Here’s how parents can push back on the alarming ideology that’s infecting our children’s classrooms.
At what point did cartoon caricatures automatically become “hate,” or offensive? For example, should white gun-owners be offended by the character Elmer Fudd? Because, as a white gun-owner, I’m not. Cartoons are all about exaggerating characteristics and stereotypes, of pretty much everyone and everything. If I watch The Simpson, am I supposed to then despise and hate all bald, overweight white guys? (Or yellow guys, or whatever.)
Episode 463 has Skyler giving his commentary on the following aphorisms written by Jakub Bożydar Wiśniewski: “A ‘guaranteed profit’ is something akin to a riskless danger.”; “A fool believes that liberty comes from participation in power. A person of reason knows that it comes from dissipation of power.”; “A libertarian does not oppose the welfare state because he does not care about the poor, but because he cares about them too much to believe they deserve being caught in the web of lies, empty promises, perpetual dependence, hate-mongering, and cultural degradation created by self-serving, power-hungry crooks.”; “It takes a common thug to commit injustice, but it takes an exceptional thug to call it ‘social justice’.”; “Collectivism: the practice of exploiting humans in the name of humankind.”; and “All delusions aside, personal development consists in little more than scrubbing oneself clean of endless layers of folly.”
On February 9, the US Justice Department announced that US President Joe Biden, as in so many other areas, intends to serve Donald Trump’s second term when it comes to persecuting heroes guilty of exposing US war crimes and embarrassing American politicians.
(My Eastern New Mexico News column for February 10, 2021)
When something is important to you, you want to share it. If other people don’t understand it, you want to explain it to them.
You usually want others to like and understand it as much as you …
Last week, I reported on two myths about socialism. My new video covers three more.
Episode 461 has Skyler giving his commentary on the following topics: taking responsibility for a fetus whose mother wants to abort it; taking responsibility for a child whose parents want to abandon it; taking responsibility for your neighbor’s welfare; taking responsibility for a criminal’s incarceration; and more.
Episode 456 welcomes back Alex R. Knight III to the podcast to chat with Skyler on the following topics: pessimism about the future of America; the display of dominance by the corrupt left over Trump for 4 years; the press revealing their strong leftist bias by going silent now that the Presidency is in Democratic hands; Twitter as Establishment, not radical left; Stefan Molyneux; the justice in destroying the US Capitol building (a monument to slavery and continual oppression); a thought experiment on acquitting an unpopular defendant even when widespread riots are guaranteed; politicians and bureaucrats being put under oath and having their claims cross-examined; the fact that government actors have no skin in the game of interfering with our lives; the character flaw that is allowing yourself to assume authority over others without liability (immunity); talking to cops about why they became cops and seeing how far they’ve been corrupted away from those probably noble reasons; normalizing adult drug use, such as is Dr. Carl Hart on Rogan and Reason podcasts; and more.
Episode 446 has Skyler giving his commentary on a quote by Bertrand Russell on the idea that some questions and opinions aren’t open to discussion; by Thomas Jefferson on disobeying unjust laws; by Francis Mahaffy on the concept of “social justice” and the damage it does to justice; and by Mahatma Gandhi on the inhumanity that is the use of coercion.
The anonymous author of the satirical “Homeless Camping in Austin: A Modest Proposal” has also sent me this more serious guest post. The title is mine. “Democratic centralism,” you may recall, is the Leninist practice of demanding strict loyalty to a party line after a (usually perfunctory) debate. Printed with the author’s permission.