Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Talking to Joseph Stalin

H. G. Wells and Joseph Stalin
H.G. Wells, the prolific British sci-fi writer, who self-described to be a socialist left of Stalin, interviewed the infamous Soviet dictator for three hours on July 23, 1934. The interview was recorded by Constantine Oumansky, the chief of the Press Bureau of the Commissariat of Foreign Affairs.

The scope of the interview, after he spoke at length with President Roosevelt, was to find out what Stalin was “doing to change the world.” Wells told Stalin that he tried to look at the world through the eyes of the “common man” not the eyes of a politician or a bureaucrat.

Indicating to Stalin that “capitalists must learn from you, to grasp the spirit of socialism,” Wells stated that a profound reorganization was taking place in the United States, the creation of a “planned, that is, socialist, economy.” He witnessed Washington building offices, new state regulatory bodies, and “a much needed Civil Service.”

Stalin expressed his skepticism about U.S. being able to build a planned economy. It is not possible, he said, because “the Americans want to rid themselves of the [economic] crisis on the basis of private capitalist activity without changing the economic basis.” Stalin was touting the new economic basis that socialism had built. In his view, the existing capitalist system was rooted in anarchy. “A planned economy tries to abolish unemployment.” But a capitalist would never agree to completely abolish unemployment, Stalin said, because capitalists want to maintain a supply of cheap labor.

Stalin was wrong about unemployment under a socialist Soviet economy for three reasons:

1.       Data in general was never accurately kept or reported.

2.       The labor was highly manual with low levels of automation; under a free market economy automation often displaces labor, causing retraining of workers into other skills.

3.       Women who sought employment worked for shorter periods of time and were thus not included in the statistics.

Stalin explained to Wells that planned economies increase output in those “branches of the industry which produce goods that the masses of the people need particularly.”

Having survived for twenty years in such a system Stalin described, I remember precisely all the shortages of goods and services that the economically illiterate central planners created, the long lines, the rationing we had to endure, and the empty shelves everywhere.

Furthermore, to see how wrong Stalin was, just look today at Venezuela under Maduro’s centrally planned socialist policies, a continuation of his mentor’s, Hugo Chavez, and you will see the empty shelves and suffering. Look at Castro’s Cuba after 50 years of central planning and at its decaying infrastructure and decrepit buildings. Fidel “protected” Cuba’s hapless citizens from the “evils” of capitalism and instead gave them a nightmarish socialist economy and a political socialist dictatorship.

Stalin described to Wells that capital flows into those sectors of the economy where the rate of profit is highest.  A capitalist would never agree “to incur loss to himself and agree to a lower rate of profit for the sake of satisfying the needs of the people.” A central planner like Stalin did not understand supply and demand, only saw collectivism, and viewed profit as evil. Who wants to open a business if they are going to lose money?

Stalin admitted that “without getting rid of the capitalists, without abolishing the principle of private property in the means of production, it is impossible to create a planned economy.”  When the “financial oligarchy will be abolished, only then socialism will be brought about,” Stalin added.

He believed that Roosevelt’s “New Deal” was a very powerful socialist idea. But, in Stalin’s opinion, Roosevelt would not be able to achieve his socialist goals for many generations because “the banks, the industries, the large enterprises, the large farms are not in Roosevelt’s hands.”

All the railroads, the mercantile fleet, the army of skilled workers, engineers, and technical personnel are all working for private enterprise, he said. Even though the State offers military defense of the country, maintains law and order, and collects taxes, this private ownership of the means of production, renders the State unable to control everything, “the State is in the hands of capitalist economy.”

Stalin explained that, if the State controlled the banks, then transportation, then heavy industries, industries in general, commerce, an “all-embracing control will be equivalent to the State ownership of all branches of the national economy and this will be the process of socialization.”

I wonder if the Millennials understand that they would lose their smart gadgets, TVs, laptops, and other electronics they love to their socialist utopian dream of social justice. If they can’t get rich then everybody must be equally poor and miserable.

The important question is, are American citizens ready to lose everything they own privately, giving government carte blanche to own the means the production and to tell them what they can and cannot have, consume, and do?

Stalin argued that Roosevelt made an honest attempt to “satisfy the interests of the proletariat class at the expense of the capitalist class.” Today, we, the taxpayers/capitalist class, are still satisfying the interests of the non-producers who receive welfare at our expense from the heavy taxes we pay. Are we willing supporters of such idle individuals? Roosevelt, with his programs, created a generational welfare class that feels entitled to what they receive, and destroyed the family in the process.

Stalin described the two classes in capitalism, as he saw it through the lenses of a socialist:

-          “The propertied class” (the owners of banks, factories, mines, farms, “plantations in colonies,” who chased after the “evil” profit)

-          “The exploited class” (the class of the poor who existed by selling their labor)

Wells told Stalin that, although he personally saw the need to “conduct propaganda in favor of socialism,” he met many educated people such as “engineers, airmen, military-technical people” who regarded “your simple class antagonism as nonsense.” Additionally, he asked, were there not people who were not poor but worked productively?

Stalin admitted that “small landowners, artisans, small traders” did not decide the fate of a country, but “the toiling masses, who produce all the things society requires.”

We sure have a lot of unemployed and disabled “toiling masses” today that are sitting idle at home and don’t seem to mind one bit, benefitting from the “evil” capitalist spoils.

Calling J.P. Morgan “old Morgan,” Wells described him as “a parasite on society,” who “merely accumulated wealth.” On the other hand, Wells admired Rockefeller whom he described as a “brilliant organizer” who “has set an example of how to organize the delivery of oil that is worthy of emulation,” while Ford was “selfish.”

Further excoriating the capitalist system based on profit that, in his opinion, is “breaking down,” Wells surprised Stalin by saying, “It seems to me that I am more to the Left than you, Mr. Stalin; I think the old system is nearer to its end than you think.”

Stalin corrects him that these capitalist men possess great organizational talent which the Soviet people could learn from. “And [J. P.] Morgan, whom you characterize so unfavorably, was undoubtedly a good, capable organizer.” But people like him who “serve the cause of profit” are not “prepared to reconstruct the world,” they are not “capable organizers of production.” 

Reminding Wells, “don’t you know how many workers he throws in the streets,” Stalin added that capitalism will be abolished by the working class, not by the ‘technical intelligentsia’ or the ‘organizers’ of production. If this “technical intelligentsia breaks away spiritually from their employers, from the capitalist world, that will take a long time and only then can they begin to reconstruct the world.” The working class will become the “sovereign master of the capitalist class.”

In reality, this working class Stalin described as the savior of society, was a dumbed-down, poorly paid, miserable majority who could not care less if the factories under-produced, broke down, and were never repaired. They were paid regardless of how much they produced, how many mistakes they made, what shoddy products they sent to the market, how much theft was going on in order to barter with others to survive, and did not own much of anything. This working class pretended to work and the communist organizers and centralized planners pretended to pay them.

The Soviet economic system was a dismal model which failed miserably and eventually collapsed on its own utopian weight while the free market system thrived.

Unfortunately today, the Democrats and Social Democrats are gaining tract in their efforts to resurrect around the world a mummified model of economic failure, inventing new euphemisms, in order to stay in absolute power and control of the population.

Wells described the Royal Society whose president had delivered a speech on “social planning and scientific control.” The Royal Society, he told Stalin, held “revolutionary views and insists on the scientific reorganization of human society. Mentality changes. Your class-war propaganda has not kept pace with these facts.”

“Capitalist society is in a cul de sac,” Stalin responded, and “A devoted and energetic revolutionary minority requires the passive support of millions.”

“Revolution, the substitution of one social system for another, has always been a struggle, a painful and cruel struggle, a life and death struggle,” Stalin admitted. And the process will not be “spontaneous and peaceful, it will be complicated, long, and violent.” And the new world order “revolutionaries” should use the police to support them in the fight against “reactionaries.”

“That is why the Communists say to the working class: Answer violence with violence; do all you can to prevent the old dying order from crushing you, do not permit it to put manacles on your hands, on the hands with which you will overthrow the old system.”

Citing history, both Wells and Stalin described how Cromwell, on the basis of the Constitution, resorted to violence, beheaded the king, dispersed the Parliament, arrested many, and beheaded others; how much blood was shed to overthrow the tsars; how the October Revolution overthrew the old and decaying Russian capitalist system and how the “Bolsheviks were the only way out.”

Explaining the Third Estate (the common people) which existed before the French Revolution, Stalin pointed out that “not a single class has voluntarily made way for another class” and the “Communists would welcome the voluntary departure of the bourgeoisie.”

Wells argued that force must be used within existing laws and “there is no need to disorganize the old system because it is disorganizing itself enough as it is.” In his opinion, “insurrection against the old order, against the law, is obsolete, old-fashioned.” In addition to the educational system which must be radically changed, this is how Wells explained his point of view:

1.       He supports order.

2.       He attacks the present system “in so far as it cannot assure order.”

3.       He thinks that “class war propaganda may detach from socialism just those educated people whom socialism needs.” (H.G. Wells, p. 20 of the interview transcript)

Stalin countered with his own points:

1.       “The social bulwark of the revolution is the working class.”

2.       An auxiliary force must exist; the Communists call it a Party.

3.       Political power is the “lever of change” to create new laws in the interest of the working class.

From my experience, the only interests represented in the socialism/communism of my youth were the interests of the dictatorial ruling elite of the Communist Party. They became the millionaire rulers at that time, and, when disbanded and stripped of power, their heirs became the billionaires of today.

Ending the interview, Wells thanked Stalin for his explanations of the fundamentals of socialism and said that millions around the world hang on to every word Stalin and Roosevelt utter.

Stalin, engaging the infamous and demagogue idea of ‘self-criticism,’ which had sent many honest intellectuals to gulags, replied that much more could have been done by the Bolsheviks, had they been “cleverer.” Wells suggested making human beings “cleverer” by inventing a five-year plan for the “reconstruction of the human brain which obviously lacks many things needed for a perfect social order.”

The idea of mind control, which is not so far-fetched today, brought shivers down my spine. Bombastic and not-ground-in-reality Five-Year centralized plans issued by the Communist Party elites and their apparatchiks who had no idea how the economy should be run, many of whom did not have but an elementary education and could barely read, write, and do simple math, those plans brought the economies in all Soviet satellite countries to unmitigated disaster.








Sunday, February 21, 2016

Part V Interview on Education with Mircea Brenciu

Thinker and his companion Constanta Museum
Photo: Ileana Johnson 2012
I asked Mircea Brenciu what happened to the education in Romania as it evolved from communist indoctrination to so-called western style education in 25 years. Although some young people earned international acclaim in science and mathematics, education in general has been a profound disappointment, he added.

Brenciu is a firm believer that the lack of spending in education is a direct reason for the pathetic performance. He explained that Romania continues to place last on education spending, behind countries like Bulgaria, China, and Indonesia.

Despite politicians’ promises to make education a priority, financing it has remained at the bottom when compared to schools’ needs and to allocations that other countries have made in education. He illustrated the dearth of investment in “human capital,” a.k.a. education, with a statistically low 2.5% of the national budget in 2013, 3.2% in 2014, and 3.7% in 2015.

Even though politicians have introduced a benchmark of 6 percent for education, according to the National Institute of Statistics (INS), investment in education has never exceeded 4 percent. Yet every government in power and every prime minister have pledged to the voting population that education was a priority. Remus Pricopie, former Minister of Education (2012-2014) reported in 2014 3.2 percent of the budget for expenditures in education.

I happen to disagree with Mircea Brenciu that spending more on education, throwing more money at schools, is going to make a difference in student achievement, performance on tests, or long-term retention and learning.

I don’t think the communist party spent outrageous amounts to indoctrinate the youth yet, in general, excluding the worthless classes of Scientific Socialism, Socialist Philosophy, and other such courses, students received a well-rounded education even though they had no labs for experimentation in physics, chemistry, or biology.

When I arrived directly from the socialist/communist state to the United States, I was shocked how ill-prepared most students and their teachers actually were. The depth of knowledge acquired by most eastern block students was superior when compared to the education of most Americans. It is also true that American students were encouraged to think individually and outside the box instead of emphasizing the collective. Collectivism stunted creativity and inventiveness.

Since Americans have been spending thousands of dollars per pupil to improve achievement and raise test scores, in the face of the fact that test scores do not compare well to other countries, it is obvious that throwing more money at education does not increase student performance or test scores. There are other variables such as parental dedication and involvement in their children’s education and two-parent families that are also very important.

I understand, in many villages in Romania, where the aediles had not used the funds judiciously, or did not receive any funding for education, it was hard to learn in a classroom whose roof was leaking, had no heat, or the school had not been completed or repaired for habitation.

The most adversely affected by unemployment are high school graduates with a rate of 8.1 percent unemployment when compared to those with a college diploma (5.1%). By age, the group of 15-24 year-olds have 23.7% unemployment rate.  Among the 25-34 year-olds unemployment was much smaller, 7.75 percent.

It is obvious to Brenciu that there are special interests at play that ignore the national interest, resulting in diminished education possibilities. Having a Parliament is great, however, the voters, informed, misinformed, or deliberately ignorant, get the politicians they elect. There is no such thing as the best party in power. Romanians and people in general should run like crazy away from a party or a politician who wants to dominate political life. “Did we not have for over 50 years a ‘unique’ party which led us, against our will, to the highest peaks of socialism?”

The content of education has become globalist, emphasizing global citizenship or preparation for such global citizenship.  The elites and the United Nations’ non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are working overtime everywhere to institute the sought-after socialist global control.

To me, it was refreshing to see so many churches mushroom around the country, and a comeback of faith after five decades of atheism under Ceausescu’s socialist/communist dictatorship. State funds were allocated to repair and rebuild many churches. But Romanians seemed to resent the church leaders and priests who lived lavish and luxurious lives when compared to most Romanians, while hospitals and schools were not funded adequately by the state and people died as a result.

I noticed many museum and architectural gems in a sorry state of neglect, decay, and rust. Priceless sculptures and mosaics were drowning in dust at Tomis and marble Etruscan sarcophagi were used as trash bins outside the Tomis Museum in Constanta.

Educators have told me that the curriculum is not teaching students so much about their national heroes anymore. History and national pride have been definitely marginalized in the quest to become “European citizens” as quickly as possible. The dumbing down of education has showcased depravity and immorality, denigrating good moral values, pride in national identity, and Romanian-ness. The noble ideals of love for their country, of patriotism, of respect for historical facts and for their ancestors, have disappeared from the curriculum, replaced by defeatism and shame for one’s ancestry.

Many well-educated and average Romanians sought employment elsewhere in the EU “openness” where the pay was commensurate with education, training, and experience, leaving a huge vacuum in Romanian key sectors of labor. Why work for 300 euros in Romania when you can get five times the pay (1,500 euros) for the same type job in the European Union and the cost of living is similar?



Saturday, February 20, 2016

Freedom and Prosperity Radio Talk on Education

http://www.tertiumquids.org/120515%20E.mp3 Part II of my radio talk on Freedom and Prosperity Radio (9 minutes, no commercials)
http://www.tertiumquids.org/120515%20D.mp3 Part I of my radio talk on Freedom and Prosperity Radio (12 minutes, no commercials)

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Interview Across Cyber Space with Mircea Brenciu Part IV Medicine and Islamic Invasion

On the question of medicine and medical care after decades of communism which ended officially with the Revolution of December 1989, Brenciu explained that Romania now produces doctors on a “conveyor belt.” He admits that a good doctor is not made by textbook theory learned in school, but is born after years of residency training, specializing, and real life experience in the ER of a hospital.

The tragedy starts, he said, when the young resident is thrown in the midst of the hospital drama and realizes that he himself has become a social case, a victim of starvation on his meager income. While a nurse in the European Union, which Romania is a member of, earns about 6,500 lei (1,500 euros) per month, a doctor in Romania earns 1,500 lei per month, approximately four times less.

Under socialism/communism, people walked around the medical professionals with money in envelopes.  Extra cash for expected bribes sped up test results, X-rays, helped jump waiting lines, and gave patients extra much-needed and speedier medical attention, prevented infections, and perhaps insured survivability. Doctors accepted the bribes because their pay was so low. Everyone earned equal pay and experienced the same miserable standard of living, regardless of years of training, effort, and education.

Overcoming the problems associated with decades of totalitarian socialism/communism has not been easy. Accepting bribes and corruption across the board are still the norm. Even though medical care is socialized and free, people still pay doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel in order to expedite their tests, care, and treatment. There are private clinics but fees are potentially higher than the bribes.

Under such low current pay and demoralizing conditions, it is no surprise that a chronic crisis of medical personnel overwhelms the recovery system and the establishment of well-organized and timely health care. And the government in Bucharest does not seem to make much difference since the “command buttons are in Brussels.” The Romanians’ plans for the future do not seem to coincide with the plans of the technocrats from Brussels, added Brenciu.

Dr. Arafat, a naturalized Romanian, organized what most considered an exceptional service that was highly necessary in the medical chaos – SMURD, an acronym for the Emergency Medical Services in Romania. This service is a model of organization, efficiency, and necessity.

On the question of the Muslim invasion of Europe, Brenciu admitted that the Old Continent is finding itself again in the unenvied position of battlefield for the clash of civilizations. “Angela Merkel was not afraid to receive in the beautiful, liberal, and multicultural Germany one million Islamists, of which at least 5% could be terrorists with proper papers.”

Brenciu added that the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington brought attention to this inevitable phenomenon for the European society. The clash of civilization is a post-Cold War era hypothesis that supports the idea that people’s cultural and religious identities will be a major source of conflict. Huntington proposed this idea in a 1992 lecture at the American Enterprise Institute. Huntington later expanded his thesis in a 1996 book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

Setting aside the humanitarian aspect of this invasion and petitions for political and economic asylum, Brenciu believes that “accepting to be invaded in good conscience by cohorts of people with foreign traditions, culture, schooling, and especially religion, by hundreds of thousands of individuals terrorized by war, poverty, and the devastating and merciless Islamism, seems to be a form of madness bordering on treason.”

In his opinion, Angela Merkel, with her exaggerated and programmed tolerance for the refugees of Islam, will compromise the European Union, which will fold in the face of huge pressure of the member states, forced to accept unwillingly thousands and thousands of hungry, lawless, and savage refugees. Additionally, Germany will be gripped by national despair.

What will Merkel do to “attenuate the fantastic pressure of this human ballast which materialized suddenly and without logic?” She will probably “force the small states of Central and Eastern Europe, EU members, to receive a large portion of these unfortunate “impoverished” who paid heavy fees [where did they get so much money, he wonders] to cross many borders and thousands of kilometers to come to the Promised Land, Germany.”

Romania was asked initially to accept two thousand immigrants but President Johannis negotiated later to accept forty-five hundred. Following the visit of the “technocrat premier Ciolos in Germany in January 2016, we must now think of a number of refugees much, much larger, a number that will likely be either secret or falsified publicly.”

What shocks Brenciu is that, despite the sacrifices Romanians have made across the centuries to preserve the “Christian spirit, they are now infected quietly by Islam in unknown proportions by the very European institutions which should have defended Christianity and the doctrine of a free and democratic Europe.”

Brenciu did not speak in a discriminatory vein; he referred to the Islamic world that must respect its geographic boundaries and the boundaries, cultures, lands, human rights, and religions of other peoples.


Sunday, February 14, 2016

The Three Americas of Your Dreams

Photo: Ileana Johnson 2015
Michael Savage made an interesting and profound statement on his radio show that struck a chord with me because I believe it to be true, based on my past experience with socialism and communism, my present knowledge of crony capitalism, and my research.

“We have three Americas – the America that was, the America that is, and the America that will be.”

The Facebook generation never experienced the America that was; they never knew the correct history of the exceptional America of the past, they only learned Howard Zinn’s revisionist history. They just benefitted from its greatness and its accomplishments.  Their teachers have been telling them for decades that America was evil, racist, imperialist, and they need to be ashamed of being American, they must seek retribution for all the past wrongs at the hands of the bad white man who must have had invented “white privilege.”

Everything they enjoy, use and benefit from today, they owe in great part to the discovery, inventiveness, and entrepreneurship of the white men they hate so much. That is not to say that people of other cultures and nationalities have not contributed greatly to this country with their hard work. But not many invented things that make our lives so much better and easier today. Look how many white European men have received science Nobel prizes for their inventions and discoveries.

America that was is the exceptional America that so generously gave aid and knowledge to other countries in need, that built a successful nation that knew and was proud of its history, had a moral compass, was honorable, had stable families, and kept God at its core. America that was achieved unsurpassed greatness and, in that process, improved the lives of billions around the world, freeing an entire continent from the oppressing German National Socialists (Nazis).

America that is now is ashamed of its history, of what made it great, and people are afraid to express their feelings of pride because it is shameful and derisive to be patriotic; people are demoralized, have lost their decency, more than half of the country is on welfare or unemployed.

People who are in school know very little and are unabashedly unashamed that they know so very little. When asked simple questions that most foreigners can answer with ease, young Americans walk away with pride and a smile when they show their stupidity and ignorance, unable to recognize national landmarks, their own geography, famous Americans, their own history, and many rudiments of basic elementary education. But they can immediately recognize and worship pop-culture trash icons and recite sports statistics and worthless trivia.

Noah Webster was right when he said,
"Every child in America should be acquainted with his own country. He should read books that furnish him with ideas that will be useful to him in life and practice. As soon as he opens his lips, he should rehearse the history of his own country; he should lisp the praise of liberty, and of those illustrious heroes and statesmen, who have wrought a revolution in her favor."    

Unfortunately, most Americans with a college diploma would definitely be unable to pass a high school literacy exam from the turn of the 20th century, that is how dumbed down the American education has become by teaching to a test and lazily using calculators instead of their brains.

America that will be is yet to be decided. The electorate has two choices, go with one of the two communist candidates on the left, turning completely left to socialism and eventually communism or maintain the mixed economy of the middle with government socialism and crony capitalism.

It appears that the tendency goes toward socialism. Decades of brainwashing in schools, Hollywood, and the main stream media are finally paying off, politicians have enough domestic low information voters and imported illegal aliens to bring about their sought after utopian paradise in the vein of Venezuela and Cuba.

No matter what happens to the country, politicians will be part of the ruling elite while the useful idiots, including the media, academia, and all the fringe lunatics on the left will become part of the equally poor and miserable proletariat with implausible rights and demands that cannot be fulfilled in the real world of work. And they will have to labor when other people’s money will be gone and the middle class will become part of the dustbin of history, a blip on the radar of a formerly successful and abundant life which they squandered away by allowing their children to be brainwashed in schools.

Schools are not the only ones responsible for the creation of this entitlement mentality, an incurable societal cancer. The entitlement mentality started with the divorced single mom with children taken care of by the government largesse, a government that purposefully became daddy.

The entitlement mentality was exacerbated by two-income parents, who could not spend enough time with their children. To make up for this obvious breakdown and assuage guilt, parents started buying their children “stuff” which they did not need, thus creating an entitled future society of narcissistic people who felt that everything was owed to them free on a golden platter just  because they existed.

And old communist politicians like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton told them that it was their “right” to have health care, free education, free housing, free prenatal and postnatal care, free vacations, all at the expense of society, no personal responsibility whatsoever. It worked really well in the Fabian socialist nations of Western Europe - they are all bankrupt, financially and morally, fighting off too late or not at all the Islamist invasion and the failed multicultural “diversity” with their ill-placed tolerance.

America that will be, with a socialist and communist utopian agenda, will be muddled by disaster after disaster exacerbated by the already doubled national debt, now sitting at $19 trillion and rising, over $120 trillion with unfunded liabilities such as the Social Security Ponzi scheme, Medicare and Medicaid. This unpayable national debt cannot possibly be reversed no matter who the president is.

How do you undo the open borders policy and all the illegal aliens that have been flooding the U.S.? We’ve been told for ten years that we have 11 million “undocumented Americans,” who, by simple mathematics should have grown to 30 million by now, a sizable non-information Democrat illegal voting bloc, deceptively named “undocumented workers” to cover the fact that they are foreign nationals who broke our laws to come in, but are now demanding and receiving more rights than Americans have, in exchange for their illegal vote across the country.

They are changing the demographic face of America on a large scale plan and forcing bi-lingualism on us. They are already burdening the welfare system, schools, child care, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and the earned income tax credit system. How do you stop Muslim invasion? In the name of tolerance and their bogus contribution to America, they are allowed to change our laws, to introduce Sharia Law, proselytizing for Islam in schools across the country with the help of Common Core, in hopes of eventually taking over by sheer fertility, 8.1 children per family.

How do you undo Obamacare, the deliberate destruction of one of the world’s best healthcare systems in order to install government provided insurance? The socialist healthcare system for veterans did not work very well and thousands have died and are still dying daily, waiting to be seen and to be treated properly.

How do you overcome the weakened military? How do you overcome the Islamization of America? How do you overcome the destruction wrought in education by Common Core Sub-standards and by the State Department of Education? How do you overcome the destruction of the fossil fuel industry at the expense of building the Green, pie-in-the-sky, renewable energy of solar and wind? How do you overcome the debauchery and the loss of morality? How do you overcome the loss of faith? How do you overcome the infiltration at all levels of government of anti-Americans, communists, and Islamists who do not have America’s best interest at heart?

How are you going to reverse decades of indoctrination of our children into good socialists? How do you reverse the climate change industry? How do you overcome all the race-baiting, bigotry, hate speech, and white privilege rhetoric coming from the militant and violent left who has plenty of money to stage riots and destructive demonstration by young people addled by drug use? How do you reverse United Nation’s Agenda 21? How do you reverse all the spying on citizens? How do you protect American citizens who can be killed without due process?

The country has gone too far over the cliff. America that will be will not be recognized by baby boomers and legal aliens who immigrated to America for the opportunity of a better life, not for welfare benefits.
Copyright: Ileana Johnson 2016

Friday, February 12, 2016

Easy-Cheesy Socialist and Free College Degrees

“It is a socialist idea that making profits is a vice. I consider the real vice is making losses.”
Winston Churchill

Because I lived the utopian nightmare of socialism/communism, I think I am qualified to explain the big lie to the young men and women who dreamily and robotically applaud the socialist candidate, Bernie Sanders, for his promise of handouts and especially of free college education.

I am sure, the young  Americans, many with worthless easy-cheesy  social work and racial/gender studies degrees and some with worthy college degrees, who find themselves unemployed, will be happy to know that, under Bernie’s mega trillions economic plan, they will find themselves unemployed for free, no college debt. They will “Feel the Bern” of socialism and rejoice in it.

Education, like medical care, was free, but it came with huge strings attached and it was not worth much because the pay was equal, regardless of effort. And you had to go where the government decided to send you in order to pay back your indebtedness to government. Nothing was free, just because they said it was free, it was basic economics, even though socialists called it something else.

If you were an educator, you had to teach in a small and remote village without roads, running water, and electricity, housed in some primitive home with a thatched roof. If you were a doctor, you had to practice for years in a far-away community who had never seen a nurse in their lives or the inside of a hospital.

To get to your assigned post, you had to travel the last leg of your trip in an oxen-pulled wagon.  If you were an engineer, you had to go by train to different locations around the country where the dear leader was building his latest megalomaniacal projects. Nobody ate for free! You had to work, even if it was just sweeping streets, planting trees, weeding the fields, gathering crops, or digging ditches. Nobody was too educated for menial labor.

Before you were able to enter the university, you had to pass the muster of many examination boards, starting in middle school and college. If your grades were good, that was not enough; your communist pedigree and activism had to equally match your academic performance. If your parents were not members in good standing with the communist party and licked their boots, it did not matter how smart you were or how perfect your grades were. Your chance of getting in was slim to none. On the other hand, students who barely passed in high school but were children of prominent communist party leaders got in first. Membership in the communist elite had its privileges.

Free Castro-style medical care was one of the staples of socialism but it came with rationing of care, unqualified personnel, bribes to be seen on time or first, rationing of drugs, empty pharmacy shelves, and early and unnecessary death at the hands of uncaring and half-baked doctors and atrocious hospital conditions.

You should ask yourselves, if socialist health care is so great, why do Hollywood elites and wealthy foreigners seek treatment for their serious illnesses at the best hospitals money can buy in the United States? Why are they not going to Cuba? Michael Moore spoke non-stop about the superiority of Castro’s medical care when compared to our evil capitalist healthcare.

Did we get free cable? Not really, we got two channels daily and one educational channel at certain hours. And we had to pay every month voluntarily. Inspectors would show up unannounced randomly to check our passbook to make sure all the payment stamps were in order for both TV and radio subscriptions. Nobody got to listen to the dear leader’s Pinocchio speeches for free or to classical music.

We did get subsidized housing because salaries were so equally low. It wasn’t much space, 300-400 square feet, the size of a nice hotel room today, but it was in brand-new, concrete block apartments, with wonderful stairs we had to take turns to sweep and mop, and no elevators. The proletariat needed a good workout every day, going up and down.

Not only will you not get a free Prius or Smart Car, you will be lucky to ride the public transportation for a subsidized fee. We got to ride on buses with subsidized fares or we could walk as far as our feet could carry us. Biking was a daredevil’s adventure – many riders and pedestrians were run over by cars and buses. Life was pretty worthless in those times. Offenders still went to jail though.  And bikes disappeared before you could say “stolen.”

Dormitories looked like army barracks, with walls peeling paint like a bad manicure, and furnished with WWII-like era beds with chicken wire. University cafeterias served the standard fare, cabbage or soup with a few pieces of meat floating on top and plenty of cooking rapeseed oil and garlic to drown the lack of taste. Bread was plentiful, hard as a rock, and difficult to chew.

We got to go to the movies in a large group for one leu a viewing because we were so poor. It was the commie’s way to pacify the oppressed and throw them a bone once in a while in the form of subsidized movies, a concert, or a play. Only the elites could afford such entertainment on a regular basis.

For those of you young and entitled Americans who like the idea of anything free, especially marijuana clinics, rest-assured that, under communism, you will be put in jail for any drug use and they will lose the key forever.

There was plenty of booze and cigarettes but income was so equally low, you had to give up other important staples in order to buy them. You could drown your miserable life and sorrow in cheap vodka or home-made “tzuica” and darken your lungs with economical “Marasesti” cigarettes. It is still quite fashionable to smoke all over Europe today. You cannot look cool and sophisticated without a lit cigarette and a cup of very bitter and thick coffee.

But don’t take my word for it, vote for Bernie Sanders or his Democrat Alinsky-style adversary, and you shall “Feel the Bern” while you stand in line in sub-zero temperatures to get your “free” welfare rations.

For all my “free” education I received under communism, I had to pay the state back the sum they decided it was worth, once I left the country to live free in the United States. Why should the “capitalist pigs and spies” benefit from my excellent communist education?

Freedom has a heavy price but young people are mesmerized by the empty words of current communists because they never studied their history or forgot what little they did know and are now going to repeat it, with disastrous results.

And those of you who are so accustomed to smart phones, iPad, iPhone, blackberries, laptops, and other gadgets, Smart Cars, your expensive bikes, remember that equal and meager pay will not buy you such luxuries. And, if you are on welfare and the government is providing them, they can be taken away just as easily as they are given.

Look at the “free” healthcare you are now getting under Obamacare for a hefty monthly premium, huge deductions, and large fines for non-compliance (in 2016, $695 or 2.5% of income, whichever is greater), if you are lucky to find a physician who will accept your worthless government insurance, or find a qualified specialist within your area. Stories of the victims of such socialist healthcare are beginning to filter through the Internet.

The fact that Stalinists, Leninists, and Bolsheviks cannot possibly deliver on any of their promises is exemplified by Dr. Aurel Mircea, a medical doctor, who grew up under communism and eventually fled to freedom in the United States.

“The founders of European Socialism, the Marxist-Leninist scholars, all a bunch of ideologues without the slightest experience in job-creation, advocated free education from k-12 and college. When the communist economies held a tight grip on the people’s lives, the slogan promulgated all over was “Social Equality.” Sure, by then, everybody was equally miserable and poor. As far as the education was concerned, everyone was equally brainwashed and forced to accept revised history, junk science, fabricated political data, and submission to the rules of the Proletarian Dictatorship. The trend still continues to this day, all over the word, shrewdly disguised as new democracies and social justice.”


Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Interview Across Cyber Space with Mircea Brenciu - Part III Standard of Living

Life in general has improved for Romanians. They can now travel freely in the country and move across international borders with ease.  They have freedom of political and artistic expression, freedom of assembly, unlimited Internet access, plenty of trashy television but also good educational programming, public information, easier access to medical care and better quality care, the right to own private property, professional opportunities, the right to go to college, even private ones, and many other freedoms the West had taken for granted. The failed European style multiculturalism, sexual freedoms/perversions, and drug use have arrived as well.

Food is probably the most beneficial improvement in the lives of Romanians – it is available everywhere and there is no need to stand in endless lines to leave empty-handed as was the case during the communist regime. People are no longer faced with having to repair their shoes from year to year because they could not buy new ones. Grocery stores display an abundance of food, not just one solitaire salami in the window. Pharmacy shelves are no longer empty and drugs are available. Fast communication and modern transportation are now a breeze even in the most isolated corners of the country.

Brenciu described the standard of living and the buying power of the Romanian citizen who must live on a minimum net salary of $232 a month, about 1050 lei. According to economists, the median net salary for the country is 1,600 lei a month, $384. Yet prices for goods and services are 90 percent in line with prices across Europe. How are Romanians expected to survive under such conditions and unfair disparity? Even though Romania has joined the European Union in 2007, life is much harder than in the other EU members where salaries are much higher and in proportion to prices.

Not one political leader has succeeded in 26 years after the fall of communism, Brenciu added, to increase the Romanians’ standards of living to at least the minimum level of their European Union brethren.

The fact that people expect politicians to have solutions for their problems is quite telling. It is an indication that decades of communism have brainwashed the citizenry into believing that solutions to their problems come from big or bigger government’s intrusion into everyone’s lives.

What is to blame for the current unresolved economic disparity? Incompetence and corruption across the board at the state level are significant, however, even more important, in Brenciu’s view, are the politics of other foreign governments, of multinational corporations, and of strategies to undermine the interests of the Romanian people in order to subjugate a small country with yet unexploited natural resources. “Onerous patrimonial and business interests supersede the interests of the Romanian people.”

In his opinion, the Romanian population, after decades of tyrannical communism, has learned to survive in a harsh environment and to live with very little and quite poorly, but the younger generation does not seem so eager to be marginalized at the periphery of the globalized political system.

There are many foreign entities, Brenciu explained, who salivate at the prospect of dividing the country and claiming parts, they think, are rightfully theirs. “The Hungarians have exophthalmic eyes for Transylvania; Europe is thinking out-loud how they can round up all the gypsies into the Baragan Fields, and the Moldovans on the Russian side of the Prut River dream of an illusory Big Moldova. Even Bulgarians are not too relaxed about northern Dobrogea.”

The European Union has had to deal with Greece and its potential exodus from the EU called Grexit. The technocrats in Brussels “calmed the waters” with billions of euros in funds that are helping the Greeks continue their socialist spending. Brenciu thought that “Romania might follow the same path if EU does not take rapid measures to increase the average pay for Romanians, even though they would have to break the rules of economic development.”

Brenciu reminded us that Germany was the beneficiary of the Marshall Plan after WWII, which saved the Germans from an “existential impasse.”  He argued, “Romania was in a real war, longer and more criminal than Germany’s but nobody took this fact into account. What was communism if not a war of life and death of an entire nation? Why does EU not organize a system for Romanians, similar to the Marshall Plan, without so many conditions and strings attached?” He semi-answered his own question when he described how Holland opposed Romania’s entry into the Schengen Zone because Romania refused the indefinite concession of its main port, Constanta.
What seems to be Romania’s salvation at the moment, he said, is the fact that Romania is located strategically at the confluence of the Christian West and the Islamic Orient and the United States is taking a keen interest in this strategic location.

During the fifth decade of the 20th century, heroic anti-communist, anti-Bolshevik resistance fighters hid in the Carpathian mountains, waiting for the American troops to save them. American soldiers never arrived but they are here now, strengthening the buffer zone between Christianity and Islam. It is a blessing, Brenciu added, that “American strategic interests are converging perfectly with Romanian interests” and the ties to Washington are stronger than ever.

Brenciu believed that Europe, with its culture and enlightenment, the center of human civilization on earth, owes a debt of gratitude to the “poor Romanians who never betrayed common European and Christian values and were satisfied with very little in order to survive as shields in the face of so many barbaric invasions.”
He concluded, “Europe should bow its head in respect and should produce urgently and with love, the fraternal and just reparations to a people who defended with their absolute poverty, the splendor of a narcissistic and profoundly selfish civilization.”

As a former Iron Curtain nation, Romania started its road to democracy and to a free market economy at a distinct disadvantage when compared to other former communist Soviet satellite nations. Ceausescu made it a point of pride that Romania should not owe money to foreign lenders; he saw himself as a ‘maverick’ president. He paid all loans quickly by taking away much needed food and funds earmarked for improving the lives of Romanians who were forced to survive in abject poverty, with no decent food, meager rations, no basic necessities, little heat, and intermittent water and electricity.




Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Interview Across Cyber Space with Mircea Brenciu - Part II

On the question, why would people put their faith in career politicians, fighting with each other fiercely on social media, looking for purity, honesty, and perfection in a person’s character, qualities that are often lacking in the political world, Mircea Brenciu’s answer was not a surprise.

The main stream media models and shapes the news and the thinking of the voting populace based on the candidates and what platform they offer – the more socialist, the more popular. The problem arises after the election when, in the “laboratories of democracy,” the two Parliamentary chambers, behind closed doors, unabashedly vacate the will of the voting people.

There is no law that prohibits the candidates elected to migrate to other parties and to change representation to that party’s interest and ideology. “Influenced by blackmail, bribery, and other means, some representatives leave their parties under whose banner they ran for office, and join another party or political organization, thus altering the results of the general vote.” This way, a party or an alliance that was previously in a majority, becomes a minority, further eroding the will of the voters.

These Machiavellian political alliances, made before or after the election, often lack the ideological unity necessary to address the strategic, political, or economic issues of the day and thus decisions are generally made arbitrarily and not in the best interest of the population.

Parliament members are inhibited by fear that they will be arrested under real or trumped up charges and would have to defend themselves for years in a court of law and potentially serve time. Romanian politics must pass through the microscope of the bureaucracy called the National Anti-Corruption Directorate. (DNA)

In Brenciu’s opinion, the DNA is necessary but often abusive. Those who control this institution, also control the direction of national politics. For example, Brenciu added, the “infractors of the Social Democrat Party (PSD) are treated differently than the Liberal Democrat Party (PDL) of former President Traian Basescu.”

Some corrupt politicians are better protected under the law than others, escaping prison, which results in a loss of trust by the general public in the fairness and justice of government.  Using this loss of trust, other politicians shamelessly campaign under the slogan of curbing abuse, corruption, and illegality, and deliver nothing.

While the politics of corruption continue unabated, national interest is forgotten, “with a disgrace and arrogance worthy of historical traitors,” said Brenciu, and the idea of nation-state and sovereignty overlooked in the wave of internationalism coming from Brussels.  “The negotiation of individual liberty is the only politics in Romania that seem worthy of sincere, huge, and herculean efforts.”

Take for example, the development funds allocated to Romania by the European Union in Brussels. Based on passed history, under the banner of curbing corruption, the funds are draconically controlled, and those who are charged with dispersing them realize that it is almost impossible to obtain or demand bribes, and it is thus not in their interest to try very hard to allocate the funds to those who need them for development.

It is difficult to prove such financial corruption; however, why should someone complicate their lives with foreign funds from EU when there is nothing to be gained from the effort, only a lot of paperwork, hard to obtain approvals, and the long wait for funds that must be spent exactly as they were earmarked and in the given amount of time.

“For the EU bureaucrats, this would justify to view Romanians as an inferior category in the grand multinational scheme of EU wannabes.” Romania’s membership in the EU is important but their land, strategic, and economic potential are much more important to these globalist elites.

As Brenciu explained, following in the footstep of history when colonists eliminated people who already resided on the lands sought after, history has an annoying tendency to repeat itself.  He explained, “Romania must be emptied of Romanians, as they are incapable to resist the western bulldozer, and must leave the gold for the explorers who came to the Old Continent in the name of the Crown with 12 gold stars and a blue flag.”

On the question of the economic situation in Romania, following the execution of the communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu in 1989, Brenciu had this to say.

After the Revolution of December 1989, the first government, that of Petre Roman, launched the competition which Brenciu dubbed, “Getting Rich at Any Cost,” an effort to privatize the economy.

One such method of privatization called MEBO, gave factories, industrial complexes, and economic centers to the new managers, chosen by workers’ meetings, supposedly democratic. In this new brand of “savage and primitive capitalism, devoid of any rules and regulations,” the newly appointed managers robbed everything and anything that belonged to Ceausescu’s communist state and thus became owners without any payment made to the state.  The “proletariat,” who continued to work for the new owners, received shares in this new “enterprise,” shares which they later sold to the new owners/directors who became millionaires overnight.

Brenciu clarified that the majority of the new owners/directors were former security officers and communist apparatchiks who were traitors to the communist regime, turning the anti-communist tide into their financial favor. They were opportunists, aided and abetted by a corrupt judicial system and a mentality of two wolves and a lamb deciding what’s for dinner.

The poor of yesterday, members of the proletariat, the much touted “workers,” remain the poor of today.  Many jobs have disappeared thanks to the sale of unproductive factories, piece by piece, or the sale to foreign investors who bought entire plants, whether productive or unproductive, to dismantle them or to modernize them, and thus eliminate any competition possible.

Even though Romanian economy functioned under communism with old and outdated technology, it had an industrial base. Today, Brenciu added, Romania has become an “industrial-agrarian, tourist, and service economy.” And the agricultural sector is also suffering as more arable land is left unused, while food is imported from far away.




Saturday, February 6, 2016

Ionuț Sabău, a Hero for Europeans

Photo: Wikipedia
After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 A.D., Europe has been besieged by waves of invasion from tribes of peoples such as Goths, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Angles, Saxons, Lombards, Suebi, Frisii, Jutes, Franks, Huns, Cumans, Avars, Bulgars, Alans, Moors, Mongolians, Khazars, Tatars, Vikings, Normans, to name a few, who brought war and pillage across Europe from 376 to 800 A.D.

These attacks were followed by the bloody incursions and invasions of the Ottoman Empire in various European countries for several centuries in their quest to establish the sought-after Caliphate. The Crusades were the logical Christian reaction to defend their faith, territories, and way of life.
Romanians fought against and pushed back the Turks and their rule for centuries and eventually paid tribute in gold and lost lives to the Ottoman Empire. The most prominent defender of Romanian territory against the Ottoman invasion was the famous Vlad Tepes.

French and Italian scholars viewed this part of history as catastrophic; it followed the destruction of the great Roman civilization which was replaced in the West with a period they termed the “Dark Ages” because it “set Europe back a millennium.” German and English scholars saw this invasion as replacing the “tired, effete, and decadent Mediterranean civilization with a more virile, martial, Nordic one.”  German and Slavic historians used the term ‘migration.’ (Halsall, Guy (2006), "The Barbarian invasions", in Fouracre, Paul, The New Cambridge Medieval History, Vol. 1: c. 500 – c. 700, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-36291-1)
This brings us to the current orchestrated mass invasion of Muslim “refugees” across the senescent continent of Europe which needs an infusion of new and virile blood from the Middle East and north Africa. These single young men of military age are quite willing to install the promised Caliphate across Europe and are not shy in their overt (but media-covered) effort to rape, pillage, and destroy across civilized society.

Secular Europe has a problem with continuing to exist by not having enough babies and is committing willful demographic suicide sped up by the politics of the European Union technocrats who are eager to have global governance under the U.N. umbrella.

It seems that one Romanian young man, Ionuț Sabău, has what it takes to defend his country, his family, and his way of life from the Muslim “refugee” social engineering plan. Non-governmental organizations have been preparing this flood of male humanity (if we can be so kind to men who behave like savages) with money from billionaire donors and socialist governments interested in changing the demographic face of old Europe.

Bill Still reported that “In early January, 28 year-old Ionuț Sabău found out that the Association Freres Romania (an NGO), in partnership with the Ministry for Internal Affairs was planning to make a ‘refugee’ center in the neighborhood of the small town of Ardud, in Satu Mare county.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcMcFmNdFvA

Ionuț Sabău, who had worked and lived in Paris in a prominently Muslim neighborhood, gathered 200 signatures and petitioned the local government to stop the planned settlement; the mayor set up a meeting with the prefect, the representative of the local government.

Ionuț Sabău told the prefect bluntly that he does not agree with this migration in any shape or form based on the simple fact that he wants his family safe from harm; he wants his children to be able to go to school and his wife and children to walk the streets alone safely. This is a small village (5,000 inhabitants) where children are not bussed to school, they walk.

“We don’t care what the law says or what the state says, we do not agree.  We are disposed to use violence and we want everyone to know that.” The prefect responded, “Please don’t talk about doing justice yourself. There are institutions for that.” Sabău rejoined, “I understand, but our children must also grow up in safe and optimal conditions and we don’t want a situation like in Western Europe where people are afraid to let children go to school alone or leave our wives alone in the streets. We don’t want any of that here! Under no circumstance! This is not an issue of defending the Romanian state as a whole, we are simply defending our own families.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5cw-8OT-EWc#t=116

Following the hearing, the Freres Romania Association, an NGO, canceled the project of resettling the Muslim refugees in a Christian country and culture that is totally alien to the Islamic faith and theocratic culture. http://breizatao.com/2016/02/03/roumanie-des-villageois-salues-en-heros-pour-setre-revoltes-contre-un-plan-secret-de-lue-visant-a-installer-des-migrants/

If only the men in the EU countries that have already been invaded and their lives violently disrupted would get half of this man’s courage!
Leaving aside the facts of who caused the Arab Spring and who financed this massive invasion, true war refugees can best be helped in countries that share their own culture and faith and provide safe-haven for their families. If these people are bona fide war refugees, young men of military age should stay in their home-countries and fight the enemy instead of fleeing like cowards and leaving women, children, and old people behind to suffer.


Friday, February 5, 2016

Dinesh D'Souza and Bill Ayers Debate American Exceptionalism

Dinesh D'Souza
Bill Ayers
An interesting debate, sponsored by the Young Americans Foundation, took place on February 3, 2016 at the University of Michigan between author and film producer Dinesh D'Souza and the progressive retired professor Bill Ayers, a moderated debate with Q & A watched on line by approximately 3,000 Americans.

Even though Dinesh D’Souza prevailed in his rational and academic arguments, inserting his brand of intelligent and at times self-deprecating humor that he is famous for, his debater, the infamous and no so subtle “unrepentant terrorist” Bill Ayers, who bombed or plotted to bomb federal buildings in the 70s, the audience applauded occasionally at  his remarks.

Unlike Dinesh D’Souza, who was professionally dressed, Bill Ayers was sporting a black with white lettering t-shirt that was advertising the Black Lives Matter logo made infamous by protesters on the payroll of a certain billionaire, protesters who disrupted civil life and learning on campuses across the country with insane segregationist demands, and violent protests in certain cities around the country that resulted in massive destruction of property, fires, looting, and chaos. Additionally, Bill Ayers was wearing a proletariat chapeau as if he had ever been part of the working class that suffered at the hands of communism in the 20th century.

D’Souza was a far more intelligent, humble, and knowledgeable academic than his debater. A section of the audience agreed with Bill Ayers when he described the national militarization of police, when he named Samantha Powers for starting the war in Libya and the Arab Spring, when he criticized Common Core for its mindless standardization and testing, and when he criticized Bill Gates. Ayers questioned what gave Bill Gates the right to become Superintendent of America's Education System and of the health of the globe.

On the question submitted prior to the debate on the impartiality of the criminal justice system in our country, D’Souza pointed out that such injustice of the criminal justice system was on full display on that very stage.

Dinesh D’Souza served 8 months in nightly confinement for giving $20,000 in illegal campaign contributions to a friend, a violation of the law in New York, while Bill Ayers, D’Souza added, bombed the Pentagon and other government buildings, and never served time nor repented for his actions and crimes.

“The inequity of our criminal justice system is on full display right on this podium right here,” he said. “So I gave $20,000 of my own money over the campaign finance limit. I got 8 months in overnight confinement. You bombed the Pentagon and tried to bomb all kinds of other things — how much time did you do in the slammer?”

Charges against Ayers were dropped based on a technicality – the government failed to obtain proper warrants for surveillance against the Weather Underground.  Ayers remarked rather obtusely that Dinesh's crime was much bigger than his crime because Dinesh tried to influence a politician.

“The fact is that you admitted to committing a felony, which you did. And it’s a felony pretty serious in a democracy,” Ayers said. “It was an attempt to buy an election.”

D’Souza noted that Democrat fundraiser Sant Singh Chatwal committed a similar campaign finance violation but received no prison time for his crime. D’Souza reasoned:

“Here’s my point. Yes, justice is a matter of, ‘Did you break the law?’ But it’s also a matter of, ‘Does the penalty fit the crime? Do other guys who do the same thing get roughly the same offense?’ Under the Obama administration I will say that progressive justice is a complete sham.”

On the issue of illegal immigration, D’Souza explained that "Immigrants are voting with their feet against their own culture...for one [country] that is...better." But we cannot take the whole world in by leaving borders open. He pointed out that those who come into the new club, [the United States], “must abide by the rules and must become one of us.”

Speaking with distinction, thorough knowledge of history and economics, conviction, and articulation, D’Souza mentioned his friend from India who said that “he wanted to immigrate to a country where poor people were fat,” alluding to the generous welfare system in this country.

On the remark and question from the audience that All Lives Matter and that he is a “con” man, Ayers tried to explain why Black Lives Matter more at the moment, because cops are indiscriminately killing black people. To make his point, he used the Jewish/Nazi Holocaust as an example why at the time, saying Jewish Lives Matter, would have been important.

However, D’Souza clarified why the comparison is faulty and offensive. Jews were not armed, they were sitting ducks in the face of the armed National Socialists’ (Nazis) Gestapo while black people who are killed today by both white and black cops are usually heavily armed and are pursued or caught in the process of committing crimes.