The Great Abortion Debate: An Anti-abortion Perspective

Recently, we have seen bills passed in Georgia and Alabama that put severe restrictions on abortion. Ohio and Mississippi have also passed legislation similar to Georgia. In this post, I will discuss the details of the laws passed in Georgia and Alabama as well as make arguments against abortion. I will also make rebuttals to common arguments made in favor abortion.

Let us begin with Georgia. Current law in Georgia outlaws abortion after 20 weeks. The newly passed legislation would outlaw abortion after six weeks. It would also be illegal to perform an abortion if a heartbeat is detected. The law does include exceptions for rape and incest. The penalties for breaking current Georgia abortion law is imprisonment for not less than one and nor more than 10 years.

In Alabama, the new law would ban nearly all abortions at any stage except in the cases when the mother’s physical or mental health are in danger. The law also does not carry exceptions for rape or incest. A doctor who performs an abortion would be charged with a Class A felony, which can carry a punishment of life in prison or imprisonment for 10 to 99 years. Attempting to perform an abortion would be a Class C felony, which is punishable by one to 10 years in prison. The woman seeking the abortion would not be charged with anything. This law is meant to be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. I expect that there will be litigation on this law as well as the law passed in Georgia , which will most likely go to the Supreme Court.

With regards to the legality of abortion, the Constitution does not say anything about it. It is not even mentioned once. The tenth amendment of the Constitution says, “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Since the Constitution has given no authority to the federal government over abortion, the issue is left up to the states, or to the people. Therefore, Alabama and Georgia are within their rights as states to pass legislation on abortion. The new laws are a certainly a great step in the right direction, and I hope the challenge to Roe v. Wade is successful.

Now that we have covered the laws, let me make my arguments against abortion. I believe that abortion is immoral on the grounds that is is wrong to end an innocent human being’s life by force. Human life begins at conception. When the sperm meets the egg, the zygote immediately begins cell division and multiplies. It begins the process of developing into a human, through a steady process of cell division and differentiation into body parts and organs. Even if it does not resemble a child in the early stages, the fetus is still living and growing. If that process is ended by an abortion at any stage, it is in effect ending a child’s life. Since that child’s life is sacred, the method of conception is irrelevant. Even if a child is conceived through rape or incest, it does not justify ending the child’s life. Why should the child be punished for a crime that the parent committed?

Those who advocate for abortion have yet to come up with their own coherent definition of when life begins. The lack of a clear definition has paved the way to the passage of absurd laws that allow for abortion into the third trimester. If it is the case that they cannot define when life begins, why would they then take the risk of ending a human life by supporting abortion? Isn’t it possible that an abortion would end a child’s life? Some of those that I have spoken to have said that they would still support a woman’s right to choose, even if it means ending a child’s life. This is a violation of a child’s right to life and it is immoral.

A common phrase that is used by those who advocate for abortion is “my body, my choice.” This is blatantly false and must be refuted. The child that is within a pregnant woman’s uterus is not “her body.” The child has different DNA and often times a different blood type from the mother. The child also has its own brain and internal organs. The mother is only carrying the child, it is not a part of her body in the same way that her arm or her nose is. The child has his or her own body and therefore a right to life. With regards to choice, there are numerous laws on the books that prevent women from doing things that they want with their body, like laws against prostitution or taking illegal drugs. Regardless of whether the laws are sensible, the idea that the law cannot dictate what a woman does with her body goes against American legal precedent.

Speaking of the law, people who favor abortion also make the argument that if abortion is outlawed, women to will turn to unsafe methods such as using coat hangers or taking poisons to do away with a child. This same argument can be used against the government outlawing anything. If murder is against the law, wouldn’t crazy people resort to finding nefarious ways to kill someone? Why should there be laws against stealing if people are going to steal anyway? Just because people will break the law does not mean that the law should not exist. The goal of legislation should be creating a morally correct outcome. Preserving human life is what is morally correct and outlawing abortion will help us achieve that goal.

Another common argument made in favor of abortion is that if a woman has been raped or is in a difficult financial situation, having a child would lead to a great deal of discomfort and trauma.  To this, I would say that the argument puts the mother’s horrible experience of having the child above the child’s right to life. While I have enormous sympathy for a woman in that situation, I don’t think a difficult situation for the mother is enough justification to end a child’s life. Even in a difficult situation, a woman still has the option of giving the child up for adoption. According to the CDC, 10% of women between the ages of 15-44 have difficulty getting and staying pregnant. There are many couples who do not have children and still yearn to have them. Adoption is a viable option for both the beleaguered mother and the childless couple.

I look forward to seeing the progress that America makes in ending the evil of abortion. I think the laws that have been passed are a good first step. We can continue our efforts in our home states and see that they pass similar laws. It is also important to have conversations with our friends and family on the issue, so that we may bring more people to our cause. I hope that my arguments in this post have supplied you with some confidence and ammunition to use when you begin your own efforts to put an end to abortion.




America’s Future: Death by Immigration

What happens when the American people are replaced with foreigners? White Americans are learning the answer to this question as they see their numbers decline in their own country. The demographic and political changes we have witnessed over the last several decades are the legacy of the 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act. Since the law was passed, the United States has experienced a radical demographic transformation. This transformation was imposed on the American people through deceit. The racial group that has been most affected by this deception is, of course, the white majority. The Center for Immigration Studies has done a detailed analysis of the demographic changes brought about by the law and the dishonesty involved in selling it to the American people. In this post, I will also speak about the consequences of the 1965 Immigration Act and how the left embraces the changes it has brought. I will also explain how the law went completely against what the Founding Fathers wanted America to be. I will then talk about the changes I would like to see America make if it is to survive as a nation of Europeans.

Speaking about the bill, Senator Ted Kennedy said “the bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission.” Each and every one of those statements have proven to be wrong. According to the Pew Research Center, in 1960, the demographics of America were: 85% white, 11% black, 3.5% hispanic and 0.6% asian. By 2011, those numbers were: 63% white, 12% black, 17% hispanic and 5% asian. The ethnic mix of the United States has indeed been upset. Most notably, the proportion of the population that is white has dropped precipitously. Hispanics and asians have increased in proportion very rapidly. This is to be expected since after 1965, immigration shifted away from Europe and more towards Asia, Mexico and South America. By 2050, the demographics are projected to be: 47% white, 13% black, 29% hispanic and 9% asian. Whites are projected to become a minority in the America around the year 2043 according to US Census Data. Nearly half of American children younger than 5 are minorities, and the number of minorities under 18 is expected to surpass the number of white children by 2019. The total minority population has grown 21 times faster than the white population. This is no surprise given the change in the countries where immigration is coming from. In 1960, the countries with the largest amounts of immigrants to the US were: Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Poland, Soviet Union, Hungary, Ireland, Austria and Mexico. In 2016, those countries were: Mexico, India, China, Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, El Salvador, Dominican Republic and Guatemala. This replacement of whites through immigration has been an intentional process on the part of the left to increase their constituency.

The Democrat Party understands that if whites remain a majority in America, they will be at an electoral disadvantage. For example, whites preferred Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton by a 21 point margin in the 2016 presidential election. Blacks preferred Clinton by 80 points and hispanics favored Clinton by 36 points. Seeing these numbers, Democrats have turned their party into the party of non-whites. Their policies are supported by largely by colored people, particularly colored women. The latest video by Now This celebrates the fact that the new congress will have a record number of “diverse” women. By diverse, they mean not white. Aimee Allison, president of Democracy in Color, says that “women of color are the saving graces of democracy.” Democracy in Color is an organization that is “dedicated to empowering the New American Majority—multiracial, multicultural, and progressive—through media, public conversations, research and analysis on race and politics.” This “New American Majority” is, of course, composed of non-whites. The Democrat Party has made politics about race. All politics are now identity politics. It is time that conservatives and white Americans as a whole pull their heads out of the sand and realize this. Allison goes on to tell white women to “follow women of color.” It is clear that the Democrats no longer want whites among their elected officials, but rather have whites as convenient allies who will vote for colored candidates until they inevitably turn into a minority. When that happens, America will cease to be the country that the Founding Fathers had envisioned once and for all.

The Founding Fathers wanted America to be a country made by Europeans for Europeans. They wanted to maintain the common European heritage that Americans had at the time the country was founded. John Jay wrote favorably about America’s common ancestry in Federalist No. 2. He was delighted that “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.” Jay saw the lack of diversity in America as a literal blessing. The common ancestry he was referring to was the British ancestry that the vast majority of whites shared at the time of the founding. The desire to maintain a European population was shared by other founders as well.

Alexander Hamilton said that “foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners.” He argued that “it is unlikely that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism.” Hamilton also predicted the insidious influence mass immigration would have on America when he argued, “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.” We are seeing the fruits of a discordant intermixture today, with each ethnic group vying for its own share of influence, rather than each group living in a harmonious “melting pot.”

The “melting pot” is a myth that must be dispelled. It was not at all what the Founding Fathers envisioned for America, as demonstrated by the Naturalization Act of 1790. Passed by the 1st United States Congress, the Act limits naturalization to “any alien being a free white person” who lived in the country for two years. After the Constitution was ratified, the leaders of the new republic intended to create a distinct American nationality. It is clear that they wanted the United States to be a white country. This ethnic standard was reaffirmed in the Naturalization Act of 1795, with only the period of required residency being extended to five years. It was only in 1870 when a second racial category introduced. Naturalization was extended to “aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent.” Note that citizenship was only extended to whites and blacks, not any other racial group. The racial standards were held by the Naturalization Act of 1906 and the Nationality Act of 1940, which extended citizenship to individuals of Native American descent. The Supreme Court case Takao Ozawa v. United States (1922) clearly showed that to be American was to be white:

“In all of the naturalization acts from 1790 to 1906 the privilege of naturalization was confined to white persons (with the addition in 1870 of those of African nativity and descent), although the exact wording of the various statutes was not always the same. If Congress in 1906 desired to alter a rule so well and so long established it may be assumed that its purpose would have been definitely disclosed and its legislation to that end put in unmistakable terms… If it be assumed that the opinion of the framers was that the only persons who would fall outside the designation ‘white’ were Negroes and Indians, this would go no farther than to demonstrate their lack of sufficient information to enable them to foresee precisely who would be excluded by that term in the subsequent administration of the statute. It is not important in construing their words to consider the extent of their ethnological knowledge or whether they thought that under the statute the only persons who would be denied naturalization would be Negroes and Indians. It is sufficient to ascertain whom they intended to include and having ascertained that it follows, as a necessary corollary, that all others are to be excluded.”

For half of American history, citizenship to the United States was restricted to whites. The country also pursued an immigration policy to keep the country majority white in accordance with what the Founders envisioned. The ethnic standards for immigration were destroyed in 1965, making way for the myth of the “melting pot.”

The idea that America is a racial “melting pot” is a recent idea that was created to make Americans comfortable with the idea of an invasion from the third world. Since the law was passed, there have been millions of people from alien and backward cultures that stream into America and change the culture. We are seeing the proliferation of thousands of little ethnic enclaves in our suburbs and cities, with each ethnic group retaining their own language, culture and customs. It is clear from this pattern of behavior that people prefer to associate with people who are like themselves. When there are a small number of minorities in a society, they must make themselves acceptable to the majority population if they are to be successful. However, the United States is on track to have no majority ethnic group in the United States within 25 years. Therefore, if current demographic trends continue, the United States will most likely devolve into a group of competing ethnostates. I would like to see such a racial division to take place peacefully.

To avoid further conflict, I propose granting blacks in the United States their own territory in the Southeastern part of the United States. It would be the most practical place, given that 55% of the black population currently lives in the Southeast. They can live amongst their people, have their own economy, make their own laws and control their own destiny free from the influence of any other ethnic group.

With regards to hispanics, I propose repatriating them to their countries of origin. There is already a legal precedent for this, with Eisenhower having deported thousands of Mexican immigrants during Operation Wetback in 1954. Many of them were American citizens. Just as blacks would be able to pursue their own destiny in the Southeastern United States, Mexicans would be able to do the same in their home country. I would also propose repatriating other hispanic groups to their home countries in a similar manner.

Asians, the smallest minority group, are perhaps the most well integrated into American society. They outperform whites economically and are not a major cause of racial tension in America. Given that they are a high-IQ group, they will and already have integrated well with a high-IQ European population. Therefore, I believe it will be to America’s advantage to keep them in the country as legal residents. The resulting country will be a predominantly white country with a small Asian minority.

If my proposals are adopted, I think the United States can avert a Civil War and remain a coherent political entity. Each racial group will also be better off living amongst their own people. I understand that my proposals will cause shock and dismay amongst many who read them, but it is a necessary step to conserve America and Western Civilization by extension. I believe that the changes I have proposed will inevitably take place. Whether they happen peacefully or through violence remains to be seen.

Colin Kaepernick: Nike’s Folly

This past week, Nike has made headlines by featuring former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick as the face of their “Just Do It” campaign. This has of course sparked outrage and created a great deal of animosity towards Nike. I am among those who are upset and will elaborate on why I upset in this post. I believe that this move will hurt the Nike brand in the long run and permanently taint the image of the company in the eyes of millions of Americans.

Kaepernick caught the nation’s attention when he refused to stand for the national anthem when it was played at an NFL game in 2016. He said that he was doing this to being awareness of the fact that America is oppressing black people and other people of color. Not only is this not true, but he disrespected the American flag and the national anthem over this falsehood. Nobody disputes that he had a first amendment right to protest. However, the issue was more over upsetting patriotic fans and going against that values of his country. While he has a legal right to protest, the public is not required to accept him protesting their flag in a stadium that was paid for with their tax dollars. They came to enjoy football, not see a political statement. Kaepernick’s protest also shows that social justice warriors will desecrate what you hold dear in order to push their own message. The fact that Nike has chosen to use Kaepernick  in their campaign has shown that they also stand against what Americans value.

The image of the advertisement shows Colin Kaepernick’s face with the words “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” Those words are so vapid and incorrect it was hard for me to believe that Nike would push such a thing. It does not tell us to believe in the truth, believe in facts or to be righteous. Nike is just telling us to believe in something. Adolf Hitler believed in something too, and sacrificed everything for his beliefs. Are we to be believe that Hitler did a good thing? Simply having a commitment to something and sacrificing yourself for the cause is not a good thing in itself. Also, Kaepernick did not sacrifice everything for what he believed in. In fact, he has likely made millions of dollars in his deal with Nike. Kaepernick is also in the process of suing the NFL for colluding against him. For argument’s sake, I will grant him his premise that he is being blackballed from the league. Even if this is true, I believe that that NFL owners should have the right to do this if they feel it is necessary. Kaepnerick’s anthem protest and this lawsuit have shown the owners that he is not worth the trouble that he brings. Since he stopped playing in the NFL, Kaepernick has focused more on his activism and has propagated more lies about America.

Kaepernick said at his speech in Amsterdam after receiving the Amensty International Ambassador of Conscience Award this year, “racialized oppression and dehumanization is woven into the very fabric of our nation – the effects of which can be seen in the lawful lynching of black and brown people by the police, and the mass incarceration of black and brown lives in the prison industrial complex.”The idea that law enforcement is racially discriminating against blacks killing them at will without any consequences is a myth that must be put to rest. The police are not discriminating against blacks, but rather acting in response to the disproportionate amount of crime that blacks commit. Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has researched the issue of race and crime and cites a Department of Justice study of the 75 largest counties in America. Blacks made up 15% of the population in those counties, yet they were charged with 62% of robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults. In New York City, blacks commit 75% of all shootings, while making up only 23% of the population. Whites on the other hand, commit only 2% of all shootings, while making up 34% of the city’s population.

Furthermore, in 2014 there were 6,095 black homicide victims in the United States. In 2015, there were only 258 blacks who were killed by the police. In fact, a police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is likely to be killed by a police officer. The fact is that the vast majority of blacks who are murdered are murdered by other blacks. A common response to this is that whites who are murdered are also mostly killed by other whites. What this doesn’t take into account is the fact that blacks commit murder at a much higher rate than whites do. Blacks make up about 13% of the U.S. population, yet they commit 52.5% of all homicides in the country. It is not elderly blacks and black women in general who are committing these murders. it is mostly young black men. A more accurate approximation would be 3-4% of the population committing almost half the murders in our country.

The statistics that I have presented should give some perspective as to why the police disproportionately arrest blacks. The police have a limited amount of time and resources with which they can enforce the law. It therefore makes sense that they would focus their efforts in the areas where crime is the highest. A clear demonstration of this is shown in The Color of Crime, a statistical analysis done by the New Century Foundation. They tracked the number of reported offenders by race from the National Crime Victimization Survey and matched them with the number of people who were arrested by race for each crime. They found that they arrest rates for blacks closely matched the numbers of black offenders that were reported for each type of crime. This is a refutation of the idea that the police are targeting blacks because they are racist and wish to persecute them. In fact, it shows that the police are acting appropriately and arresting the people who are actually committing crimes, rather than showing anti-black bias.

Kaepernick says that police officers “continue to terrorize black and brown communities,” and accuses them of “abusing their power and then hiding behind their blue wall of silence.” Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, there is evidence to show that the decrease in policing in 2015, also known as the Ferguson Effect, has led to a spike in violent crime in our cities. In Cleveland, homicides for 2015 increased by 90 percent over the previous year. Through the end of April 2015, shootings in St. Louis were up 39 percent, robberies 43 percent, and homicides 25 percent. Murders in Nashville rose 83 percent in 2015; Milwaukee closed out the year with a 72 percent increase in homicides. Shootings in Chicago had increased 24 percent and homicides 17 percent by May 2015. The police were the bulwark against the criminals who are terrorizing the black community before they were condemned by the likes of Kaepernick and the Black Lives Matter movement.

By demonizing the police, Kaepernick is only putting more black lives in danger. He has refused to condemn the blacks who are murdering other blacks and instead focuses his efforts on the police, who are trying to solve the crime problem. Nike has validated his deceitful message and encourages the rest of us to follow his example. I would endorse the boycott against Nike for standing against what we hold dear and for helping spread Kaepernick’s false narrative. Considering how much Nike’s favorability has dropped across the board, it looks like many Americans are on board with this idea. It is time that American patriots refuse to do business with companies that go against our values and push causes endorsed by social justice warriors. Only then will we be able to put an end to this affront to our flag and national anthem.

President Trump’s State of the Union Address: An Appeal for Unity

Having listened to the God Emperor’s first State of the Union address, I can say that we have once again witnessed the work of a master rhetorician. What was more impressive to me than his list of accomplishments was the way that the God Emperor used the left’s own language and tactics against them. In addition, the Democrats managed to make themselves look like the nasty and resentful people that I have known them to be through their conduct during the address.

The God Emperor began his speech by with an appeal for unity. He asked the all those present to set aside their differences and find common ground so that they can serve the American people together. He also mentioned that “the state of our Union is strong because our people are strong.” This is a response to the vicious race-baiting and identity politics that characterized the Obama administration and the presidential election. The prosperity that Americans are experiencing are indeed the result of them being freed from regulation and high taxes under the God Emperor’s administration. The stock market has hit record highs and 2.4 million new jobs have been created. Moreover, we have not yet seen the full effects of the tax cuts that congress passed. With Americans having more take-home pay, we are likely to see even better economic results in the future.

In the midst of all this good news, the Democrats continued to snarl and refused to applaud economic results that they can only dream of creating on their own. They were unhappy with the fact that Americans have more jobs and are now getting to keep more of their hard-earned money. While their attitude is contemptible, it does not come as a surprise given that they along with their cronies in the mainstream media believed that the God Emperor would be a disaster for the country. Not only were their predictions of the stock market crashing and an impending tyranny from the new administration incorrect, the exact opposite has happened. To drive the point on economic growth home, the God Emperor mentioned a small business called Staub Manufacturing, which benefited from the tax cuts that were passed. He also congratulated one of its employees, Corey Adams, for investing his additional take home pay in a house and his two daughters’ education. This method of promoting the new tax cuts was outstanding because he used the same emotional appeal that leftists use in promoting their policies. The God Emperor put a human face on the policies that he promoted in a way that would resonate with the American people. What was even worse for the Democrats is that Corey Adams is a black man. We were consistently told that the God Emperor is a white supremacist and that his campaign was predicated on racial hatred. Well, here he is congratulating a black man who is benefiting from his policies.

The most memorable moment of the address for me was when the God Emperor mentioned that black unemployment is at the lowest rate ever recorded. The cameras cut to the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, none of whom applauded. They continued to scowl and maintain long faces as the rest of the chamber applauded. What does this tell you about black democrats in congress and their priorities? They were upset at their fellow blacks having more jobs under this administration. Perhaps this will make black Americans question the benevolence of Democrats as well as their own loyalty to the Democrat Party.

Another hard-hitting moment was when the God Emperor said that as Americans, “we all share the same home, the same heart, the same destiny, and the same great American flag.” This was a direct response to the NFL and the players that protested the national anthem. The story of Preston Redding only served to make the message even stronger, with more emotional appeal in the form of a 12-year-old patriot. The God Emperor implied that the players who were protesting were not doing their civic duty and disrespected our veterans, a sentiment held by the vast majority of the American people. How can any decent American object to what the God Emperor said?

The God Emperor then moved on to immigration, speaking about the violence and bloodshed that has resulted from our open borders and our refusal to enforce immigration laws. We were witness to the heartbroken faces of two fathers and two mothers: Evelyn Rodriguez, Freddy Cuevas, Elizabeth Alvarado, and Robert Mickens. Their children were murdered by members of the MS-13 gang that entered our country illegally. The emotional appeal in the address was relentless, the perfect combination of sensible policy and real people were hurt by the lack of common sense in our government. Enforcing our immigration laws and deporting those who entered the country illegally will certainly prevent the needless deaths of more innocent Americans.

The greatest rhetorical bomb that the God Emperor was when he said: “My duty, and the sacred duty of every elected official in this chamber, is to defend Americans — to protect their safety, their families, their communities, and their right to the American Dream. Because Americans are dreamers too.” He stole the media’s own word for defending DACA in one fell swoop. The God Emperor asserted the interests of American citizens ahead of aliens who entered the United States illegally. This is also a very effective criticism of Democrats who shut down the government over the issue of DACA. He reminded the American people that the Democrats are not fulfilling their duty to them and would rather serve the interests of illegal aliens who are likely to vote for them.

Another moment that emotionally resonated with me was when the God Emperor told the story of Ji Seong-Ho, a defector from North Korea. His story embodied the yearning that we has humans have for freedom, and the sacrifices that we must make to achieve it. I will never forget the sight of Seong-Ho raising his old crutches in the air to a resounding applause. As Americans, his story should be a reminder of the fact that most governments in the world are run by thugs, and what we have built here in America is a human treasure that must be preserved through intense sacrifice. We must show the same conviction as Seong-Ho if we are to preserve our nation, which was one of the main themes of the address.

The God Emperor’s speech was incredibly powerful not only in listing the achievements of his administration, but also in using the left’s own tactic of emotional appeal to promote a conservative agenda. I don’t see how the Democrats can give an effective response to what the God Emperor said that night. Instead, they will continue to look like the hateful power-addicts that they are. If this speech and the results of last year are anything to go by, the God Emperor will likely break apart the Democrat coalition and cement his reelection in 2020. America may never look back again after having tasted greatness under the watch of the God Emperor.

Resilience and Compassion: Surviving a Category Five Hurricane

On the night of September 18th, 2017, Dominica was devastated by Hurricane Maria. It was a category 5 hurricane with wind speeds going up to 175 mph. This is my account of the events that night and what unfolded in the days after the hurricane.

Hurricane Maria swiftly strengthened into a category 5 storm. On the morning of September 18th, Maria was a category 2 hurricane, making its way to Dominica. By the evening, it had become a category 4 storm expected hit the island sometime around midnight. Having grown up in Chicago, I had never experienced a hurricane. The category numbers had no meaning to me since I had no frame of reference by which to judge a hurricane. I got a harsh lesson in  the destructive power of a category 5 storm that night. Around 9 pm, the winds started picking up. I could hear the whistling of the wind in my room. We had our scheduled power cut and I sat on my bed in the dark, bracing for impact.

At first, the winds would simply blow the branches on the trees outside my window back and forth. I thought the island would be alright. However, those winds were only the calm before the storm. By 11 pm, the winds had developed into a tempest. The rain was the heaviest I had ever seen in my life. It was as if god had emptied a gigantic bucket of water on the island. The wind was now making entire coconut trees bend back and forth. The wind had gone from whistling to howling. I began to get airplane ear as time went by. The winds were so great that they managed to seep in through the gaps in my doors and blow my belongings across the room. I began hearing the clang on debris on my windows and my doors.

After midnight, the wind was so strong that the back door of my apartment started to move. Had the door opened, I would have been in grave danger from the debris that was banging on my door. Thankfully, the door held. The building that I was living in was made concrete, and it withstood the storm. It did not, however, give me any measure of comfort as the storm progressed. I watched as the light outside my apartment was broken. Around 2 am, I heard a loud clang come from my kitchen. I then hear something break. When I opened my bedroom door to look, I found that my front window had broken, and the wind was fiercely blowing inside. I also saw my apartment start to get flooded with the wind pushing the water into my apartment from underneath the doors. Tiny bits of dirt and debris were mixed in with the water. The wind was so strong that I struggled to close the door to my bedroom. That was the first time that I considered the possibility that the storm would kill me.

The wind and the thumping of debris continued for another four hours. I spent those four hours sitting on my bed, staying as far away from the windows as possible. I prayed the entire night that I would survive this hurricane with no physical injury. I felt like a soldier in a trench, hoping that would not get hit. Around 5:30 am, the wind subsided. Somehow, I managed to sleep for two hours before waking up to the noise to my neighbors talking to each other.

I decided to to go outside and see how they were doing. I was in for quite a shock. All of the leaves from the trees near our building had gathered on our doorstep. A chair had made its way in front of my door. There was still some light rain from the storm. I walked over to the other side of my floor to see the ocean! I had never seen the ocean from my apartment because it was covered by trees. All of trees had either fallen over or were stripped bare by the wind. It was like Chicago in the winter. I looked down the street to see the roof on a building my friend lived in blown clean off. I also saw downed power lines and debris cluttering the street. I had never seen such devastation in my life. I asked myself: How in the world are we going to survive this? As I walked back to my apartment, a door opened. It was one of my neighbors. She told me that she was going to go to campus, where they had electricity and water. I decided to move to campus too, on account of our building not having any utilities. I packed by backpack and went to campus.

The walk was a difficult one, trying to navigate all of the debris and water. On my way, received a hug from a good-heartened young woman who wished me well. I definitely needed that. It was certainly a relief to see people safe after the storm. When I got to campus, I met with some friends and we took a spot in the student center. I later went back with a friend to my apartment and packed a suitcase with my things to bring to campus. The walk back was miserable due to the heavy rain that ensued. Eventually, we made it back and stayed at our spot on the second floor of the student center. That night, we all checked in on campus so that our loved ones could be notified. While we did survive the storm, I knew my parents were worried sick at home. I wanted to speak with them as soon as possible.

That night, I decided to sleep in the student center. I heard reports of looters in the area and did not want to risk being at home in the event that armed looters arrived. I slept on the carpet that night. The next day, I woke up and ate the cereal that I had brought with me from my apartment. We received word that we would be evacuated by early next week. It was only a matter of waiting. I will always have the humorous memory of helping one my friends get into her apartment when her door was jammed. I repeatedly kicked the door with no avail. We then grabbed a large chunk of a coconut tree that was lying on the side of the road. A group of three of us used the branch as a battering ram until the door was shattered. We were certainly glad to be of service.

That afternoon, I volunteered to go to the river and fetch water for flushing. A group 9 of us drove to the river in a pickup truck and filled 5 plastic garbage bins with water and brought them to each floor of the student center. I was happy to help in any way that I could. It was our duty to help each other in this crisis.

It is to the everlasting credit of the student body that it pulled together to help both the locals and fellow students in that time of need. Students volunteered to do everything from cleaning, security patrols, rationing food and running an emergency medicine clinic on the third floor of the student center. I did not see a single student panic during the entire time that I was on the island. We all understood what needed to be done to get through the disaster. Everyone was prepared with food and water and gave it to those who lost everything in the storm. I could not be more proud to have these wonderful and resilient people as my peers.

I also owe a debt of gratitude to the storeowners in the area who opened their stores to us and gave our campus much needed food and supplies. I was a regular customer at Sunshine Market just across from campus. When I went to get some snacks, the woman behind the counter recognized me. She smiled and handed me three Twix bars for free. It was a small gesture, but it meant the world to me. I hope I can see her again and return the favor. The owners of the locals stores were instrumental in helping us survive the aftermath of the hurricane, and I cannot thank them enough.

I also cannot forget about the faculty. Many of them lost their homes on the islands. They also had families to take care of. In spite of this, they still helped us and facilitated the evacuation. Now, they are banding together to continue our semester later this month. I appreciate their kindness and fortitude at this testing time.

Over the next few days, I had spent time hanging out with friends and sleeping on chairs at night. Not having wifi meant that we had to talk to each other and play games to pass the time. It certainly gave me insight into how big a role smart phones and laptops play in our lives. Being forced to speak with each other was a transformative experience. We were able to form a bond with each other that can only exist between people who have survived traumatic events together. I made lifelong friends over those 8 days I spent in the student center. It was one of the best times of my life. I will always cherish the memories.

To help me remember, a young man I spent time with in the student center drew a caricature of me as we passed time in the student center. He was an artist and drew people for fun. I now have a souvenir from that time in my life. The drawing is a snapshot of what I looked like at the time. I had an overgrown beard and was wearing a Cubs World Championship baseball cap (Go Cubs!). I intend to frame that picture and keep it as a treasure.

On the day that I was finally evacuated along with my friends, I actually felt a sense of guilt. As the ferry pulled away from the island, I looked back at all of trees stripped bare of their leaves, the debris strewn across the land and the wreckage of what was Portsmouth. I felt bad leaving the island in such a state. However, I did not have much time to reflect on that as the ferry entered choppy waters. The small ship was thrown up and down by the wave for hours. water from the ocean splashed on us. When we arrived at St. Lucia, I had a terrible bout of sea sickness. I could not even stand up straight without dry heaving. Thankfully, there were EMS personnel at customs who helped me. I am grateful to them and the benevolence they showed me. I was given some water to drink. I vomited a dozen times before I reached the nurse’s station at St James Club. I had never been that sick in my life. One of my friends helped sign me in and take me to the nurse’s station. I ended up sleeping in the station that night.

The next day, I woke up feeling completely rejuvenated. I had my breakfast and was finally able to call my mother after a week. It was such a relief for both of us to hear our voices again. I was happy that I would be going home that day. We took American Airlines to Miami. I was on the first flight back and reached Miami in the evening. We were taken to our hotel, which was the Hyatt Regency in Coral Gables. They even had a nice buffet of food and deserts waiting for us upon our arrival! There was one young man who travelled with us whose birthday fell on that day. He was given a whopping big slice of chocolate cake with strawberries. It was great to be back in America. My flight back to Chicago was in the morning at 6:45 am. The following morning was the first time that I did not mind getting up early. I was eager to get home.

The University did a tremendous job of of organizing the evacuation and treating us well during the process. They put all of us in nice hotels and arranged for good food. They really did spoil us. The faculty and administrators must have spent many sleepless nights organizing the entire evacuation. I highly commend Ross University for the way it handled the entire situation.

When I arrived in Chicago, it was hard to believe that I really was home after the ordeal that we had all been through. Seeing my parents was the greatest relief I had ever felt. I am sure it was the same for my parents. My peers must have felt the same way when they all finally reached home as well.

This break has been very satisfying and refreshing. I got to spend quality time with my family. I look forward to going back to the floating university and seeing what is in store for us there. This will sure make a great story to tell at interviews and to my grandchildren.

To my peers, I hope all of you maintain a positive attitude at this time. The cruise ship is a interesting idea that I think will lead to yet another adventure for all of us. This will be a unique life experience that very few people have. We can all now lay claim to surviving a category 5 hurricane and then spending a semester of medical school on a cruise ship! I look forward to sharing that experience with all of you in the coming weeks. Until then, relax and spend time with your families so that you can put all your energy into finishing this semester.

The Charlottesville Riots: Erasing Culture

The riots that occurred at Charlottesville were a horrible example of how political discourse in the United States has devolved into an outright civil war. The media and the American left, which make excuses for Antifa, have normalized political violence. This violence escalated in Charlottesville, leading to the tragic death of Heather Heyer. The threat of assault, both physical and verbal, is now used to censor those on the right. President Trump was quick to condemn bigotry on both sides: the white nationalists on the Alt-Right and the violent and equally racist members of Antifa.

President Trump’s press conference last Tuesday was a masterful display of rhetorical skill. He condemned bigotry on all sides the day of the riot, since Antifa and Neo-Nazis on the Alt-Right were present. He even condemned the media for rushing to judgment on what had happened. The President asked one reporter, “What about the ‘alt-left’ that came charging at the Alt-Right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?” In an instant, the President reframed the opposition and added a new word to the American lexicon. The Alt-Right members who showed up were without a doubt a hateful, anti-semitic, racist group of losers who I would never defend. However, the Alt-Left were also equally bigoted and committed acts of violence. They even sprayed graffiti saying “die whites die.” President Trump was right to double down on his original statement about condemning bigotry “on all sides,” including Antifa.

The media on the other hand, has never condemned Antifa when they committed violence on numerous occasions in the past. Shutting down Milo Yiannopoulos’ speech at Berkeley was the prime example. Instead of denouncing the violence on the part of Antifa, the media blamed Milo for being too provocative and hateful. Yvette Felarca, the head of the domestic terrorist group By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), organized the riots at Berkeley. In an interview, she said that “the left has been far too timid” and that “mass and militant protests” are what is necessary to stop fascists (namely Milo and President Trump). The definition of the word fascist has proven to be extremely broad, with everyone who is right of center being included. No one in the media or on the left has condemned Felarca and her evil actions to this day.

There is also the infamous punch a Nazi meme, which was created after Alt-Right leader Richard Spencer, who was present at the Unite the Right protest, was punched in the face by a black-clad Antifa member. The meme normalized violence against those who were deemed as Nazis. The term Nazi has also been given a broad definition to include all Trump supporters. The left and its counterparts in the media did not condemn this disgraceful idea and instead spread the meme. By saying it is acceptable to punch a Nazi, you are giving someone free license to kill a Nazi by sanctioning physical violence against them. What is to say that you can just stop at a punch? By declaring it acceptable to punch Nazis, the left has not only condoned violence, but has given itself the power to determine who can be an acceptable target for assault.

The very existence of Antifa is a confession of inadequacy on the part of the left. The left lost the argument during the election. They had the media, the political establishment, Hollywood celebrities, pollsters and pundits on their side and yet were still unable to achieve victory. After the loss, Antifa immediately began committing acts of violence with the riots in Washington D.C. on inauguration day. Antifa is the street muscle for the left that is used to silence those who disagree with them. The left is no longer interested in debate because they are utterly incapable of making a convincing argument. They want to do everything they can to reverse the results of the last election, and have resorted to deceit and mayhem in order to achieve that objective.

Remember when the media went hysterical over Donald Trump not accepting the results of the election? It turns out that they were projecting their own wicked nature onto President Trump. They continue to push the narrative that Russia hacked the election without any substantial evidence. Dana R. Fisher, an NBC contributor, described violent members of Antifa as protestors who are “defending the left” from the “hateful and racist messages” coming from the right. Now, media outlets trying to link President Trump with the KKK and Neo-Nazis as a way to gin up public outrage and remove him from office. This is in spite of the President repeatedly vilifying the KKK and Neo-Nazis during his presidential campaign. The President cannot even count on members of his own party for support in the midst of this media coup.

Republicans have proven themselves to be the biggest obstacles to President Trump’s success by obstructing his agenda and aligning themselves with the media. John McCain, who voted against repealing Obamacare after running on a platform to repeal the law, tweeted support for the disgusting members of Antifa last Tuesday: “There’s no moral equivalency between racists & Americans standing up to defy hate & bigotry. The President of the United States should say so.” McCain has bought into the media narrative of Antifa and is willing to excuse their violence as a means of avoiding the chants of racism from the media. Like President Trump, I also prefer people who weren’t captured. Mitt Romney, proving once again why he lost the presidential election in 2012 tweeted on the same day: “No, not the same. One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi. The other opposes racism and bigotry. Morally different universes.” Romney himself would have to be on a morally different universe himself to not recognize the immoral beliefs on both sides. Marco Rubio took the lunacy to another level when he openly condoned the brutality exhibited by Antifa. “When entire movement built on anger & hatred towards people different than you, it justifies & ultimately leads to violence against them,” Rubio tweeted. The response to Charlottesville is a clear litmus test on who President Trump can trust to support him in his efforts to make America great again. It also reveals to the general public who is willing to support the rule of law and the preservation of our history as a nation.

What impressed me the most was President Trump’s defense of the monuments across the country. “This week it’s Robert E. Lee. I notice that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You really do have to ask yourself: When is it going to stop?” The statues of Confederate leaders such as Robert E. Lee are a part of American history, whether we like it or not. They should serve as a reminder to us of how much our country had to sacrifice in order to defeat such formidable foes in the Civil War and put an end to slavery in America. Destroying those monuments would wipe away that history and the lessons we could take from it. Washington and Jefferson were both slaveowners as well as Founding Fathers. Are we to wipe away their memory and any wisdom that they imparted on us? Those who seek to destroy these monuments ultimately want to expunge any part of American culture or history that does not conform to their social justice ideology.

The irony of these attempts to remove Confederate statues is that the Confederacy was a creation of the Democrat Party. Every slaveowner in America before the Civil War started was a Democrat. It was the Republicans who were fighting for abolition. The statues that are being removed at statues of Democrats which were put up by Democrats. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo called on the Army to rename two streets in Brooklyn honoring Confederate Civil War generals. “Renaming these streets will send a clear message that in New York, we stand against intolerance and racism, whether it be insidious and hidden or obvious and intentional,” Cuomo wrote in a letter sent to acting Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy. When Democrats like Cuomo condemn the Confederacy and attempt to eliminate any of its symbols, they are condemning the history of their own party. They are so ashamed of their own party’s history that they want to erase it in an attempt to gain the moral high ground. Black Pigeon Speaks did an excellent video on the subject, comparing the feral left’s desire to erase American history to ISIS destroying monuments from other cultures that they come across on their conquests. ISIS has destroyed, churches, ancient statues and libraries to remove any traces of a previous culture. As America gets closer to becoming a minority white nation, any traces of its European cultural heritage are being erased in a similar manner.

There is a concerted effort on the part of leftists and Democrats to turn whites into a minority in the United States. Democrats have not been able to get the majority of whites to vote for them in presidential elections for decades, and it therefore works to their advantage electorally to make whites a minority. Sally Boynton Brown, who I have written about in a post on anti-white racism, stated openly during her campaign to become chair of the DNC that it was her job “to shut other white people down.” She wants to “make sure that they get that they have privilege.” Brown also wanted to reach out to people of color because her home state of Idaho was “so white!” She said this as if it were a complaint to a cheering crowd. Joe Biden himself spoke about how whites will become minority in the United States by 2017, and that it is a “not a bad thing” and that it is “a source of our strength.” The 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act was passed with the intention of changing America’s demographics to make whites a minority by bringing in an unrelenting stream of third world immigrants.

This entire plan to turn whites into a minority is rooted in anti-white racism. The call for diversity and multiculturalism means that whites should play a smaller and smaller part in American society. The social justice warriors on the left believe that whites have historically been the oppressors across the world and are to blame for all the inequality between them and minorities. In order to achieve social justice, not only will whites be turned into a minority but any symbols of their cultural heritage as Americans will also be destroyed. The Democrats go along with this process because it is electorally beneficial for them, as third world immigrants vote for them by in large. Whites will become a scorned minority bereft of a country if this process continues. Those who oppose this process are being threatened and censored, often through violence.

I fear that both the demographic shift and anti-white racism will lead to an ethnic conflict within the United States that will not be resolved peacefully. We must prevent this slide to barbarism by using reason and evidence to convince people to join our cause. No one is going to do this for us. We as individuals must work to preserve our civilization and history as Americans. If Charlottesville is anything to go by, now may be our last chance.

The Battle of Berkeley: Free Speech Triumphs

Yesterday, there was a clash between Antifa and Trump supporters at the Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in Downtown Berkeley. A “Patriot’s Day” rally was organized by hundreds of Trump supporters at the park. The Trump supporters were descended upon by a horde of masked, black-clad hooligans who had come to violently disrupt a peaceful gathering. A total of sixteen people were arrested. Nine people were injured, with six of them being taken to the hospital, one of whom was stabbed. The reason I am doing a post on this is because we are seeing the battle for free speech literally unfold in front of our eyes. The feral left must be exposed and brought to heel if our country is to survive.

Mike Cernovich, a journalist and author of Gorilla Mindset, was present at Berkeley and dealt with violence first hand. Cernovich took the microphone in front of a group of anti-trump protestors and said, “Bill Clinton is a rapist. He raped Juanita Broderick and the media covered it up.” He promptly had the microphone taken from him and was surrounded by a group of leftists who were pushing him. Cernovich kept calm the entire time and two police officers escorted him away. He later had to defend himself from one rioter who attempted to punch him. This incident was one of many instances of violence committed by Antifa and other communist groups against people on the right. Antifa thugs also hurled bottles, bricks, rocks and M-80s at Trump supporters. Berkeley was scene to fights that were akin to Weimar Republic street brawls in the in 1930s. CNN has already reported this as a clash between pro- and anti-trump protestors, not naming the real perpetrators of the violence at Berkeley in their reporting. Antifa was not mentioned at all in their initial reports. It is up to citizens like us to unmask the feral left.

I’m glad to see that the Trump supporters who came to the event were organized and prepared for what Antifa was going to do that day. Many Trump supporters had helmets, respirators and gloves. The helmets proved to be a necessity as a video of a man with a gory head injury shows. The police were also reluctant to intervene in the situation, as Mother Jones reporter Shane Bauer witnessed while he was at the riots. According to Cernovich, the FBI opened an investigation into the mayor of Berkeley, Jesse Arreguin, for ordering the police to stand down during the riots at UC Berkeley in February. It would not be a stretch to say that the police were given similar orders yesterday. The Antifa thugs took full advantage of the inaction on the part of the police to enact violence.

To understand the mindset of these communist vandals, one only has to look at a recent interview with Yvette Felarca, a member of a group called By Any Means Necessary (BAMN). She is also a middle school teacher at the Berkeley Unified School District. Felarca organized the riot at UC Berkeley in February this year at an event for Milo Yiannopoulos. The rioters broke barricades, vandalized buildings and lit fires forcing Milo to cancel the event and be evacuated by security. “Milo is a fascist. He’s a white supremacist… He was on the UC Berkeley campus to recruit more fascists and to wage attacks on muslim students, immigrant students, women and trans students,” Felarca claimed during the interview. This is a classic form of project on the part of people on the left, where she accuses Milo of doing exactly what she is doing. She violently suppressed Milo’s right to free speech and then calls him a fascist afterwards. “I think the left has been far too timid for far too long,” Felarca added. She wants to see more violence committed on the part of those on the left in order to advance their far-left agenda. The interviewer then asked her about complaints coming from business owners in the area who were upset with the vandalism inflicted on their businesses, Felarca blamed the chancellor of UC Berkeley. “Chancellor Dirks is responsible for anything that happened…he had a chance to cancel the event to make sure it didn’t happen.” What an atrocious and despicable woman. She organized a massive riot leading to vandalized property and physical injuries and then had the unmitigated gall to blame the chancellor of UC Berkeley for not cancelling the event. She had “no regrets” for bringing mass destruction to Berkeley because it was an act of self-defense against fascists.

The purpose of these riots is to force anyone who is not on the far-left out of the realm of political discourse. These communist agitators seek to intimidate those who do not agree with them into silence through verbal abuse and acts of violence. This violence is not just targeted at those on the right, but also centrists who do not agree with the far-left. The protestors, who think like Felarca, feel that those who disagree with them are the real fascists and claim to defend the country from the fascist mob. By framing the conflict in this manner, they can excuse their own violent actions while silencing everyone who disagrees with them. Their end goal is to impose their far-left agenda on a population that is terrified to speak the truth. The violence that occurred at Berkeley yesterday reveals that America dodged a bullet by not electing Hillary Clinton as president. Clinton never condemned any of the violence directed towards Trump supporters during the election, nor has she condemned the riots that occurred yesterday. These rioters could have had someone who was sympathetic to them in the most powerful office in the world. Dissenting voices would most likely have been suppressed through the force of the government had Clinton been elected.

If you have any regard for the country you live in, it is your duty to join us in the fight against these hoodlums who would tear our civilization apart. These people will not stop until everyone is forced into compliance with their militant-communist agenda. Free speech won yesterday at Berkeley as Trump supporters outnumbered Antifa and were willing to fight back to defend themselves. However, the riots at Berkeley will not be the last we see of Antifa. I hope that the images from these riots provoke a self-defense response in all freedom-loving Americans to protect our country from the threat of the feral left.

Donald Trump’s Inauguration: The Riots

Friday, January 20th, was a wonderful day for the American people. We finally inaugurated a president who will not be beholden to special interests and will fulfill his campaign promises with a compliant congress. Those of us who supported Trump are overjoyed. Unfortunately, this cheerful occasion was sullied by riots and violence on the part of the left. What we have seen over the last few days reveals that we are literally at war with those who are against freedom, do not respect human rights and are willing to use violence against to promote their ideology. Our country will not survive if we do not acknowledge this reality and fight back against those who would plunge our nation into chaos.

When people run out of words and arguments, they turn to punches and bricks. This is the point that the left is at right now in America. We have seen riots in Washington D.C. during the inauguration. Only look at Lauren Southern’s video of the riots. They are seen the smashing windows of a Starbucks and a branch of Bank of America. They even charged the riot police. Tear gas was used against them. Many of them were seen carrying the red and black anarcho-communist flag. I am glad to see that they are being clear about who they are: communists. They claim to be anti-fascist, but then violently try to suppress those who disagree with them. These riots are only going to turn more people against the left and persuade them to support Donald Trump. The American people can see the character of those who oppose Trump very clearly in these riots. There has not been a word of condemnation from anyone in the media or progressives in general against these riots. In fact, the media does not even deign to call them riots, but rather protests. These people are not protestors. They form phalanxes, assault people and destroy private property. So much for taking the high road. They are an existential threat to our civilization. Figures in the media also do not acknowledge that these rioters are communists. It is up to us as freedom-loving people to recognize them for who they are and condemn them.

The rioters also shouted mindless slogans like, “love Trump’s hate” and “make racists afraid again.” These words are meant to deceive those who have decency and values and use their morals against them. The left does not have morals, as you can see in the video of the riots. It is meant to appeal to the good nature of those who have moral standards and oppose racism. The rioters claim to be loving, but are actually the greatest propagators of hatred in our country. They physically attack Trump supporters and commit acts of vandalism. The rioters also claim to be against racism, but they themselves are the most racist people in our country. Only look at the way the left treats black conservatives. They are repeatedly called uncle toms and sellouts for expressing their opinions and leaving the Democratic plantation. The left believes that all black people must think the same way and vote for the Democrats. Any black person who does not do this is not a “real” black person in their eyes. This same principle applies to women who are on the right. They are also targets of vitriol and are told that they are betraying their sex. Only look at the way the left treated Ann Coulter and Phyllis Schlafly. Whenever leftists accuse you of racism or sexism, they are projecting their own beliefs onto you. Idaho Democratic Party Executive Director and DNC Chair candidate Sally Boynton Brown embodied this when she proclaimed that “my job is to shut other white people down when they want to say, oh, no, I’m not prejudiced. I’m a Democrat. I’m accepting.’ My job is to make sure that they get that they have privilege.” Brown does not even see how accusing white people of being racist because of the color of their skin is racist in itself. In fact, she has the gall to tell us that she is “accepting.” It seems that her acceptance is only given anyone who is not white.

Another example of the maliciousness is what they planned to do at Mike Cernovich’s “Deploraball.” It was a black-tie event held at the National Press Club that was meant to celebrate Trump’s victory. Project Veritas revealed that members of the D.C. Anti-Fascist Coalition, a radical leftist group, planned to attack the event with butyric acid, or rather a stink bomb. It turned out that four members of that organization had bought tickets to the event. This was a real safety threat. Scott Ryan Charney, 34, was arrested Jan. 19, hours before the event. He is charged with conspiracy to commit assault, a misdemeanor. The other three terrorists are at large as of now. Riots broke out outside of the event, with riot police using pepper spray grenades against the rioters. This is how insane and despicable the left has become in our country.

Perhaps the most disgusting example of leftist violence is what happened at the University of Washington. Milo Yiannopoulos gave a speech at the university where a person was shot in the abdomen. The Seattle police are currently looking for a suspect who is described as an Asian male around the age of 50. The shooting took place after Milo took the stage to address his audience. Even after he was told there was a shooting, Milo insisted on continuing his speech. “The police have told me that it is indeed the case. We don’t really have a protocol for this. I don’t know if it was a fatality or not. Until I do know that, my suggestion is that the show should go on.” Milo went on to say “if I stopped my event now, we are sending a clear message that they can stop our events by killing people. I am not prepared to do that.” Those who attended the talk had to be escorted out by police through an underground parking garage and were advised to remove their Trump hats. You now need to have an entire battalion of police officers to give a speech at an American college today.

The violence that is being committed by leftists is meant to intimidate and scare people who do and will disagree with them in the future. If you were to see something that the left does in the future and find it unacceptable, you will remember all these riots and assaults and keep your mouth closed. That is the goal of these rioters. They want to scare you into submission through violence. A fundraiser email from the Clinton campaign stated a clear intention to destroy Breitbart news so that “their kind never rises again.” The rioters and other leftists would have attacked all of their detractors even if Hillary had won. That was their plan to consolidate power. The intimidation would have been far worse if Trump had not prevailed.

I believe the best way to fight back is through words and unfettered condemnation. If we remain silent, this violence will continue to spread and become normalized in our society. This election was really the last chance for us to save our country. These riots make that all the more clear. If we have any care for our civilization or our posterity, we must banish this brutality from our nation and our minds. We can do this by destroying the root of all of this corruption: the mainstream media and academia. The rioters were propagandized by the media who told them that Donald Trump is a racist, sexist fascist who would deport all the immigrants and do away with women’s rights. Ashley Judd even said that she “feels Hitler in these streets” at the Women’s March in Washington D.C. They feel that they are justified in acting violent in opposition to such a dire threat. The media did everything thing it could to keep Donald Trump out of the White House, and are now doing everything they can to hound him out. The best things we can do to counter the media is to deny them viewership and spread the truth through the internet. Alternative media sources turned the mainstream news outlets into dinosaurs through their use of the internet. They were able to bypass the media’s filter and report news directly. Wikileaks is the prime example of this. This election has shown that the media’s hold of the American people has been broken, and it is up to alternative sources to bring facts to the public.

Academia has also fed into this by filling the minds of young people with lies about the world such as the patriarchy and institutional racism. It stripped their students of their agency, critical thinking skills and ability to see the world as it is. Instead, they have been instilled with a profound sense of unearned moral righteousness by their professors. The professors are using them as foot soldiers in their goal of turning America into a neo-marxist state. Those unfortunate young people who fall into this trap have their lives destroyed. Many of those who were arrested during the riots face felony charges. Millions of students in our country are also stocks with thousands of dollars of debt over degrees that provided them with no economic value, but rather indoctrinated them with progressive lies. This is a most malicious form of exploitation and it is morally atrocious. We can counter this by exposing those professors who do indoctrinate students and deny funding to universities that tolerate violent, anti-American ideologies.

It is up to us as citizens to work to preserve our country in the face of the existential threat presented to us by the left. We have a chance with this administration to take our country back, and must now begin the work of restoring America to its former glory.

The West’s Disease: Anti-White Racism

Over the last week, I have been feeling disgusted and irate over the kidnapping and torture of a mentally handicapped 18-year-old in Chicago. I saw the video and could not begin to imagine the terror that poor young man felt as his assailants beat him, forced him to drink toilet water and scalped him. The four kidnappers were identified by the police yesterday as Jordan Hill, 18; Tesfaye Cooper, 18; Brittany Covington, 18; and Tanishia Covington, 25. In the video, they are seen cutting of parts of the victim’s clothes, hitting him, threatening him and cutting hair off of his scalp, causing bleeding. It is estimated that the victim was with the attackers for between 24 and 48 hours. All four face multiple felony charges, including for kidnapping, battery and hate crimes. We have still yet to hear whether the hate crime is based on he victim’s mental handicap or his race. One attacker shouted “fuck white people” and “fuck Donald Trump.” I cannot imagine how they could not be charged with a racial hate crime.

Unfortunately, Chicago police commander Kevin Duffin was willing to make excuses for the attackers, saying that it was a “stupid mistake” on the part of young adults. He went on to say “that certainly will be part of whether or not a hate crime – whether we seek a hate crime and determine whether or not this is sincere or just stupid ranting and raving.” If four young whites had kidnapped a special needs 18-year-old black man, tortured him, and streamed it on Facebook, would there be any excuse-making or hesitance in calling this a hate crime? There would be riots all across the country on a scale that would make Ferguson and Baltimore look like picnics. The media would be up in arms about how Donald Trump’s election has empowered white racism in America. This is the revolting double standard that the progressives have created. This is also the result of eight years of Barack Obama, the supposed racial healer, being in the White House. Race relations in America have been set back perhaps more than half a century due to the racist narrative perpetuated by progressives and the media.

America has had a long and glorious history of moral progress, especially with the issue of race. No other nation in human history has faced the challenges of race relations to the extent that the United States has. The Union sacrificed 350,000 lives in the Civil War to put an end to slavery. America then had a Civil Rights movement to guarantee blacks their rights under the constitution. Unfortunately, the bigotry that was directed towards blacks has now reversed itself. Whites are the only ethnic group that are acceptable targets of racial abuse. They are repeatedly told that they are racist simply because they are white, and that their very existence is predicated on the oppression of minorities, particularly blacks. Whites have also been brainwashed into thinking that voting in their own interest or showing any sort of in-group preference is a form of racism or nazism. As someone who opposes racism, I find the amount of racism directed towards whites appalling, and it has to stop. In this post, I will reveal the bigotry of the progressive mindset and debunk the falsehood of white racism. The implications of anti-white racism threaten the survival of Western Civilization as a whole.

Anti-white racism is a concoction of progressives, seeking to divide the country along racial lines. It is a part of “identity politics,” which admonishes whites, blaming them for all the sins of America and giving them credit for none of her achievements. A favorite term used by progressives is “institutional racism,” a fictional construct which they use to explain all disparities between whites and blacks. They must use this term because, although “institutional racism” was outlawed decades ago, real racists are very hard to find. Progressives are unable to point to any person or law that is racist in intent. Instead, they would prefer to fight a phantom by saying that racism is covert and “institutional.” This is a cheap and harmful way to pander to black Americans by excusing them of moral responsibility for their own actions. For example, progressives say that black students do not do as well in school due to racist whites. “When will we address the effect that rich white people think they know what’s in the best interest of children of African Americans and Latinos, no matter what the parents’ income or education level?” said Karen Lewis, the president of the Chicago Teachers Union in 2013. I would bet that neither Lewis nor any of her progressive allies would have have the courage to go up to a white person and call them racist to their face. Progressives instead choose to infantilize blacks by telling them that they are not capable of succeeding on their own, and need the help of progressives to advance themselves in the face of white racism. That proposition is condescending and racist. Unfortunately, there are many black Americans that have bought into this message and propagate it themselves.

Black Lives Matter, for instance, has taken hatred towards whites to absurdity by claiming that America is a “white supremacist nation.” That statement reveals the deranged hatred of whites that BLM activists have. “White supremacy — that’s a system you benefited from and you’re no longer going to benefit from it,” blared the leader of a BLM demonstration in Philadelphia through a bullhorn. America has twice elected a black president, has had two successive black attorney generals, two black secretaries of state, a black four-star general as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and thousands of elected black congressman, mayors, judges and police chiefs. Calling America “white supremacist” trivializes the struggles of the civil rights movement and is hostile to blacks, who have more opportunities here than in any other nation run by blacks on this planet. It also detaches blacks from their cultural contributions to America.

Black Lives Matter is a domestic terrorist organization that is the primary proponent of the white supremacist narrative. They are openly hostile towards cops, both in their rhetoric and their actions. They riot and call for violence against the police (What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!). Their wish was granted when one of their sympathizers gunned down 5 police officers in Dallas. Black Lives Matter justifies its terrorism and racism by claiming they are fighting against the oppression of blacks in the United States. Marissa Jenae Johnson, the co-founder of the Black Lives Matter Seattle Chapter lambasted whites when she said, “Do you know how horrific it is to grow up as a child in a world that so hates you? While you’re literally being gunned down in the street, while you’re being rounded up and mass incarcerated and forced into prison slavery.” Johnson’s claims are easily refuted by the facts.

White Americans do not hate blacks and are not gunning them down in the street or forcing them into “prison slavery.” Crime data shows that in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police. In 2014, there were 6,095 black homicide deaths compared to only 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and hispanics, who make up about 80% of the population. More than 90% of blacks who were murdered that year were murdered by other blacks. It is not racist white police officers who are gunning down blacks in the street, but rather black criminals. The real oppressors of the black community are the Black Lives Matter activists and their progressive allies through their enabling of the criminal element in the inner cities.

With regards to arrest rates, we need to put the police’s actions into context. We cannot have an honest conversation about law enforcement interactions with blacks without talking about black crime rates. Heather McDonald, a scholar at the Manhattan Institute has researched and debunked the lies of Black Lives Matter in her video for Prager University.  According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, even though they made up roughly 15% of the population there. In New York City, blacks commit over three quarters of all shootings, though they are only 25% of the city’s population. Whites, by contrast, commit only 2% of all shootings, though they are 34% of the population. As MacDonald says, “there is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police.” Harvard economics professer Roland Fryer analyzed more than 1,000 officer-involved shootings across the country. He concluded that there is zero evidence of racial bias in police shootings. In Houston, he found that blacks were 24% less likely than whites to be shot be officers, even when the suspects were armed or violent. Clearly, the truth does not matter to Black Lives Matter activists, who would rather demagogue their way into political power and influence. White Americans should not be made to feel guilty by Black Lives Matter, because the facts show that BLM is lying.

When a progressive argues that minorities are being oppressed in America, one only has to point to Asians to show that they are wrong. Among the race groups, Asian households had the highest median income in 2012 ($68,636). The median income for non-Hispanic White households was $57,009. The top three ethnic groups in terms of median income in 2014 were Indians ($101,591), Taiwanese ($85,566) and Filipinos ($82,389). If whites are so racist, why do Asians outperform them economically in a majority white country? Oppressed groups do not have the highest median incomes in the country. Are we to conclude that whites are somehow pro-Asian? No. Asians actually faced historic discrimination in the past as well. In spite of this, they are still successful. Today, Asians are discriminated against when they apply to universities thanks to affirmative action. They have to clear a higher bar than black students to get into the university of their choice. Blacks are the only ones who have positive discrimination in America. When it comes to white privilege, everything that progressives claim as advantages for whites exist to an even larger degree for Asians.

Whites have been continuously accused of being racist simply for being white. That itself is a racist proposition, because it judges whites by their skin color rather than their character. Bigotry towards whites is every bit as immoral as racism towards blacks was in the past. Whites are also accused of racism whenever they vote in their own interests. On the post-election episode of Full Frontal with Samantha Bee, host Samantha Bee declared that “it’s pretty clear who ruined America: white people.” If any television host were to say that “black people ruined America,” what do you think the media reaction would be? Why is it acceptable to only attack whites in that manner? This is because progressives are simply driven by a hatred of whites. MTV recently removed a video titled “2017 New Year’s Resolutions for White Guys.” The title alone reveals the racism of the progressives at MTV news, and their belief that they can display their racism with impunity. I am glad that MTV was made to delete the video in response to the fierce backlash they received online, with the dislike to like ratio being close to 150 to 1. MTV’s racism, however, will remain online forever. The people in the video condescendingly talk to white males about how they should stop “mansplaining” and that they are still racist even if they have black friends. White males are the main targets of vitriol from those on the left. This year has been particularly angered progressives, who blame racist white males for Trump’s election, although that is not true. The reason Trump was elected was because the American people (particularly whites) are angry and annoyed with identity politics and race-baiting that has come from the left for decades. Trump’s election and the resentment over MTV’s video are a manifestation of the anger that the American people have towards progressives. I predict that this will further reveal itself in changes in society at large, particularly with policies that favor minorities over whites.

Every other ethnic group in America has its own advocacy groups, except for whites. There is no white equivalent of the NAACP. If there was such a group, it would immediately be painted as a racist organization. When I attended university, I saw groups and clubs for every ethnicity of students on campus except whites. This hostility to in-group preference on the part of whites puts whites at a disadvantage not only in the United States, but around the world. Although I do not like seeing ethnic groups vying with each other politically, whites will have to advocate for their own interests if they are to survive. The Movement for Black Lives, an organization made up of 28 regional member BLM groups, has a list of demands on its website. It advocates for reparations for slavery, which will inevitably come out of the pockets of white Americans. It also calls for further redistributions of wealth to black Americans to level the economic playing field. It is lamentable that whites are willing to tolerate all of this as a form of ethnomasochism.

When every other ethnic group on the planet except whites is acting in its own self-interest, whites are going to lose. The inability of whites, particularly in Europe, to advocate for their own interests has led to a civilization threatening migrant crisis. The acceptance of migrants is being done under the auspices of multiculturalism. Strangely, multiculturalism is only being imposed on majority-white countries. Japan and South Korea are developed nations with high standards of living and are almost entirely ethnically homogeneous. There is no demand for them to take in third world migrants, or make their countries less Japanese or Korean. The demographic change is only being asked of America and Europe. TeleSUR notes that “no Gulf country has signed the U.N. Convention on Refugees, an accord standardizing the level of treatment of people fleeing to new countries.” No refugees have been accepted by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, or the United Arab Emirates. This is in spite of Saudi Arabia having 100,000 air-conditioned tents sitting empty, with the capacity to hold three million people. The demands for more refugees to enter Europe actually comes from whites themselves. No other race of people are asking for their society to become more racially diverse than whites. This is because of the perception that having a majority white country is an inherently bad thing, and that immigrants from the third world must be brought in for the sake of diversity.

The political parties in Europe that are against bringing in more refugees are accused of racism and xenophobia without any evidence. Europeans who are against bringing more migrants in are instead told how immoral their civilization is and that they need to be more tolerant. Angela Merkel admonished her own citizens, lecturing them on “how rich European history is of dramatic and gruesome conflict and war.” She went on to say that Germans should be careful of complaining if things are going wrong elsewhere because “we have absolutely no ground to stand on.” Merkel sees the migrant crisis as a form of punishment for nazism and provoking World War II. Given the amount of support Merkel has, it seems that there are many white Germans who have suicidal self-hatred of their own civilization and culture. An August 21 poll for German broadcaster ZDF showed that 60% of Germans thought their country could cope with the high number of refugees, and 86% said that Germany was a country of immigration. A country of immigration is not a country, because it does not have values that it seeks to preserve and have immigrants assimilate to. It is just a vessel that absorbs whatever culture the immigrants bring with them. The migrant crisis is fueled by the belief that Western Civilization and whites are bad for the world, and must be replaced by foreign cultures. Demographics show that the replacement is well underway.

Germany has taken in about 1.8 million migrants in total, which is about 2.2% of the total population. With family reunification, the number could increase to 6.4 million, which would be about 8% of the total population. Moreover, the migrants are almost exclusively men between the ages of 20 and 35. The number of native, European-German men within that demographic in Germany is 11.5 million. There are 3.5 million of immigrant background in that age group. By the year 2020, there will be 2 million successful asylum applicants. Due to family reunification, there would be about three or four more people entering Germany for each asylum applicant. Of the 23 million people between the ages of 20 and 35, 11.5 million will be of immigrant background by 2020. White Germans, who make Germany the country that it is, will become an outright minority in this age category in four years. Looking ahead 30 years, the elderly population of Germany will die off and the migrants, who have much higher fertility rates than white Germans, will become a majority in Germany. If Germany does not institute policies to stop this surge of migrants from the Middle East, it will cease to exist. Forever.

What is even more heartbreaking is that this replacement is being funded by white German taxpayers. The vast majority of the migrants who come to Europe go on welfare and claim benefits for multiple wives and their entire brood of children. They are also unemployable because they do not speak German and most are illiterate in their own language. Germans do not have the money to raise their own children as it is being taken from them in the form of taxation to pay for the migrants. This is a demographic disaster. When migrants enter Germany, it does not result in Germany plus migrants. It is Germany plus migrants and minus Germans. Ethnic Germans are being cuckolded out of existence by their own government.

The President of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, was very poignant in his analysis of the situation. “For us today, what is at stake is Europe, the lifestyle of European citizens, European values, the survival or disappearance of European nations, and more precisely formulated, their transformation beyond recognition. Today, the question is not merely in what kind of a Europe we would like to live, but whether everything we understand as Europe will exist at all.” If Europe ceases to exist, it will also mean that whites as a demographic are likely to whittle away or be made to submit to shariah law. There is a sense that whites must submit to the migrants as a form of atonement for their perceived sins of colonialism, imperialism and racism. Fierce propaganda has inundated the continent with that message and stripped white Europeans of any pride they have in themselves or their civilization.

Of all the ethnic groups on the whites are the only group that are not allowed to have pride in their history or culture. Instead, whites are only allowed to have self-hatred, guilt and the endless need to genuflect in front of all the other races and cultures in the world to prove how tolerant they are. The demonization and racism towards whites must be put to an end if Western Civilization is to survive. Western Civilization was built by white Europeans, and provided us with separation of church and state, women’s rights, gay rights, scientific progress, and the most free and prosperous societies the world has ever known. The racism directed towards whites is a direct attack on Western Civilization. If you value any of the contributions that Western Civilization has made to your life and the world as a whole you would oppose the racism that is directed towards the one ethnic group that has made it all possible. If current trends continue, whites will be demographically replaced by foreign cultures and turn into minorities in their own countries. Given the level of hatred directed at whites today, do you expect them to be a well-treated minority? Can we reasonably expect whites to be treated as well as they treat the minorities in their countries today? If whites do not push back against this racism, their culture and their very race will head to oblivion. Nature does not care if whites do not survive, it is just a competition for resources and who is best able to gather them and pass on their genes. The question that we face as a civilization is: Do we care enough to protect ourselves from the disease of racism and save our civilization from destruction?




The Gift of Compassion: Christmas and Charity

Merry Christmas! I hope all of you are having a wonderful time with your friends and family on this joyous occasion. Having returned to my snowy, frigid home in Chicago, I feel a sense of relief to be spending Christmas with my family. I am especially happy to see the benevolence and generosity shown by the people of my community during this time of year. The beauty of Christmas is that it is a tradition of voluntary beneficence. The open-handedness shown by Americans during Christmas is a real act of charity and kindness. Even during times of hardship, Americans always find a way to be generous towards each other (though I particularly like receiving). Unfortunately, many people in our country mistake the welfare state as a form of charity in the same way that alms-giving is an act of goodness. This is not the case, as the government has used this sentiment to justify ever more spending on welfare programs that have done the opposite of their intended purposes. Private citizens aiding each other are far more effective at helping and showing a sense of compassion towards the poor than a bureaucrat sending someone a welfare check.

The first thing to recognize with the welfare state is that it is not charity. The government, in fact, has no capacity for charity. All of the money the government has is taken from us at gunpoint in the form of taxation. If you steal from someone and give the money to a poor person, that does not make you charitable. It makes you a thief, also know as a progressive. Real charity is earning your own money and voluntarily donating it to an organization or giving it directly to someone in need. Charity is voluntary in the same way that giving gifts to others on Christmas is a voluntary act of kindness. By advocating for more welfare spending, progressives are really asking the government to take more of other people’s money to spend on their moral posturing. This comes at a high cost to our country, which spent roughly $1.03 trillion on welfare programs in the 2011 fiscal year (or about as much as Obama’s holiday vacation). That is larger than the budgets for Social Security, Medicare and defense. Moreover, the ten largest welfare programs in the country have seen a 378% increase in spending over the last 30 years. Since January of 1964, when Lyndon Johnson began the War on Poverty, the federal government has spent $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). The results of all this spending is that the people who are supposed to benefit from these programs are objectively worse off.

Welfare programs tear away at the fabric of what holds our society together. Milton Friedman eloquently described how this happens, as welfare “has an insidious effect on the moral fiber of both the people who administer the program and of those who supposedly benefit from it.” The people who administer the program have a feeling of god-like power, as they hold the sustenance of welfare recipients in their hands. For those who receive welfare, they lose their human dignity and independence. They are kept in a state of child-like dependence by their welfare supervisors, and their capacity to make good decisions erodes over time, much like myself on eggnog. For example, single women with children receive more money for not working and not having a man in the house. This has led to the destruction of millions of families across America. The welfare system has created an incentive for women to become single mothers. It has also created neighborhoods where most people do not work. This destroys the accumulated job skills in a community, which leads to the children of welfare recipients going on welfare themselves.

While the recipients of welfare are provided for in terms of food and shelter, their drive to better their own lives is taken from them. Depriving human beings of their natural ambition is the perhaps the biggest act of cruelty that someone can enact on another. The welfare state provides an incentive for people to fail because it makes failure so comfortable. Private charity is much more discerning. Charitable organizations that help those in need have greater standards for those who receive money. They are all involved in helping the recipients improve their skills in the market so that they do not have to return for more money. They also distinguish between those who will benefit from receiving money, and those who will not. The welfare state does no such thing. In fact, the bureaucrats who run the welfare system fare better when more people are receiving government benefits. This is why private individuals helping each other is more effective than the welfare state, which does not have an incentive to actually solve the problem of poverty.

My favorite example along these lines is the case of healthcare. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, one of the primary sources of healthcare and health insurance for the working poor in Britain, Australia, and the United States was the fraternal society. Roderick T. Long explains the details of this arrangement in his article “How Government Solved the Health Care Crisis.” Fraternal societies were voluntary mutual aid associations. They were particularly popular among blacks and immigrants. Long explains that “the principle behind the fraternal societies was simple. A group of working-class people would form an association (or join a local branch, or “lodge,” of an existing association) and pay monthly fees into the association’s treasury; individual members would then be able to draw on the pooled resources in time of need. The fraternal societies thus operated as a form of self-help insurance company.” Private citizens were able to find a way to provide each other with health insurance without turning to the government for help. It was also at a very reasonable price. According to Long, “at the turn of the century, the average cost of “lodge practice” to an individual member was between one and two dollars a year. A day’s wage would pay for a year’s worth of medical care.” Could you imagine such a thing happening today? If healthcare were so cheap, what would we need progressives for? The government intrusions in the medical field has increased the cost of healthcare far beyond that of a day’s wage. However, the welfare state has not only increased the cost of healthcare, but it has pushed aside private arrangements. Fraternal societies are no longer viable due to the existence of Medicaid, Medicare and government regulations that heighten the barrier of entry into the medical profession.

While I was in university, I heard my peers admonish conservatives for wanting to cut social welfare benefits while also believing in private charity. The reason conservatives like myself are against the welfare state is because we believe in taking up the mantle of helping the poor ourselves, rather than having the government take more money from others. According to the book “Who Really Cares” by Arthur C. Brooks, conservatives donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes to charity that liberals do. What a surprise! They also volunteer more time and donate more blood than liberals. Professor Brooks adds that “if liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply of the United States would jump about 45 percent.” If that were to happen, I suspect the STD rates would also increase by the same percentage. But I digress.

The reason progressives advocate so much for the welfare is state is because they do not have anyone in their lives who will help them when they are in need. Many of them come from unstable households and do not have a family that they can rely on. They want welfare for themselves, not because they are concerned with the poor. As someone who had a good childhood and has loving family who is willing to support me, I do not need the welfare state. I was not only raised to be independent, but also have the good fortune of having my family there to help me in a time of crisis. When the welfare state is in place, communities and families that provide support to people are less necessary.

A study was conducted at MIT to examine the crowding out effect of the New Deal on charitable spending. It found that “church spending fell by 30% in response to the New Deal, and that government relief spending can explain virtually all of the decline in charitable church activity observed between 1933 and 1939.” When the government provides more aid to people in tax dollars, it crowds-out private charity. It also makes the population more selfish and entitled to the fruits of their fellow citizens’ labor. The Christmas spirit is the antithesis of that.

On this occasion, you have the chance to give and enjoy your philanthropic efforts. Remember the feeling you have when you give on this day, because you can keep this feeling at all times through your own efforts, not the government’s. When you directly help those in need, you can enjoy the satisfaction of doing good in the world while preserving our freedoms from an ever-growing government. If each and every one of us shows the compassion and benevolence that we show on Christmas every day to the disadvantaged, we would have no need for a welfare state. We could celebrate our freedoms with our friends and family who would be there to support us during hard times. Have a wonderful Christmas with your loved ones and remember the happiness you have received and given on this delightful holiday.