of cooperation.

The mystics, poets, and scientists are all describing the same truth from different angles:

Reality is relationship. Separation is illusion.

When we love, we come into alignment with the fundamental rhythm of existence.

When we hate, we fall out of tune.

In this sense, enlightenment is nothing more than total alignment with love.

The Eternal Force

Can love die?

No more than energy can vanish. It only changes form.

A love that seems lost has simply shifted shape—into memory, into gratitude, into the subtle guidance of the unseen. Every act of love adds to the collective field of healing on this planet. No gesture of kindness is ever wasted.

Our task is not to manufacture love but to remember that we are made of it.

The heart’s true intelligence knows this even when the mind forgets.

The more we love, the more we see that there is nothing outside of love.

A Call to Live as Love

We are at a crossroads as a species.

Fear has had its centuries—wars, greed, domination, division. It has exhausted itself. The next evolution is not technological but emotional: the awakening of love as a global intelligence.

Each person who lives from love contributes to that awakening. Each act of kindness is a vote for a new world.

The invitation is simple yet profound:

• Choose connection over control.
• Choose curiosity over judgment.
• Choose generosity over competition.
• Choose truth over comfort.

Love is not naïve—it is revolutionary. It is the only power that can heal both the individual and the collective wound.

Closing Reflection

Love is the great teacher, the invisible companion, the pulse within every breath.

It asks us to look again, to see the sacred in the ordinary, to forgive what we thought unforgivable, to keep the heart open even when it trembles.

The journey of love is not about becoming something new, but about remembering what we already are: expressions of the same divine source, radiant and whole.

When we choose love—again and again, in small ways and great—we become the living proof that another world is possible.

Love is the antidote to fear.

Love is the foundation of healing.

Love is the essence of life.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post Dedicated to Those Learning To Love Beyond Fear appeared first on LewRockwell.

This war will be won on the battlefield. Ukraine will prevail and rise back even stronger – WeAreUkraine, Apr 10, 2022

“This war will be won on the battlefield,” said [EU foreign policy chief Josep] Borrell on Twitter. “Ukraine will prevail and rise back even stronger. And the EU will continue to stand by you, every step of the way.”

Speech by President [of the European Council] Charles Michel to the Verkhovna Rada in Kyiv – Consilium, Jan 19 2023

We are determined to help you win on the battlefield. When President Zelenskyy called me on February 24th, he said, “Charles, we need weapons, we need ammunition”. Three days later, we formally decided to provide lethal equipment to a third country for the first time in the history of the EU.

Boris Johnson vows Ukraine ‘will win’ as he visits Kyiv on two-year anniversary of war Independent, Feb 24 2024

Mr Johnson said: “On this grim second anniversary of Putin’s invasion I am honoured to be here in Ukraine. With their indomitable courage I have no doubt that the Ukrainians will win and expel Putin’s forces – provided we give them the military, political and economic help that they need.”

Ukraine Must Win, Regain Full Territory: Germany’s Merz – Kyiv Post, Jan 21 2025

Merz said he wants peace in Ukraine but not “at the price of submission to an imperialist power” and stressed that “Ukraine must win the war.”

“To me, winning means restoring territorial integrity,” said Merz, whose conservative CDU-CSU is leading in polls ahead of Germany’s Feb. 23 election. “Winning also means that Ukraine must have complete freedom to choose its political and, if necessary, military alliances.”

A few months later … and the delusion of ‘winning’ is gone …

Joint statement on Ukraine: 21 October 2025

Statement by President Zelenskyy, Prime Minister Starmer, Chancellor Merz, President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Prime Minister Tusk, President von der Leyen, President Costa, Prime Minister Støre, President Stubb, Prime Minister Frederiksen, Prime Minister Sánchez and Prime Minister Kristersson on Peace for Ukraine.

We strongly support President Trump’s position that the fighting should stop immediately, and that the current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations.
…
Therefore we are clear that Ukraine must be in the strongest possible position – before, during, and after any ceasefire.

Russia will of course not agree to this ceasefire nonsense. During the Minsk agreement, which included a ceasefire in east Ukraine, the time was used to arm Ukraine and to prepare its army for further attacks. Russia wont fall for the same trick twice.

Lavrov Rejects Ceasefire: Russia Says Halting War Would ‘Preserve the Nazi Regime’ in Ukraine – Novinite, Oct 21 2025

Speaking to reporters, Lavrov criticized a joint statement by European leaders who reaffirmed their support for Ukraine and backed US President Donald Trump’s recent diplomatic efforts to stop the fighting. “A ceasefire now would mean only one thing – that a vast part of Ukraine remains under the control of a Nazi regime,” he said. “It would be the only place on Earth where an entire language is legally banned, not to mention that it is an official UN language and spoken by the majority of the population.”

Borell and Michel were right when they said that the war will be decided on the battlefield. But it wont be Ukraine that will be winning.

Russia has introduced a new version of the universal guidance kit attached to dumb bombs of previous ages. They now can reach up to 100 kilometer from their release point. Their precision is truly impressive (vid). Over the last week the Russian airforce dropped more than 250 of those per day!

Russian Geran drones have evolved further. The Geran-2 has a 90 kg warhead, night vision and some autonomous targeting capabilities. It can also be manually controlled via repeaters even over longer distances. The new Geran-3 with a jet engine is just coming in. It has a range of 700 km and carries a 250 kilogram warhead. It is cheaper than ballistic Iskander missiles while fulfilling a similar purpose.

After the Alaska summit between the Presidents Trump and Putin the Russian side had agreed to a ceasefire on long range infrastructure targets. Unfortunately Ukraine never held up to it. It continued to attack Russian refineries and electricity station. After a pause Russia countered with a major campaign against Ukraine’s energy and railway infrastructure. It will continue until Ukraine agrees to cease and desist from strikes on Russia.

Unless that happens Ukraine is in for a cold and very dark winter.

Reprinted with permission from Moon of Alabama.

The post EU-NATO Retreats From ‘Ukraine Is Winning’ To Begging for a Ceasefire appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

The post Bobby Lee’s Weird Trip to Israel appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Is Trump About To Pull The Trigger On Venezuela? appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Jeffrey Sachs: Last Chance for Peace in Ukraine Sabotaged by Europe appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Ginny Garner:

Lew,

During the last two years of his life, Charlie Kirk was evolving to an antiwar position due to the views of his millions of young followers and his own research. The TPUSA audience’s reaction to Tucker Carlson’s responses to their questions show Charlie’s supporters continue to be opposed to war. The first two questions were about foreign policy and Tucker expressed his opposition to pointless wars. These questions begin at 59:00.

The post Tucker Carlson and TPUSA Conference Audience Oppose Pointless War appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Ginny Garner.

Yahoo News

 

The post ICE Using Israeli Company Tool to Track You appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Ginny Garner:

Lew,

I figure Steve Bannon has known for a very long time but he finally publicly said the Mossad runs the CIA. It’s at 6:20 in this video. He commends ODNI Director Tulsi Gabbard for her courage standing up to them when they tried to run her out of town. CIA (Mossad) has been lying to Trump peace negotiator Steve Witkoff three times a day in briefings attempting to sabotage any possibility of peace.

The post The Mossad Runs the CIA: Steve Bannon appeared first on LewRockwell.

Based upon the fact that most elected members of Congress are corrupt, I must conclude that these officials have chosen Communism which will lead to Civil War. Many citizens are still ignorant and apathetic as a result of brainwashing and  propaganda. However, I believe that a majority of our citizens still want the Middle-class American Dream,  with Justice and Prosperity in a Constitutional Republic. This paper will spell out comprehensively what must be done to preclude a Civil War.

1. Terminate all Foreign Aid and foreign Military Deployments. All of these expenses directly benefit the Evil Ones in the Deep state. We have no justified Interest in any country except our own. We cannot be invaded, we can only bedefeated by weapons of mass destruction or from within. This is why we have no reason to be in NATO.

2. Terminate the Privately-Owned Federal Reserve Bank, which will stop money printing to finance Wars-for-Profit and a multitude of scams. Replace Fiat Currency with Gold and Silver money, which will pretty much end inflation.

3. Stop all federal payments to states for functions unconstitutionally usurped from the states or for functions not authorized by specific Enumerated Powers in the Constitution. Either terminate the income tax or return most of the collections from a state to that state. The Income Tax reversed the roles of the states and federal government, making a Constitutional Republic impossible without these modifications..

4. Deport all illegal Invaders as fast as possible prior to the 2030 census. The Constitution states that giving aid and comfort to invaders is Treason. Communist Invaders have already commenced with attacks on citizens and police. The Draft may be required, as our military is too small to confront an deport invaders. If rioters resist using measures that could injure police, then deadly force should be used. So far use of deadly force has been too little and too late.

5. Writ of Habeas Corpus can be terminated in this situation of rebellion, invasion or threat to public safety. Lincoln did this during the Civil War.

6. There must be effective law enforcement to force elected officials and bureaucrats of the Administrative State to conduct their duties in a lawful manner. This is especially important since most officials have been bribed to support Communism and the Evil Ones in the Deep State.

7. It is well known that thousands of unconstitutional functions are performed by bureaucrats of the Administrative State. I call this the Criminal Enterprise, which maybe comprises 50% of Government. If I was to attempt to list them, no one would read this paper.

8. The American People have no faith or trust in the FBI or the National Security Agencies. I think the FBI should be disbanded and the security agencies be allowed only to gather information.

9. Many people believe, with good reason, that the election of President Trump saved us from a Civil War and bought us some time for Trump’s programs to blossom and save us from total Economic Collapse.

As an Economist, I can pretty much guarantee Unlimited Prosperity at an unheard-of level with the American Dream in full blossom for everyone willing to work, if the recommendations in this paper are followed. However if key elements are not followed,  I can foresee a Civil War with the Communists and  the Evil Ones in the Deep State aka Parasitic  Super-Rich Ruling Class aka Wealthy Families  aka the Zionist Jewish Lobby, etc., and their Minions in government.

The post This Is a Few Words About How To Return to the American Dream and Our Constitutional Republic appeared first on LewRockwell.

Rulers seek to rule. Well, that seems a bit obvious, doesn’t it? And yet, time after time, we elect new leaders, imagining that, “This new group will be better—they’ll represent us as they promised.”

Unfortunately, the democratic system doesn’t really work very well at all. The idea is supposed to be that if old leaders overstep their bounds, new candidates may come forth who promise a reversal of the autocracy of the previous group, and we elect them. They will then proceed to implement that reversal.

Of course, we all know that it’s this last bit that consistently fails to happen. The new group does not fulfil its promises to the electorate—in fact, it almost invariably seeks to increase its power over them. And as each group assumes greater power than the previous one, the country slowly declines, until ultimately, it reaches the state of tyranny.

But what is at the heart of this process? Why on earth does it never seem to happen that the new leaders actually diminish their power and become true representatives of those who elected them? Surely, we must get a few good leaders once in a while.

To answer this question, let’s have another look at that title, at the top of the page…

Rulers seek to rule. Ruling is not a side issue; it is not a by-product. It is their very purpose. It is the reason they ran for elected office.

But then, why do better, less-obsessed people not run? Well, they occasionally do, mostly at the lower levels of public office, where they soon find that politics is a nasty business and that their fellow office-holders detest them for their integrity. In effect, they find themselves isolated, much like New York policeman Frank Serpico—a lamb amongst vipers. In such an environment, it’s unlikely that a “good guy” will last long.

There arises the occasional Ron Paul, a beacon in the night, but the Ron Pauls are rare and even more rarely attain high office. Instead, those who are most likely to pursue public office and most likely to remain there are those that most desire to rule.

So, if we follow this reasoning along, who within a given society does most want to rule? Well, clearly, those who are the most obsessive in their desire to control others. Even more so if they possess this desire to a pathological degree.

In a small jurisdiction, this is less pronounced, because there are fewer people to run for office. The larger the country, the greater the likelihood that those who are pathological will not only come forward, but will do whatever it takes to succeed. Their odds of initial and continued success are therefore far greater than those of the “good” candidates.

If the above reasoning is correct, we’d find our legislatures full of pathological people.

In a large country, all candidates, in all parties, might well answer this description, resulting in a virtual guarantee that the top spots would be filled by those who are pathological. (Estimates hold that approximately 6.2% of any population are likely to be narcissistic. Sociopaths are at 4%.)

So, let’s test this out. Let’s look at a list of character traits of each of these psychopathies and ask ourselves if the descriptions fit any (or all) of our rulers.

Narcisism

• Grandiose sense of self-importance

• Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success and power

• Requires excessive admiration

• Has a pronounced sense of entitlement

• Is exploitative of others

• Lacks empathy

• Demonstrates arrogant, haughty behaviour

Sociopathy

• Superficial charm and good intelligence

• Unreliability

• Untruthfulness and insincerity

• Lack of remorse and shame

• Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience

• Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love

In examining the traits above and comparing them to the traits we observe in our political leaders, we no longer wonder why our leaders are not more truthful, more reliable, more representative, less arrogant, etc. In fact, in any given situation, we can expect overreach from leaders in each of the following categories:

• An assumed right to power (over both the electorate and other sovereign states)

• Extreme lack of concern for truth or integrity (Reality becomes whatever the leader has most recently decided it is)

• Lack of true concern for the electorate on any level (although “concern” may very well be pretended)

• Inconsistency and unreliability in actions and policymaking

• Fascination with opportunities for armed conflict (both domestic and international)

• Carelessness in the sacrifice of the lives of others in combat situations (Armed conflict is an interesting game, rather than an unfortunate necessity)

Whatever nation the reader is from, he might reread the above description, whilst picturing each of the last several leaders his country has had, and ask himself if these traits apply. (Again, the larger the country, the more likely that all the boxes are ticked, with regard to every leader, regardless of political party.) In addition, if the reader decides to extend the exercise to those on the second and third tiers of power (deputy prime minister, vice president, chancellor of the exchequer, secretary of state, etc., depending upon the jurisdiction), my guess would be that these individuals would also fit the bill fairly well.

Right, then. We were already a bit glum about those who ostensibly were elected to “represent our interests”. Now, it appears not only that they are a bad lot, but that there’s little hope for improvement, short of exhuming Guy Fawkes and cloning him in large numbers.

So what can we glean from this exercise?

We can surmise that, whether a sovereign state was founded as a free republic (e.g., Ancient Rome or the United States), or whether it was founded right from the outset as an oppressive state (e.g., France or the Soviet Union after their respective revolutions in 1799 and 1917), it is certain that pathological individuals will be those who will most desperately seek office. This then means that, over time, the new state will invariably progress toward tyranny, until such time as the system is ended and started anew.

What this means is that the reader might wish to assess the point that his home country has reached in its decline and consider whether it has reached the point of diminishing returns as regards his own personal freedom to live his life as he sees fit.

The good news is that, at any point in history, countries exist that are at different stages of decline, and the reader has choices as to where he might reside, work, and invest, if he wishes to pursue them.

Reprinted with permission from International Man.

The post Rulers Seek To Rule appeared first on LewRockwell.

In America, every voice counts — to a degree. Those more active in the political process count more. Simply being a precinct captain in your local party gives you leverage that the average voter does not have. There are other ways to magnify one’s leverage.

One way is to be a donor. It’s costly to run for office — $5 million to win some congressional districts.

Some Areas Of Distraction For President Trump

Ten months into this Trump term:

-the Epstein files are AWOL,
-anti-AIPAC Massie is being primaried,
-many deep state American criminals are walking free, including those who ran a coup on this country in the 2020 color revolution,
-patriots, innocents, and heroes still sit in jail,
-the Executive Branch is moving fast for government, but at a snail’s pace for many Americans.

While these are matters our President can fix with the right perspective and will, our President, instead of ensuring pardons for our heroes, is flying into Ben Gurion Airport, addressing the Knesset, and asking for the pardon of Benjamin Netanyahu.

This doesn’t feel like America First. This feels like the fastest moving and most transparent presidency that has ever existed, but it also feels misguided.

Was he lying the whole time?

Was he a decepticon?

Maybe.

But you know what, he also needed a lot of money to get elected.

So, What’s Your Point?

I, too, can write a spicy ideological take down of how flawed Trump is and how correct your stated values are.

I’m not doing that.

I’m writing about what is happening right now, and how you, personally, can have impact.

Why President Trump Is Predictably Distracted

Trump has repeatedly called Israel-first billionaire Sheldon Adelson generous, tough, and demanding — most recently during his October 13, 2025, visit to Jerusalem.

The Knesset, the unicameral Israeli parliament building, was built with a gift from James de Rothschild (1878-1957) of the Ashkenazi banking family. The building is located on Rothschild Street. As the US President stood before that assembly, he paid honor to Miriam Adelson and the late Sheldon Adelson, who have supported his campaigns.

Mrs. Adelson was an honored guest as Trump announced peace in Gaza through a large multinational agreement, along with a rebuilding effort.

While October 13, 2025 is not two years after October 7, 2023 in the Gregorian calendar, in the Hebrew calendar it is exactly two years. Trump specifically came on the 21st and 22nd day of Tishri 5786. He left as the holiday Simchat Torah was beginning, the two-year anniversary of the attack, which began on the 22nd day of Tishri 5784, around sunrise on October 7, 2023.

Some say Trump came to declare victory in the ethnic cleansing campaign, and to dance on the ashes, as he began to paint the public picture of Gaza as an international real estate development not populated by locals.

Some 67,000 Palestinians died in Gaza from Israeli bullets, bombs, and fire these two years. Depending on how quickly and plentifully aid enters Gaza, multiples more will likely die because of limited food, sanitation, housing, and medical infrastructure. This situation looks very distracted and very Israel-first.

I don’t care for Israel-first influence in US politics. I despise it. I am as America First as Ron Paul taught me to be long ago. Donald Trump took up that mantle, and has done a relatively good job putting America first — though I recognize the man has flaws.

I also understand that the piper plays the tune of the one who pays him, and Trump didn’t finance his own campaign.

Zionist money did. I am grateful to not have another Bushite presidency. Bush was right 3 out of 10 times. Trump is right 8 out of 10 times.

Why I Am Grateful To The Zionist Supporters Of President Trump

Trump deserves criticism. A lot. But you probably do too.

It’s easy to criticize another. It’s harder to partner with a person to build the future.

The Zionists, for all their flaws, do that. I am grateful to not have a Kamala Harris presidency. If I run into Miriam Adelson, I will thank her for that. I will also, likely, share a few other opinions. But first I will thank her for helping return Trump to the White House.

I know many well-resourced people who did not stand up for America the way Adelson did. Of course Adelson was likely more interested in what Trump would do for Israel, than what Trump would do for America. That does not change the fact that she helped give me 10 months of a president who gets it right 8 out of 10 times.

Yet, The Cheapskates And Do-Nothings Now Feel Entitled To Comment Without Shame Or Blame

In contrast to Adelson, at this late hour, a year after an election, many well-resourced cheapskates speak up. Did those of you capable, support Trump heartily last summer? No. Well, then you are part of the problem that created a vacuum for the Zionist donors, aren’t you?

Did those of you with the wherewithal to start a PAC for Trump (basically any literate American over 16), start a PAC for Trump?  No. Well, then you are part of the problem that created a vacuum for the Zionist donors, aren’t you?

Did you knock on doors Scott Pressler-style? Did you become a precinct captain? Did you have conversations with your 40 closest acquaintances? Did you do anything other than vote? Because that’s not enough.

I mean, there is only so far that finger pointing can get you.

And there is only so far that air support from the White House can get America. Trump cannot do everything from the Oval Office. He can’t change 80-plus years of failed policies and lazy freedom culture. He can’t change 80-plus years of Americans being nonchalant toward freedom.

I hate how incapable of cooperation many on the political right are. I love the individualism. I love the freedom. I hate the willingness to burn friends who are not perfect. I hate the selfishness when it comes to collaboration.

Your political rival is, in contrast, lockstep unified. American businessman Robert Welch (1899-1985), when he started the John Birch Society, made clear the dedication that communists have to their cause — that they tithe both fortune and time to that cause.

It’s an aberration to see the same from someone on the political right — especially their fortune.

How many times I have met conservatives and libertarians who won’t spend a penny without great hesitation — from the offering plate to charities, from pretty good candidates to pretty good companies. Many America First people will sooner buy slop from Costco than to spend $3 more buying eggs, butter, meat or other staples from a quality farmer.

I mean, it’s hard to take some vocal freedom lovers seriously.

No, it’s hard to take many vocal freedom lovers seriously.

So, I am happy for the Zionists on the political right. They are funding campaigns that bring some benefit to the American people, and to me personally.

If we can ever force AIPAC and their bedfellows to register as foreign agents, I suspect we will notice that wealthy Zionists priced many Americans out of the political process in both parties, and created $5 million congressional races. To force AIPAC to register is going to take a lot more rising to the occasion.

As I write this, many lukewarm Trump supporters write him off, while many Zionists are busy getting friends into his administration, and writing checks for the midterms next year.

They don’t feel bad about your lukewarmness for Trump or for the process. Your lack of resolve makes it easier for them to be more dominant.

What Happens Next?

Let me save you the suspense. Given the trajectory of the grassroots, Zionists and establishment Republicans will have increasing influence over this term, since so many in the grassroots are acting like born losers, while so many Zionists are playing an effective strategy in a predictable game.

I have no appetite for those who bail one year post-election because they aren’t getting what they wanted. Open your eyes and realize freedom isn’t free. You are going to have to work for it, especially after 80-plus years of neglect.

Some Fighters I Admire

Do you know who I admire? Steve Bannon. He found partners, started a successful podcast, became a voice of a movement, was put on trial, let off, put on trial again, thrown in prison, and is still going strong.

Is he perfect? Doesn’t matter.

Do you know who I admire? Robert Kennedy. He lost in 2024, lost again in 2024, swallowed his pride, joined the Trump team when it was in its darkest hours, is pilloried in the media daily, loses 8 out of 10 battles in a department that, on paper, he controls, and keeps pushing forward with small victories.

Is he perfect? Doesn’t matter.

Do you know who I admire? Jesse Benton. He helped advance liberty through Ron Paul’s campaign, helped advance liberty through Rand Paul’s campaign, helped advance liberty even through Mitch McConnell’s campaign. For years, he has been hounded by federal prosecutors for things no Democrat, even in the reddest of states, would see jail time for.

Is he perfect? Doesn’t matter.

Do you know who I admire? Steve Stockman, a man who was an activist troublemaker in and out of Congress before becoming the Jack Smith lawfare test case for what they did to Donald Trump. Still a warrior.

Is he perfect? Doesn’t matter.

Do you know who I admire? Thomas Massie, a man who acts out of conviction to represent his district. He is arguably the most impactful member of the House, including the Speaker. Absent some significant change in the Speaker’s demeanor, no one will remember the Speaker in 20 years, but Thomas Massie will still be remembered in 200 years. Each American can be a Massie, a virtually meaningless 1 out of 435 who leverages his position bigly, or every American can be the Speaker of the House, whatever his name is, a virtually faceless person who holds one of the most important offices in the country, yet lives his days as a valueless cog in someone else’s machine. Those are our two dramatic choices in life.

Is he perfect? Doesn’t matter.

I am a Christian. That means I have high moral standards for myself and when I screw up (which I do), I repent and accept my Savior’s forgiveness. I have high moral standards for others, and I also know that people aren’t perfect. I have appreciation for idealists who believe in freedom and stay in the arena.

At the same time, I know when people around me are hardly trying, and because of that, they are losing the greatest opportunity they have to revive freedom. Kudos to those likeminded people, those who truly believe in freedom and are truly America First.

Robert Welch said decades ago that communists tithe money and time to their cause. Those people are now deep within American institutions. Communists still tithe time and money, outside of work, to their cause. The institutions, however, now support their full-time work toward their cause. They are in every institution around you from police to church, from street sweeper to health official, from hospital to the real estate, and they are promoting their communist worldview.

In response to that reality, do you really think you are going to win back your country by folding on a pretty good president after 10 months and never having given so much it hurts to that fight, let alone waking up every day and giving so much it hurts EVERY SINGLE DAY to that fight.

I give so much that it hurts, and I do it every single day.

You can do the same. We can win this. We don’t have to lose this. Don’t fall for the enticing story of the doomers, the do-nothings, and the cheapskates who proclaim freedom in empty words and who do little of consequence.

Dear cheapskate who is complaining a year after the election — you are part of the problem. Please amend your behavior. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

The post A Year After the Election Is Too Late for the Cheapskates To Complain appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Russophobic Euro elites are trying to railroad the continent to war.

The 27-nation European Union this week unveiled a five-year plan “to get ready for war” with Russia.

The so-called “Roadmap on European Defense Readiness 2030” sounds like a war manifesto and a self-fulfilling prophecy, putting the EU on a disastrous collision course with Russia.

It is incredible that such an ominous direction is being blatantly dictated by an unaccountable elite in Brussels. Eighty-five years ago, the Third Reich had a plan to rule over Europe by dominating the Soviet Union. The EU elite are carrying on the plan.

As for the “defense readiness” (that is, “war readiness”) roadmap, the future is already here, not in five years. The EU is presently on a disastrous collision course with Russia.

Like the United States, the European Union has been at war with Russia through its proxy regime in Ukraine since February 2022, and before that, going back to the 2014 coup in Kiev.

Over the past four years, the EU has supplied nearly €180 billion of taxpayer money to weaponize a NeoNazi regime in Kiev. As we noted in last week’s editorial, that vast allocation (and waste) of resources is far greater than the EU’s own member nations have received for developing their economies and societies. When has the European public had a chance to vote on that? Decisions are being made by an elite cabal.

Unlike the Trump administration, the European Union under the influence of arch-Russophobes like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas, has shown absolutely no will for finding a diplomatic resolution to the conflict in Ukraine. With honorable exceptions, most of the European governments are pushing the war hysteria. So, too, are the European media, as are the American mainstream media. Russia is the evil aggressor, no diplomacy, no dialogue with Moscow, no surrender, and so on. It’s war-on-autopilot.

The European bloc, at least at the official level, is completely dominated by NATO and intelligence agencies’ propaganda portraying Russia as the enemy. The CIA and Britain’s MI6 are no doubt pulling the strings and Europe is dancing like a pathetic puppet.

President Donald Trump held a two-hour phone call with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Thursday during which the two leaders agreed to meet in Budapest in the next two weeks. The meeting is a follow-up to their summit in Anchorage on August 15, to try to end the hostilities in Ukraine.

The EU leadership is implacably opposed to any such diplomacy. They were disconcerted by the meeting in Alaska because Trump treated Putin with respectful diplomacy. The latest news about a summit in Budapest is also peeving EU leaders. They are clamoring for Trump to deliver Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, which they will pay for. This is aimed at ensuring that diplomacy gets blown up.

Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, the European Union has undergone a retrograde transformation to become a militarized bloc defined by obsessive hostility towards Russia. The EU is increasingly a clone of the NATO military alliance. Historically, the European Union stood for peace through neighborly trade and commerce. It was intended to have evolved from the ashes of the Second World War, ensuring that war would never happen again on the continent. In 2012, the bloc was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Not that that award means much, but it serves to illustrate the absurdity.

Over recent months, the EU has become fixated on a feverish war mentality. The economies of the 27 nations are increasingly marshaled by military production and spending. The whole purpose of the bloc is being defined as an existential confrontation with Russia. It seems significant that Von der Leyen and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have Nazi skeletons in their family wardrobes. The Baltic states, too, which have emerged as belligerent influences on EU policy, have nefarious links to the Nazi past.

The war mentality reached fever pitch in Von der Leyen’s State of the Union address on September 10. She opened by declaring that “Europe is in a fight” with Russia. She said it was a fight for “freedom and independence,” and she united the cause of the EU with Ukraine against Russia.

“Europe must fight… because Ukraine’s freedom is Europe’s freedom,” she claimed.

Von der Leyen, the former German military minister, and the European Union’s most senior official, who is unelected, was declaring that the bloc was at war. Now, not in five years.

In recent months with intensifying emphasis, the EU’s intelligence agencies (CIA, MI6 clones) have been warning of war with Russia as imminent, and there has been a suspicious surge in drone incursions in Poland, Estonia, Romania and Denmark, which have been blamed on Russia without any evidence.

All the while, European leaders and NATO chief Mark Rutte (a former Dutch prime minister, and an abject clone if ever there was one) have been calling for massive increases in military spending to “counter the Russia threat”. In March, Von der Leyen floated the figure at €800 billion for the bloc to spend on “defense”.

In 2014, the combined EU military spend was less than €200 billion. It now stands at €340 billion. That is an increase by 70 percent over a decade.

The roadmap unveiled this week sure enough delivers on Von der Leyen’s earlier astronomical figure. It is planning a total EU spend on military of €800 billion – more than double the current level and four times the level the EU spent 10 years ago.

This is insane and unsustainable. If it doesn’t escalate into an all-out war in Europe, the least damaging effect of such wanton militarism will destroy European nations from economic and political collapse.

It is clear that major decisions have been made behind closed doors to take the EU in a direction towards increased militarism where the civilian economies are transformed into war economies. That’s great news for military corporations and politicians who are sponsored (bribed) by lobbyists. European citizens are the losers and they are not being consulted about their fate. Their societies are being drained of vital resources, which are being sucked up by militarism and corporate investors.

To pull off this grand theft and deception, the EU relies on unelected bureaucrats like Von der Leyen, Kallas and Rutte to whip up Russophobia and “war fears”. The mainstream media plays its part by peddling intelligence propaganda to manufacture public acquiescence.

However, there is pushback to the craziness. The rise of populist (that is, more representative and democratic) parties is demonstrating contempt for the undemocratic EU ruling class. The protests in France throwing the government into chaos are motivated by disgust at the economic cutbacks for public services and workers’ rights while Paris throws billions of euros propping up the proxy war in Ukraine.

To their credit, governments in Hungary and Slovakia are speaking out against the warmongering of the EU towards Russia. Viktor Orbán and Robert Fico have criticized the militarization of Europe and are consistently calling for diplomacy with Moscow.

It is significant that Trump chose to meet Putin in the Hungarian capital for their next meeting, chaired by Orbán who described the event as “great news for people who want peace”.

The European-NATO leadership is displeased by the Budapest venue because it suggests following a diplomatic option instead of a policy of war-on-autopilot.

The Russophobic Euro elites are trying to railroad the continent to war. They can see no other way of doing international relations. They have committed the EU to war and dictatorial war spending that is criminal. They, therefore, cannot allow peace and diplomacy to succeed because that would be an admission of their criminal warmongering.

But their way is leading to the abyss.

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

The post Five Years Until War With Russia? The EU Is Already at War appeared first on LewRockwell.

I spend too much time watching videos of perpetually angry Black people attacking and assaulting White people. Always easy targets. Usually in gangs. Often starting with a cowardly sucker punch. But you can’t ignore them. They’re everywhere. Earlier this year, the shocking frequency of them triggered what was dubbed Black Fatigue.

Now, I wrote about what I called African American Fatigue Syndrome a few years back. I’m not bitter over the simpler Black Fatigue catching on. We’re talking about the same thing after all. Bluntly stated, those of us who aren’t “African-American” are saddled with a minority group that we cannot help but interact with at times. This group, although only about 12 percent of the population, is a very loud demographic, and their concerns and alleged mistreatment at the hands of the other 88 percent of the people is drummed into our heads continuously by what Donald Trump has christened the Fake News. The rest of us are supposed to be unduly interested in the welfare of these “African-Americans,” even to the extent of prioritizing them over our own families. What, after all, is more important than a young Black man in the “hood?” Stop whining about living paycheck to paycheck, or the fact you aren’t paid enough to save any money. You should be concerned instead about “Reparations.”

Sure, you might have experienced a medical emergency and find it impossible to pay the bill that comes courtesy of our thoroughly evil Medical Industrial Complex. It might have impacted your “quality of life,” to use a favorite term of that same Complex. But what about all those Black children with indecipherable names, who are forced to graduate from high school without ever learning to read? Who can’t perform basic math problems? Of course, we all know that grammar and math are “racist,” but why aren’t you worried about how they can all become “influencers,” rappers, and other kinds of laughable celebrities? As Humphrey Bogart once said, your problems don’t amount to a hill of beans. Not to some resident of a real, genuine “hood.” Where the nights are full of high excitement. Will there be an actual drive-by shooting here? Will some “gangstas” kill other “gangstas” who “disrespected” them? Don’t tell me about your Parkinson’s Disease. Have you ever been really and truly “disrespected?”

The AI photo above reflects a tragic reality; Black males have long been prone to raping White females. Forget To Kill a Mockingbird. Look at the official crime statistics. While Black on White rape is all too common, Whites raping Blacks is so statistically negligible as to be considered nonexistent. Yet, Hollywood always depicts things that way, doesn’t it? Eldridge Cleaver bragged about all the White women he raped in his allegedly best-selling memoir, Soul on Ice. How could a major publisher not publish it? I don’t have to tell you that there are very few former altar boys controlling the major publishers. White women especially ate that stuff up. Accounts of White women being raped. Somehow, that’s cool, as long as the rapists were a particular magical color. Ask the German “activist” who apologized to the migrants who raped her. Or the German girl who was given a longer prison sentence than the migrant rapists for “insulting” them. You’ve come a long way from Hitler, baby.

As I’ve said before, I am fatigued beyond measure by the ghetto mentality. Ghetto issues. Ghetto “fashion.” Ghetto “music.” I have zero tolerance for hearing any more Black people yelling. About anything. Being called “racist” doesn’t bother me in the least. It’s a label that has lost whatever meaning it might have ever had. I think Trotsky invented the term, didn’t he? You know, the former Lev Bronstein from New York. Who became a leading figure in the “Russian” revolution. Wound up with an icepick in the head, Lev did. Now, that’s ghetto. That’s “keeping it real.” I think Lev might have invented the term “anti-Semitism” too. “Anti-Semitism” and “racism” go together. Like a horse and carriage, in the words of the old song. Those words were written by yet another non-Irishman, Sammy Cahn. Old Lev would have been proud. Which brings us to the more important part of the equation. Just who ensures that there is always an endless array of Black complaints? Who promotes this?

I’m sure anyone reading this knows the answer to that. It wasn’t a group of Mormons. Or lesbian Presbyterians. Or one-legged Eskimos. Or transgender Unitarians. If any other group held the kind of power that those who are whole or partially Jewish do, the sleeping Sheeple would at least be aware of it. Because our lapdog press would at least acknowledge it. The lame investigatory process, such as it exists in America 2.0, is controlled by this magical Two Percent of the population. From the FBI to the New York Times, Jewish concerns are front and center. Since the primary concern of powerful American Jews is unquestioned taxpayer support to the parasitic state of Israel, their concerns are most often expressed as Black concerns. It is they who have pushed and promoted Blacks to the exclusion of all others, since the days when some hoaxer with incredible foresight produced the Protocols of Zion. Even got Henry Ford on board. Poor Henry, invented the car and gets labeled a despicable “anti-Semite.”

This marriage of Black and Jew is so prevalent that you have turn off your critical thinking skills not to see it. Who promoted all those Black big band leaders, and then the early rock and rollers? They weren’t Christmas Celebrators, to use comedian Leonarda Joni’s phrase. Of course, there were many Black performers with talent, but that many? Who guided the careers of Black big band leaders like Duke Ellington, and early rock and roll artists like Little Richard and Chuck Berry? After all, weren’t they all being viciously discriminated against in those days? Well, to be fair, those “guiding” their careers did invariably cheat and rob them of their earnings. What were all those White audience members doing, cheering on people who couldn’t stay in the same hotel with? Who wrote all those Brill Building songs of the early 1960s? Carole King? Cynthia Weil? Gerry Goffin? Neil Sedaka? No Irish in that bunch. And they wrote most of those songs for Black artists to perform.

Who produced the slew of Black television comedies in the 1970s? I think Norman Lear is still alive. Ask him if he goes to a synagogue or a church. Why did Lear, and so many other prominent Jews, have such a strong desire to promote Black comedians, Black musicians, and more recently Black politicians? Why didn’t they just promote members of their own tribe as rock and roll stars, etc? Sure, there was half-Jewish Gary Lewis. And David Lee Roth. Dee Snyder. The Beastie Boys. K.I.S.S. Going back to the early days of Hollywood, Jewish performers still were disproportionately represented onscreen, as they absolutely dominated things behind the scenes. Think of all the poor White gentiles, standing there with Fender Stratocaster in hand, waiting for somebody’s nephew named Seymour to “discover” them. Call it “hate.” Call it “anti-Semitism.” It’s undeniable who runs our culture. And that culture, on the surface, has the visage and “style” of ghetto Black people.

Considering how many videos are produced, on a daily basis, of Black people behaving badly, a sane society’s response should be to expose and try to correct this behavior. It’s irrational behavior. It’s uncivilized behavior. And it’s behavior that we don’t see any other group engaging in. Yet this same behavior is perfectly normal for untold numbers of this one particular minority group. Unbelievably conceited and arrogant “self-esteem,” nurtured from childhood by the non-Irish overlords of our culture. Senseless and unearned pride from non-accomplishments. Hyper sensitivity over any perceived slight, colloquially framed as “dissing.” You don’t “dis” a Black person. In spite of their inflated self-worth, they can be deflated by the simplest critique. Well, more often driven to violence by criticism. Or even someone looking at them. Kind of like how Hillary Clinton and other elitists don’t want the commoners to gaze upon them. As with dangerous animals, it’s best not to attract their attention.

Read the Whole Article

The post Black Fatigue in a Zionist World appeared first on LewRockwell.