Few would deny the modern “Star Trek” universe is hopelessly woke.
The team pulling the “Star Trek” strings today <a href="https://www.startrek.com/videos/we-support-black-lives-matter">quickly bowed down to Black Lives Matter</a>. That’s above and beyond the new “Trek’s” overt progressive agenda, from re-imagining Sulu as a gay man to episodes appealing to social justice scolds.
As <a href="https://decider.com/2018/02/22/star-trek-discovery-is-woke-af/">Decider</a> puts it, &#8220;Discovery has a lot to say about The Way We Live Now. It’s the most on-message TV show this side of Black-ish or Broad City. They might as well call it Star Trek: The Woke Generation.&#8221;
Sir Patrick Stewart, Mr. “Make It So” himself, described his “Picard” series as a response to both <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/patrick-stewart-star-trek-picard-a-response-to-the-fed-world-of-brexit-trump">President Donald Trump’s existence and Brexit.</a>
Most cultural observers say the original “Star Trek” series was uniformly progressive, too. They have many solid points, from episodes about race relations to the concept of a UN-style body “boldly going where no man had gone before.” (That patriarchal phrase got the heave ho in recent years.)
The series famously featured TV’s first interracial kiss between William Shatner and Nichelle Nichols. That’s real progress, the opposite of virtue signaling.
It’s comical that “Star Trek” creator Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a multi-race crew living in harmony suddenly clashes with the modern Left’s identity politics.
Still, the show’s progressive roots are considered canon … like furry Tribbles and Montgomery Scott’s dramatic time estimates.
Look closer.
A number of classic “Trek” episodes spotlight conservative themes and concepts above and beyond ‘60s era platitudes. In fact, some of the stories wouldn’t pass muster today if a “Trek” scribe sent them to the powers that be for approval.
1. “Charlie X” (Ep. 2, Season 1)
What happens when a young man (Robert Walker), dizzy from hormones and zero family ties, can literally make anything he wishes a reality? His emotions take over, with disaster and death the natural byproduct.
Enter Captain James T. Kirk (Shatner), the Alpha Male figure poor Charlie needs.
Kirk can’t fully control Charlie, but he commands the lad’s respect and buys the crew time to deal with his god-like powers. The unchecked Charlie has no one to explain life to him, let alone place vital boundaries in his path. Without a father figure he revolts, not unlike what we’re seeing nationwide as the spoiled children who make up the Antifa crowd drag statues to the ground.
Kirk’s uber-masculine guidance can’t prevent a sad ending for Charlie, but the captain ensures no more Starfleet personnel will die by Charlie’s hands.
<div id="attachment_125965" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125965" class="wp-image-125965" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Charlie-X-1-884x576.jpg" alt="Robert Walker Jr. as Charlie Evans and William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk in the STAR TREK episode, &quot;Charlie X.&quot; Season 1, episode, 2. Original air date September 15, 1966. Image is a screen grab. (Photo by CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="521" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Charlie-X-1-884x576.jpg 884w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Charlie-X-1-300x195.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Charlie-X-1-768x500.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Charlie-X-1.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
2. “The City on the Edge of Forever” (Ep. 28, Season 1)
Kirk falls in love, hard, during this time travel episode considered the series’ zenith. His crush is a budding pacifist (Joan Collins) who delays the U.S. from entering the second World War after Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelley) saves her from a life-threatening accident.
Now, Kirk and Spock must make sure that doesn’t happen again … or the Germans will develop the atomic bomb first and change the course of history.
“Star Trek’s” level-headed approach to war, when to wage it and under what terms, can be both admirable and deeply conservative.
<div id="attachment_125964" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125964" class="wp-image-125964" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/City-on-the-Edge-of-Forever-1-986x576.jpg" alt="Star Trek, The Original Series, episode &quot;The City on the Edge of Forever&quot; first broadcast on April 6, 1967. From left, Joan Collins (as Edith Keeler) and William Shatner (as Captain James T. Kirk) in year 1930. Image is a screen grab. (CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="467" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/City-on-the-Edge-of-Forever-1-986x576.jpg 986w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/City-on-the-Edge-of-Forever-1-300x175.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/City-on-the-Edge-of-Forever-1-768x449.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/City-on-the-Edge-of-Forever-1.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
3. “Balance of Terror” (Ep. 14, Season 1)
Spock is no war monger, but he takes a neo-con-like stand in this tense episode. Some enemies, like the Romulans threatening war along the Neutral Zone, cannot be talked out of combat. They must be defeated at all costs.
A battle between two shrewd captains ensues, leaving just enough time for a lecture on bigotry. The takeaway? Sometimes a good offense is the best defense.
4. “Space Seed” (Ep. 22, Season 1)
The episode that set the stage for “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” introduced us to a swaggering, super-human Ricardo Montalban. The episode has aged as well as the 1982 film, but a deeper look into the story reveals something else.
Khan represented a misguided attempt to perfect humanity, granting some with extra strength and intelligence. Khan and his ilk felt they knew better than everyone else, and therefore must lead by any means necessary. One wonders what Fidel Castro thought of this episode… Another problematic element for a feminist audience: the female lead (Madlyn Rhue) initially finds herself swept away by Khan&#8217;s masculine appeal.
<div id="attachment_125960" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125960" class="wp-image-125960" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Khan-945x576.jpg" alt="Madlyn Rhue as Lt. Maria McGivers (the ship's historian), Ricardo Montalban as Khan Noonien Singh (a genetically engineered human from the 20th century) and William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk in the Star Trek: The Original Series episode, &quot;Space Seed.&quot; Original air date February 16, 1967. Image is a frame grab. (Photo by CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="488" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Khan-945x576.jpg 945w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Khan-300x183.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Khan-768x468.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Khan.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
5. “The Enemy Within” (Ep. 5, Season 1)
Modern progressives would recoil at the core of this potboiler. Kirk is split into two distinct selves, a calm, compassionate soul and a raging Id. The latter causes chaos on the ship, including a tough to watch assault on Yeoman Rand (Grace Lee Whitney). Still, we learn that Kirk isn’t the strong, capable leader we’ve come to know without a dose of “toxic masculinity.”
Removing that element would cripple the Enterprise and turn Kirk into just another, lesser captain.
<div id="attachment_125966" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125966" class="wp-image-125966" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Kirk-852x576.jpg" alt="William Shatner, as split versions of Captain James T. Kirk in STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES episode, &quot;The Enemy Within.&quot; Season 1, episode 5. He is seen here as the good self, (approaching at left), and the evil version (lying down, in sick bay). Original air date is October 6, 1966. Image is a screen grab. (Photo by CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="541" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Kirk-852x576.jpg 852w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Kirk-300x203.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Kirk-768x519.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Kirk.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
6. “Dagger of the Mind” (Ep. 9, Season 1)
The unmissable message of this anti-progressive episode: “Curing” mankind of our sinful behavior and errant thoughts through science and forced rehabilitation is not just futile. It’s inhumane.
7. “Mudd’s Women” (Ep. 6, Season 1)
Gloria Steinem must loathe this episode.
Women want to feel beautiful, or at least have a man who views them that way.  The cartoonish Harry Mudd (Roger C. Carmel) knows this all too well, and he exploits it to keep himself one step ahead of the law.
The episode assumes distinct gender roles in male-female relationships while acknowledging how men’s visual senses can be overloaded by beauty and grace. And, shockingly, that isn’t deemed disastrous by the episode’s ending.
Speaking of gender themes, another classic episode the title of which alone would get it canceled by today&#8217;s politically correct crowd: &#8220;What Little Girls Are Made Of&#8221; (Ep. 7, Season 1).
<div id="attachment_125967" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125967" class="wp-image-125967" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/What-Are-Little-Girls-Made-Of-850x576.jpg" alt="Michael Strong as Dr. Roger Korby, Majel Barrett as Nurse Christine Chapel, Sherry Jackson as Andrea and William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk in the STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES episode, &quot;What Are Little Girls Made Of?&quot; Season 1, episode 7. Original air date, October 20, 1966. Image is a frame grab. (Photo by CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="542" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/What-Are-Little-Girls-Made-Of-850x576.jpg 850w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/What-Are-Little-Girls-Made-Of-300x203.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/What-Are-Little-Girls-Made-Of-768x521.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/What-Are-Little-Girls-Made-Of.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
8. “The Return of the Archons” (Ep. 21, Season 1)
The first of several “Trek” tales where people are considered part of one “body” — a la the Borg — and stripped of their individuality to create a more harmonious society. Kirk talks the machinery behind this “perfect order” into destroying itself, reminding it why free will matters.
It’s a similar story with “The Apple” (Ep. 5. Season 2). Once again Kirk realizes the folly of living in an Edenic state and wrecks the gadgetry that makes it all possible.
9. “Arena” (Ep. 18, Season 1)
Kirk must battle a lizard creature with great strength and lousy mobility in this essential “Trek” tale. The Kirk/Gorn battle is epic by “Trek” standards, but the intriguing element arrives when we learn why Gorn’s comrades attacked Kirk’s landing team. Starfleet encroached on their territory, and they viewed the incursion as an unprovoked attack.
The un-woke lesson: People have a right to defend their territory, be it via a man-made wall or military means.
<div id="attachment_125968" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-125968" class="wp-image-125968" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Arena-768x576.jpg" alt=" STAR TREK William Shatner as James T. Kirk fighting the Gorn in &quot;Arena&quot;. Original air date January 19, 1967, season 1, episode 19. Image is a screen grab. (Photo by CBS via Getty Images)" width="800" height="600" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Arena-768x576.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Arena-300x225.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Arena.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />CBS via Getty Images</div>
10. “Amok Time” (Ep. 1, Season 2)
It’s mating season for Leonard Nimoy’s pointy-eared hero, Mr. Spock, and it couldn’t come at a worse time for Kirk and company.
It leads to a wild fight between the show’s main players, after which Spock echoes a philosophy with a whiff of social conservatism.
&#8220;Having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting,” Spock notes.
11. “This Side of Paradise” (Ep. 24, Season 1)
Kirk and the landing party encounter a settlement teeming with contentment. There’s a catch, of course. Their bliss is provided by alien spores which keep them healthy and devoid of negative emotions.
It’s utopia — and it’s antithetical to the human condition. The society’s leader learns that the hard way after waking from his spore-driven stupor.
“Three years, no accomplishments,” he mutters.
The episode’s portrait of a biologist (Jill Ireland) who just isn’t complete without Spock by her side might drive feminists up a wall. Let’s not forget the drab, gray uniforms the settlers where, right out of the Communist Gift Guide.
Later, Kirk muses on the trouble with so-called paradise.
“Maybe we weren’t meant for paradise. Maybe we were meant to fight our way through, struggle, claw our way up, scratch for every inch of the way. Maybe we can’t stroll to the music of the lute. We must march to the sound of drums.”
Not a bad definition of capitalism.
More from Christian Toto: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/toto-shut-up-the-celebrities-said-hoping-the-pc-police-would-spare-them">‘Shut Up,’ The Celebrities Said (Hoping The PC Police Would Spare Them)</a>

Star Trek: The Original Series

Star Trek’s Stealth Conservatism: 11 Classic Episodes The Woke Crowd Would Cancel Today

Cancel culture

Capitalism

Conservatism

Gender

Hollywood

William Shatner

Rapper Lord Jamar, a member of the hip-hop group Brand Nubian, sparked controversy when he rejected the Black Lives Matter organization over its Marxist roots, alleging it was created by far-left philanthropist billionaire George Soros and saying it is robbing Black Americans of their own &#8220;organic movement.&#8221;
In a video that has quickly gone viral, Lord Jamar (real name Lorenzo Dechalus) said that he is not a &#8220;Black Lives Matter&#8221; supporter, citing the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/black-lives-matter-what-we-believe-page-disrupt-the-western-prescribed-nuclear-family-dismantle-cisgender-privilege">organization&#8217;s radical views</a> that fall outside its original mission statement.
&#8220;I&#8217;m not a Black Lives Matter supporter,&#8221; Jamar said in an interview on SCUM.
&#8220;You&#8217;re not?&#8221; the interviewer asked in surprise.
&#8220;No, absolutely not,&#8221; responded Jamar. &#8220;Because it&#8217;s not our movement. This is a movement that was given to us by, you know, George Soros and his f***ing boys. Because they saw how things were going and they didn&#8217;t want to go back to the 60s to where we started having our own organic movements. That was a big f***ing problem for them. So let&#8217;s give the people a movement that we can control. We’ll provide them the leaders and all this type of s**t. That&#8217;s what black lives matter is.&#8221;
Lord Jamar then directed people to look at the leaders of Black Lives Matter and their allegiance with the LGBTQ movement to illustrate his point. &#8220;Look at the leaders of Black Lives Matter,&#8221; he said. &#8220;These lesbian women who are trying to incorporate, you know, LG whatever the f*** the letters are, incorporate their concerns into black people’s concerns. Go to the website. Look it up.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
(Warning: Profanity)<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BlackLivesMatter?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BlackLivesMatter</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GeorgeSoros?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GeorgeSoros</a> <a href="https://t.co/DnfDqMsmK1">https://t.co/DnfDqMsmK1</a>
&mdash; Larry Elder (@larryelder) <a href="https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1278524142455676929?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Black Lives Matter states on its &#8220;<a href="https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/">What We Believe</a>&#8221; page that the organization is a &#8220;queer-affirming network&#8221; that seeks to &#8220;dismantle cisgender privilege&#8221; and &#8220;disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family.&#8221;
<blockquote>We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.
We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.
We practice empathy. We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts.
We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.
We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).</blockquote>
Black Lives Matter (BLM) founder Patrisse Cullors <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-black-lives-matter-founder-goal-is-to-remove-trump-reveals-marxist-ideology">also emphasized in 2015</a> that the leaders are &#8220;trained Marxists&#8221; steeped in ideological theory. &#8220;We actually do have an ideological frame, myself and Alicia, in particular, are trained organizers,&#8221; said Cullors. &#8220;We are trained Marxists.&#8221; Many Black Lives Matter rallies have included calls to &#8220;abolish capitalism&#8221; along with the police.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/black-lives-matter-led-drive-to-defund-the-police-also-targets-capitalism">Black Lives Matter-Led Drive To ‘Defund The Police’ Also Targets Capitalism</a>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers with the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Lord Jamar

VIRAL VIDEO: Rapper Lord Jamar: Black Lives Matter ‘Not Our Movement,’ ‘Given To Us By George Soros’

Black Lives Matter

George Soros

Marxism

Defund the Police

SHAPIRO: The Left’s Most Destructive Myths

American History

Race

Socialism

As the COVID-19 pandemic freezes the American economy, actor-turned-producer Zachery Bryan, who played Brad Taylor alongside Tim Allen on the popular 1990s sitcom &#8220;Home Improvement,&#8221; has emerged as an advocate for the Hollywood working class – the people behind the camera who get a bad name based on the public statements of &#8220;clueless celebs.&#8221;
In a recent <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/home-improvement-star-zachery-ty-bryan-dont-judge-all-of-hollywood-by-clueless-celebs">op-ed for Fox News</a>, Bryan asked Americans to have compassion for the many hard-working people in Hollywood whose lives have been upended by the economic shutdown, asserting that they should not be judged based on the actions of what he called the 1%.
&#8220;During a recent conversation with a longtime friend who works in the entertainment industry, she expressed concern that if the coronavirus shutdown goes on too long, they won’t be able to make their monthly housing payment,&#8221; wrote Bryan. “It was a reminder that Hollywood, just like the rest of the country, is filled with support and service work positions. Jobs that you can’t do from home. Like millions of others, these are the folks that run the risk of suffering the most from the economic fallout of COVID-19. ”
Indeed, as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hollywood-made-just-five-thousand-dollars-in-the-last-week-of-march">reported</a> by The Daily Wire&#8217;s Emily Zanotti, between delayed releases, theater closures, and halted projects, Hollywood has taken a beating like no other in recent weeks. Last year, the U.S. box office raked in $200 million in the final week of March; this year, just $5,000. Regardless of how long the shutdown lasts, there&#8217;s no telling when Tinseltown will be back to functioning normally.
But Zachery Bryan, who runs the <a href="https://lostlane.com/">production company </a>Lost Lane Entertainment, feels that maybe Hollywood shouldn&#8217;t return to business-as-usual. In <a href="https://www.zacherybryan.com/blog/hollywood-amp-embracing-the-universal-reset">another op-ed</a> published Friday, Bryan advocated that Hollywood help its working-class by practicing &#8220;conscious capitalism,&#8221; wherein studios and production companies give ownership opportunities for creative projects in the same way that corporations give employees stock options.
&#8220;Just like tech startups giving employees stock in the company, this type of royalty sharing in Hollywood allows the 99% to share in the long-term profits of their work,&#8221; argued Bryan. &#8220;A change that will finally allow hard-working and enterprising people at all levels of Hollywood the ability to move beyond economic vulnerability. Had this shift begun earlier, fewer of my hard-working colleagues in Hollywood would be in such a spot of financial uncertainty brought about by COVID-19, but it’s never too late to start and I plan to lead that charge.&#8221;
Speaking with The Daily Wire, Bryan argued that new video-on-demand (VOD) services will continue to put more control in the hands of creators, cutting out legions of middlemen – domestic and foreign sales agencies, distributors, lawyers, etc. – whose flat fees diminish a creative&#8217;s return on investment (ROI).
&#8220;This new VOD streaming model is direct to consumer, cutting out those middlemen in which the content creator gets direct sales and longterm streaming royalties,&#8221; Bryan told The Daily Wire. &#8220;This decentralizes the industry allowing for creators and filmmakers to basically become their own mini studios, and will allow them to invest profits back into future productions rather than constantly fundraising for their next endeavors.&#8221;
&#8220;By keeping more of the earnings, filmmakers can hire talent and crews by incentivizing them with ownership opportunities instead of just paying minimum union rates,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Creating an environment where everyone reaps rewards based on the success of the movie/series.&#8221;
Though the pandemic has wreaked havoc on American culture, Bryan highlighted a silver lining: an outpouring of generosity from all walks of life, which he described as a &#8220;universal reset.&#8221;
&#8220;Without any necessary coercion from Bernie Sanders types, CEOs are skipping their salaries so that their employees can get paid, banks are offering small businesses debt forgiveness loans, as well as homeowners the opportunity to defer their mortgage payments,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;Right now, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has said that all foreclosures and evictions are suspended through the end of April 2020.&#8221;
People may dismiss such grand gestures of piety as mere PR stunts, but Bryan feels that the &#8220;impact of this crisis is too long and too deep&#8221; to simply allow for temporary changes, creating a whole new way of life that alters &#8220;our habits, our daily rhythms, and the way we think.&#8221;
&#8220;In my humble opinion, real change doesn’t come by heavy-handed policies and bureaucracy backed by government might,&#8221; he concluded. &#8220;It comes from the American people and the free market they created, adjusting and making changes to overcome crisis and catastrophes.&#8221;

Zach

‘Home Improvement’ Star Zachery Bryan: Hollywood Should Practice ‘Conscious Capitalism’ To Help The Working Class

Coronavirus

COVID-19

Zachary Bryan

A far-left professor in Canada is on a tear against the wildly popular kids&#8217; cartoon, &#8220;Paw Patrol,&#8221; which he claims is &#8220;capitalist propaganda&#8221; that leads children away from Marxism, teaching them to critique and distrust government and embrace individualism.
King’s University College professor Liam Kennedy has published an entire treatise on the subject of &#8220;Paw Patrol,&#8221; entitled &#8220;Whenever there’s trouble. Just yelp for help’: Crime, Conservation, and Corporatization in Paw Patrol.”
&#8220;Paw Patrol,&#8221; created by a Canadian toy maker is &#8220;a cartoon, a toy brand, and a merchandising juggernaut, as well as a touring live show. Together, it rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars every year and has been forging a cult-like preschool following for years,&#8221; according to Fast Company. The show portrays a band of puppies who provide much-needed emergency services &#8212; police, fire, construction, and other public works &#8212; to a fictional town where the dogs in charge are largely incompetent.
&#8220;In the show, Ryder is the ring-leader of the pups, each of whom has a job to do as part of their team,&#8221; according to Post Millennial. &#8216;There’s Chase, the police dog, Marshall, the fire chief dog who can never quite get control of his hose, Rubble, the builder, Skye, who flies a plane for some reason and is the girl pup, Everest, the extreme outdoor adventuring pup, Rocky, the rescue dog, and Zuma, the pup who drives a boat.&#8221;
That&#8217;s a huge problem, per Kennedy: “Paw Patrol, as a private corporation, is used to help provide basic social services in the Adventure Bay community. That’s problematic in that the Paw Patrol creators are sending this message that we can’t depend on the state to provide these services.”
Kennedy is so anti-&#8220;Paw Patrol&#8221; that he won&#8217;t let her daughter watch the show, out of fear that she might grow up to love law enforcement, question authority, and approve of profit (Kennedy, <a href="https://www.thepostmillennial.com/cbc-asks-if-paw-patrol-is-capitalist-propaganda/">Post Millennal reports</a>, came up with his theory after watching hours of the show alone in his office).
In an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Kennedy railed against the evils of &#8220;Paw Patrol&#8217;s&#8221; peppy team of first responder hounds, declaring them the real villains of the show because they don&#8217;t respect their local leaders.
“I’ll start with the depiction of the state. Mayor Humdinger and Mayor Goodway—kind of the representatives of the state or the government—are portrayed negatively,” Kennedy railed. “Mayor Humdinger is portrayed as unethical or corrupt. Mayor Goodway as hysterical, bumbling, incompetent.”
And don&#8217;t get him started on how the Paw Patrol itself encourages individual achievement through its motto, &#8220;no job too big, no pup too small.&#8221;
“To me that’s an individualist message,” Kennedy said. “Pull up your bootstraps, you can do it if you just try hard enough. That kind of message ignores structural barriers in our society and not everyone can do it.”
It&#8217;s a truly awful show, Kennedy complained. “I just think that as time goes on, children might be less likely to critique the capitalist system that causes environmental harm in the first place and reproduces inequality.&#8221;
What nerve.

Paw Patrol

Leftist Prof Claims ‘Paw Patrol’ Kids’ Cartoon Is ‘Capitalist Propaganda’

Canada

Communism

On Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., sat for a discussion with author Ta-Nehisi Coates. She dropped a number of shocking statements — statements that elicited nothing but murmurs of agreement from Coates.
AOC claimed: “No one ever makes a billion dollars. You take a billion dollars.”
How, pray tell, are American billionaires responsible for such massive theft? According to AOC, the very mechanisms of capitalism mandate such theft. In her view, successful businesspeople simply exploit their workers while maximizing their profits.
Hypothetically speaking about billionaires making widgets, she said: “You didn’t make those widgets! You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern-day slave wages and, in some cases, real modern-day slavery … You made that money off the backs of undocumented people.”
This, of course, is nonsense. Voluntary exchange of labor for wages is, as stated, voluntary, and the fact that there are many people willing and able to labor in the manufacture of widgets is presumably responsible for lower wages.
Companies that refuse to pay their workers market wages will soon watch those workers migrate to other businesses or other industries. It is a patent violation of free market principles to utilize force in order to compel someone to work for you; blaming the free market for coercion is like blaming free speech for censorship. Exploitation in labor markets is typically accompanied by government subsidies, regulation, and interventionism.
So, how does AOC magically turn economic freedom into economic tyranny? By suggesting that true freedom lies in collective control of the means of production: “If you’re a billionaire, that means that you control a massive system. … It means that you have a massive labor force under your control, and to be ethical if you’re a billionaire today, the thing that you need to do is give up control and power.”
But to whom would such power and control be given? AOC suggests that major companies be turned into worker cooperatives — companies whose workers own and control the business.
But, of course, that doesn’t solve her problem: If workers own and control the business, they are properly classified as capitalists. They will have to make decisions to make the business competitive, which means keeping wages competitive, for example.
This is precisely what has happened with one of the world’s biggest worker collectives, the Spanish Mondragon Cooperative Corporation, whose worker-owners have “learned to think like the shareholders of any other global business,” according to The Guardian.
In fact, most companies begin with a few workers who pool their capital and labor: Facebook, for example, handed out stock options to employees, resulting in a $23 billion valuation for its initial employees when the company went public. Does that make those workers evil capitalists?
In the end, what AOC truly wants is government control. Worker collectives won’t do the trick. Only top-down government redefinition of the value of labor will.
When AOC claims that capitalists merely leech off the true value of labor, she suggests that labor can be measured without reference to the market.
How would AOC measure the value of such labor? Presumably through appeals to “fairness.” There is only one problem with this method: It simply doesn’t work.
Consumers determine the value of products; producers do not. The diffuse informational system of the free market, which rewards the power of entrepreneurship, rather than punishing it, creates prosperity; top-down control creates poverty. In fact, the greatest guarantee of the sort of poverty AOC decries is the destruction of the same system she decries.
But according to AOC, we have nothing to fear from government, and “the government is us.” The fact that Coates, one of the most prominent writers on the evils of Jim Crow, nodded along should demonstrate that those on the left do not understand the consequences of their own philosophy.
The government is not “us,” because we are not a collective. We are individuals with rights. But in AOC’s world, we have no rights — we have only our role as members of a collective controlled by those who agree with her. And that is exploitation and tyranny.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

SHAPIRO: The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez School of Economics

Economy

Actor John Cusack is a big fan of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders&#8217; particular brand of socialism. In fact, as the &#8217;80s actor made alarmingly clear at a Bernie rally in Exeter, NH on Saturday, he believes if we don&#8217;t stop &#8220;predatory capitalism&#8221; in the next &#8220;ten or twelve years,&#8221; we&#8217;re all toast.
&#8220;[T]he billionaires are getting nervous and all the corporate media is — they hate us, they don’t hate us, they&#8217;re confused. And it seems like every conceivable power structure on earth is trying to kill or derail our movement, but we’re still here,&#8221; declared Cusack, in remarks reported by <a href="https://news.grabien.com/story-john-cusack-we-have-10-12-years-save-planet-climate-capitali">Grabien</a>.
&#8220;We know this form of capitalism takes and takes; it takes whatever, whenever, however it wants,&#8221; he said. &#8220;It’ll take our lives, it’ll take our labor, our spirit, our air and water, even our earth.&#8221;
Cusack then echoed an alarmist line often repeated by global warming activist Greta Thunberg, but specifically tying the sentiment to Sanders&#8217; policies.
&#8220;Bernie respects us enough to tell the truth, the hard truth: We have a ten to twelve year window to radically transform our energy systems, or climate change, predatory capitalism, and endless war economies will rob us of the right to any future at all,&#8221; said the actor. &#8220;And as we can see literally every day, the house is on fire.&#8221;
Bernie, suggested Cusack, is our only hope in these desperate times.
&#8220;But as Bernie tells us, this is no time for despair, it&#8217;s no time for anything but action,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Because if we stand together, with him, the future is still indeed unwritten. And there’s nothing more powerful than a movement whose time has come.&#8221;
Cusack then invoked a vaguely defined &#8220;movement,&#8221; by which he appears to mean democratic socialism, which he says is now finally &#8220;close&#8221; to power.
&#8220;We have never had a movement candidate this close to power with a revolutionary movement he’s led and built, ready-to-go, all the way to change the country and help heal the world,&#8221; he said. &#8220;With people of every race, creed, gender, everybody stands together in solidarity when all of us whose labor powers this economy, stop the profiteering and tell the billionaires and the  corporate tyrannies that it&#8217;s time to start treating all human beings with respect and dignity.&#8221;
Video of Cusack&#8217;s remarks below (via <a href="https://news.grabien.com/story-john-cusack-we-have-10-12-years-save-planet-climate-capitali">Grabien</a>):
<iframe title="John Cusack at Sanders Rally: ‘We Have 10 to 12 Years’ to Save the Planet from Capitalism" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Bc6CgJP9nro?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Other celebrities who&#8217;ve made millions from Hollywood&#8217;s &#8220;predatory capitalism&#8221; have resorted to Thunbergian rhetoric about climate change in recent months, including &#8220;Aquaman&#8221; (which blew up at the box office) star Jason Momoa, who told the United Nations in September that humanity is &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-aquaman-jason-momoa-says-we-are-a-disease-infecting-our-planet-rips-trump-at-u-n">a disease that is infecting our planet.</a>&#8221;
&#8220;From the atmosphere to the abyssal zone, we are polluted,&#8221; said the &#8220;Game of Thrones&#8221; star. &#8220;It is a known fact that the great garbage patch floating in the Pacific is larger than the country of France. Even at the depths of the Mariana Trench we are discovering nano plastics. And shockingly, there are more particles of plastic in the ocean than there are stars in the Milky Way. It is shameful.&#8221;
&#8220;Yet, the greatest threat to small island developing states is that entire islands are drowning into the sea due to the enormous volume of emissions generated by the first world countries,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Island nations contribute the least to this disaster but are made to suffer the weight of its consequences.&#8221;
Similar to Cusack, Momoa laid the blame at the feet of capitalism and failure of the government to intervene enough.
&#8220;Our governments and corporate entities have known for decades that immediate change is needed, yet change still has not come,&#8221; said the actor. &#8220;And when the front line is gone, we are doomed. There is no undoing. If you continue to watch unsympathetic to the issues of island nations, this realization will soon come — that you stood by and witnessed the world cross the critical tipping point, ushering in the death of our planet.&#8221;
Momoa&#8217;s speech the U.N. below:
<iframe title="Jason Momoa Addresses United Nations On Climate Crisis (Sept. 27, 2019)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0Bo2UD2wAOs?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;

John Cusack

WATCH: Actor John Cusack Goes Full Greta At Bernie Rally: ‘The House Is On Fire’

Bernie Sanders

Climate Change

Global Warming

Greta Thunberg

Jason Momoa

Tonight brings the year 2019 to a close. Please stay safe, everyone. And for you truly crazy masochists who will be packed like sardines tonight in New York City&#8217;s Times Square — well, as they say in the South, &#8220;bless your heart.&#8221;
This past year was an eventful one, from a political perspective. From the Covington Catholic High School media imbroglio back in January through the unveiling of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller&#8217;s much-anticipated eponymous report in April through a slew of horrific mass shootings over the dog days of the summer through House Democrats&#8217; (<a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1207731722995023872">kind of</a>/<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/us/trump-feldman-impeach.html">sort of</a>) formal impeachment of President Donald Trump, 2019 pretty much saw it all.
As we enter 2020, I have two main substantive political wishes to complement my <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-here-are-three-reasons-why-i-plan-vote-josh-hammer">electoral wish</a> that the president be <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-yes-any-moral-stain-trump-now-mostly-sunk-josh-hammer">re-elected</a>. We need less socialism and we need more law and order.
It is possible that, perhaps above all else in the broader political universe, the year 2019 will be remembered by historians as the year in which unvarnished socialism became truly ascendant on the American Left. Embodied by the harrowing all-freshman congresswoman <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-aocs-squad-will-destroy-democrats-2020-josh-hammer">&#8220;Squad&#8221;</a> of economically illiterate would-be despots, socialism has likely not been this popular since the fall of the Berlin Wall itself. According to <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/257639/four-americans-embrace-form-socialism.aspx">Gallup</a>, an eye-opening four in ten Americans now support some form of socialism. Perhaps even more terrifyingly, MarketWatch <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/for-millennials-socialism-and-communism-are-hot-capitalism-is-not-2019-10-28">reports</a> that more than a third of Millennials approve of communism itself.
It is impossible to overstate how grossly irresponsible this flirtatiousness is with the economic <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/09/capitalisms-triumph-michael-tanner/">fool&#8217;s errand</a> of socialism and the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-bernie-sanders-entire-worldview-grotesquely-josh-hammer">outright evil political totalitarianism</a> to which socialism inevitably leads: Communism. No ideology in human history has ever <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/100-years-of-communismand-100-million-dead-1510011810">killed more human beings</a> than has communism. None. Alas, as it is said, those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. And as we enter 2020, a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/who-will-win-democratic-primary-latest-2020-josh-hammer">leading presidential candidate</a> for the Democratic Party, Sen. Bernie Sanders (Loonbag-VT), is a former Soviet Union-honeymooning, hammer and sickle flag-waving communist who sided with America&#8217;s existential geopolitical foes at the very height of the Cold War. This is utter moral idiocy. Hopefully 2020 sees a resurgence of traditional American skepticism of socialism.
A similarly immensely dispiriting trend, and one that unfortunately has more bipartisan support, is the rise of an all-encompassing culture of lawlessness. From weak-on-sentencing judges to the <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/accused-cop-killer-bragged-prior-releases-jail-offered-bail/">decline of bail</a> to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/09/us/first-step-act-release-alleged-murder/index.html">&#8220;First Step Act&#8221;</a>-style early prison release of violent felons to leftist/libertarian assaults on the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-in-defense-of-prosecutors">integrity of prosecutors</a> to the continued <a href="https://nypost.com/2017/05/07/fbi-confirms-the-deadly-costs-of-a-war-on-cops/">war on cops</a> to the misplaced calls for <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomangell/2019/09/19/beto-orourke-proposes-drug-war-reparations-funded-by-marijuana-taxes/">mass drug liberalization</a> to the neo-Confederate illegality of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-why-no-one-pointing-out-sanctuary-cities-josh-hammer">sanctuary jurisdictions</a>, 2019 was also marked by a general decline in pervasiveness of traditional American support for law and order.
The rule of law is an indispensable piece of the broader puzzle that is the American experiment. Without robust and diligent enforcement of the law, we are nothing. The bipartisan infatuation with mass jailbreak initiatives, the likes of which bamboozled Trump into signing the First Step Act federal <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/first-step-criminal-justice-reform-bill-whats-in-it/">legislative catastrophe</a> and which are locally responsible for recent high-profile criminals from <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/anti-semitic-terrorist-new-york-7-arrests-little-prison-time/">New York</a> to <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/texas-church-shooter-massive-rap-sheet-almost-no-prison-time/">Texas</a> being free to roam to streets and wreak havoc upon a vulnerable citizenry, simply must stop. The mentality of mollycoddling criminals and failing to stand for the victims of crime — most emphatically illegal alien crime, but certainly also crime committed from those American citizens who ought to be incarcerated — has long since moved from the realm of the merely pernicious to the realm of the full-on societally ruinous. Along with the<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1373"> inherent lawlessness</a> of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi">Supremacy Clause</a>-defying sanctuary cities, the totality of all these attacks on law enforcement and the rule of law is to inculcate a culture of sheer anarchy. Anarchy, much like socialism and communism, is complete moral idiocy. Hopefully 2020 sees a resurgence of traditional American support for law and order.
Surely that isn&#8217;t asking too much for our political environs in the year 2020. Is it?

2020 goals on notepad

HAMMER: A Political Wish For 2020: Less Socialism, More Law And Order

2020 Election

Crime

Jail

Law Enforcement

Leftism

Libertarianism

Police

Prison

Progressivism

National anthem-protesting former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick kicked off December posting a warning against the dangers of capitalism but ended the month engaging in the most capitalist of actions, promoting his new hit shoe with Nike and, in the process, demonstrating the power of capitalism to be a force for good in the world.
Kaepernick, whose social justice activism has eclipsed his professional athleticism, has repeatedly criticized the United States from a radically left angle, including at one point <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/curse-castro-colin-kaepernicks-james-barrett">favorably comparing</a> the oppressive communist regime of Fidel Castro to the U.S. In early December, Kaepernick <a href="https://twitter.com/LeftSentThis/status/1202281184346030080">retweeted</a> a quote from revolutionary socialist and chairman of the violence-embracing Black Panther Party Fred Hampton warning against the evils of capitalism:
<blockquote>&#8220;With no education you’ll have neo-colonialism instead of colonialism&#8230;and before you know it, they’ll [Black folks] be capitalist, and before you know it we’ll have Negro-Imperialist.&#8221; –Chairman Fred Hampton</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
“With no education you’ll have neo-colonialism instead of colonialism&#8230;and before you know it, they’ll [Black folks] be capitalist, and before you know it we’ll have Negro-Imperialist.” –Chairman Fred Hampton <a href="https://t.co/pe9Bh0YwQc">pic.twitter.com/pe9Bh0YwQc</a>
&mdash; L E F T, PhD ⚫️ (@LeftSentThis) <a href="https://twitter.com/LeftSentThis/status/1202281184346030080?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While Kaepernick&#8217;s retweet and past rhetoric suggests he agrees with Hampton&#8217;s anti-capitalist sentiment, the former quarterback, who recently skipped what appears to have been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nfls-goodell-on-kaepernick-weve-moved-on-after-he-skipped-workout">his final shot</a> at getting back into the NFL, has no problem promoting capitalism when it comes to his own product line.
In a series of tweets over the last week, Kaepernick has been busy pushing his new Nike shoe, part of his extremely lucrative deal with the shoe giant. &#8220;Inspired by the voice of the athlete, Colin Kaepernick x Nike Air Force 1 celebrates those who are <a class="twitter-hashtag pretty-link js-nav" dir="ltr" href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrueTo7?src=hash" data-query-source="hashtag_click"><s>#</s>TrueTo7</a>. Available tomorrow at select Nike stores, retailers and SNKRS. Link in bio,&#8221; Kaepernick <a href="https://twitter.com/Kaepernick7/status/1208767020029763585">announced</a> on Dec. 22, in the first of multiple tweets (below).
In the process of promoting his new shoe, the radical activist also ended up highlighting the world-changing power of the free market. In a pair of announcements, Kaepernick revealed that multiple private companies are donating some of the profits from the sale of his shoes to charitable causes.
&#8220;Great news! [Shoe Palace] will be donating all profits from the sale of my shoes to organizations fighting systemic oppression,&#8221; Kapernick tweeted. &#8220;Make sure you go to Shoe Palace and <a class="twitter-timeline-link" dir="ltr" title="http://ShoePalace.com" href="https://t.co/Unb9r7G1es" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" data-expanded-url="http://ShoePalace.com">http://ShoePalace.com </a> to get your shoes.&#8221;
&#8220;Good morning, everyone,&#8221; he wrote in another tweet. &#8220;More good news! [Jimmy Jazz] has joined in &amp; is donating the profits from the sale of my shoe for the benefit of the people. Go grab a pair from their NYC, ATL or Charlotte locations to support the movement. On sale today!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Inspired by the voice of the athlete, Colin Kaepernick x Nike Air Force 1 celebrates those who are <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrueTo7?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TrueTo7</a>. Available tomorrow at select Nike stores, retailers and SNKRS. Link in bio. <a href="https://t.co/67HJ10RUZa">pic.twitter.com/67HJ10RUZa</a>
&mdash; Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) <a href="https://twitter.com/Kaepernick7/status/1208767020029763585?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Great news! <a href="https://twitter.com/ShoePalace?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ShoePalace</a> will be donating all profits from the sale of my shoes to organizations fighting systemic oppression. Make sure you go to Shoe Palace and <a href="https://t.co/Unb9r7G1es">https://t.co/Unb9r7G1es</a> to get your shoes. ✊🏾 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrueTo7?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TrueTo7</a> <a href="https://t.co/90K5JXmn9P">pic.twitter.com/90K5JXmn9P</a>
&mdash; Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) <a href="https://twitter.com/Kaepernick7/status/1208929043502059520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Good morning, everyone. More good news! <a href="https://twitter.com/JimmyJazzStores?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jimmyjazzstores</a> has joined in &amp; is donating the profits from the sale of my shoe for the benefit of the people. Go grab a pair from their NYC, ATL or Charlotte locations to support the movement. On sale today! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrueTo7?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TrueTo7</a> <a href="https://t.co/ewoYqpHeQK">pic.twitter.com/ewoYqpHeQK</a>
&mdash; Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) <a href="https://twitter.com/Kaepernick7/status/1209118597684948993?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Kaepernick&#8217;s new Nike Air Force 1 special edition shoe features his NFL number, 7, and touts the day he began his polarizing protest of &#8220;The Star-Spangled Banner.&#8221; The shoe&#8217;s design includes &#8220;a hangtag with Kaep’s number 7 atop a White midsole and icy translucent outsole with the date Colin first took a knee in protest &#8216;8/14/16&#8217; on the right shoe,&#8221; <a href="https://sneakerbardetroit.com/colin-kaepernick-nike-air-force-1-low-release-date/">SneakerBarDetroit</a> reports.
Kaepernick first began to refuse to stand for the playing of the national anthem ahead of a preseason game against the Houston Texans on August 14, 2016. The next week, Kaepernick sat on the bench again for the playing of the anthem ahead of the preseason game against the Green Bay Packers, at which point, his private protest started to get national attention.
Asked why he refused to stand to honor the flag, Kaepernick famously <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/8757/san-francisco-police-union-slams-kaepernick-his-james-barrett">said</a>, &#8220;I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.&#8221;
&#8220;To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way,&#8221; said the then-second string quarterback. &#8220;There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-week-after-tryout-debacle-kaepernick-posts-defiant-message-to-league">WATCH: After No Teams Call Him, Kaepernick Posts Defiant Message To League</a>

Colin Kaepernick Billboard

Kaepernick Warns Against Capitalism, Ends Up Demonstrating How It’s A Force For Good

Colin Kaepernick

Nike

Patriotism

Dr. Richard Ebeling, professor of economics at The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina, and my longtime friend and colleague, has written an important article, &#8220;Business Ethics and Morality of the Marketplace,&#8221; appearing in the American Institute for Economic Research. Its importance and timeliness is enhanced by so many of America&#8217;s youth, led by academic hacks, having fallen prey to the siren song of socialism.
In a key section of his article, Ebeling lays out what he calls the ethical principles of free markets. He says: &#8220;The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent. Another way of saying this is that in the free market society, people are morally and legally viewed as sovereign individuals possessing rights to their life, liberty, and honestly acquired property, who may not be coerced into any transaction that they do not consider being to their personal betterment and advantage.&#8221;
Ebeling says that the rules of a free market are simple and easy to understand: &#8220;You don&#8217;t kill, you don&#8217;t steal, and you don&#8217;t cheat through fraud or misrepresentation. You can only improve your own position by improving the circumstances of others. Your talents, abilities, and efforts must all be focused on one thing: what will others take in trade from you for the revenues you want to earn as the source of your own income and profits?&#8221;
For many people, profit has become a dirty word and as such has generated slogans such as &#8220;people before profits.&#8221; Many believe the pursuit of profits is the source of mankind&#8217;s troubles. However, it&#8217;s often the absence of profit motivation that&#8217;s the true villain. For example, contrast the number of complaints heard about profit-oriented establishments such as computer stores, supermarkets and clothing stores to the complaints that one hears about nonprofit establishments such as the U.S. Post Office, the public education system and departments of motor vehicles. Computer stores, supermarkets and clothing stores face competition and must satisfy customers to earn profits and stay in business. Postal workers, public teachers and department of motor vehicles employees depend on politicians and coercion to get their pay. They stay in business whether customers are satisfied with their services or not.
In a free market society, income is neither taken nor distributed. Income is earned by serving one&#8217;s fellow man. Say I mow your lawn. When I&#8217;m finished, you pay me $50. Then, I go to my grocer and demand, &#8220;Give me two pounds of sirloin and a six-pack of beer that my fellow man produced.&#8221; In effect, the grocer asks: &#8220;Williams, what did you do to deserve a claim on what your fellow man produced?&#8221; I say, &#8220;I served him.&#8221; The grocer says, &#8220;Prove it.&#8221; That&#8217;s when I pull out the $50. We might think of dollars as &#8220;certificates of performance,&#8221; proof of serving our fellow man.
Free markets are morally superior to other economic systems. To have a claim on what my fellow man produces, I&#8217;m forced to serve him. Contrast that requirement to government handouts, where a politician says to me: &#8220;You don&#8217;t have to get out in that hot sun to mow your fellow man&#8217;s lawn. Vote for me and I&#8217;ll take what your fellow man produces and give it to you.&#8221;
Ebeling says that those deserving condemnation are those who use government coercion to gain at the expense of others. There are thousands of such examples: government subsidies at taxpayers&#8217; expense, paying farmers not to grow crops or guaranteeing them a minimum price paid for through tax dollars and higher prices for consumers, regulations that limit entry into various professions and occupations, regulations that limit consumer choice, and corporate handouts and bailouts.
In a word or so, our protest should not be against capitalism. People should protest crony capitalism, where people use the political arena to buy government favors. If millennials and others want to wage war against government favors and crony capitalism, I&#8217;m with them 100%. But I&#8217;m all too afraid that anti-capitalists just want their share of the government loot.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

Cash houses.

WILLIAMS: Morality Of Free Markets

Free market

On Sunday, actor Mark Ruffalo, who is worth an estimated $30 million by <a href="https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/mark-ruffalo-net-worth/">some</a> <a href="https://wealthygorilla.com/mark-ruffalo-net-worth/">reports</a>, decided to trumpet his antipathy for the capitalist system, pontificating on Twitter, “It’s time for an economic revolution. Capitalism today is failing us, killing us, and robbing from our children’s future.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It’s time for an economic revolution. Capitalism today is failing us, killing us, and robbing from our children’s future. <a href="https://t.co/OnNm6CYrWK">https://t.co/OnNm6CYrWK</a>
&mdash; Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/1201176660252475392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In September, Ruffalo asserted his support for Senator Bernie Sanders and socialism, tweeting, “Democratic Socialism per @Bernie Sanders is basically the political system that works for all of us not just one percent. Healthcare for workers, education for workers, sick leave for workers, and a fair tax system.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Democratic Socialism per <a href="https://twitter.com/BernieSanders?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BernieSanders</a> is basically the political system that works for all of us not just one percent. Healthcare for workers, education for workers, sick leave for workers, and a fair tax system. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemDebate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemDebate</a>
&mdash; Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/1172332658061242368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 13, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In November, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJfQpTjoFhU">speaking at a SAG-AFTRA gala</a>, Ruffalo enthused:
<blockquote>I love the Democratic brand; I think they’re offering ideas and solutions and fighting for the everyday people in America, and so any one of them would be, would be a blessing to our nation. And, of course, I go way back with Bernie Sanders and I still love the guy and I still love what he’s doing. I’m so proud of every single one of them; they’re just leaning in and leaning forward on the line for Americans. I just love what we’re doing right now.</blockquote>
Only days later, Ruffalo appeared on &#8220;The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,&#8221; where Colbert asked Ruffalo which of the 2020 Democratic candidates he preferred, as <a href="https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/gabriel-hays/2019/11/15/avengers-mark-ruffalo-ecstatic-bernie-cat-fighting-us">Newsbusters</a> reported. Ruffalo responded, “First of all, I want to preface this by saying I’m very excited by the Democratic brand altogether. But for me, I started with Bernie on this trip, and, um, in 2016, and when I think about it, what I see is he led. And he led then. And now he’s leading now. And he’s the one —.”
Colbert interjected, “He’s been consistent.”
Ruffalo continued, “ — his whole life. He’s never been another, he was never another party; never had different views about these things; the rest of the United States has finally caught up to what this cat has been doing already for his entire career. And you know that when he gets into office he is going to be fighting for us.”
Near the end of November, Ruffalo was at it again, <a href="https://pjmedia.com/trending/mark-ruffalo-says-bernie-sanders-would-beat-trumps-ass-no-doubt-about-it/">saying of Sanders</a> that he would &#8220;Beat Trump&#8217;s ass.&#8221; He said, &#8220;I know that he has the grit and I know he has this huge infrastructure and the young people dig him. And of course a good part of &#8216;the Squad&#8217; signed off on him. I&#8217;m very excited about what he&#8217;s doing. He&#8217;s already pushed the Democrats to the progressive values he already has and he keeps leading in the field even today. And he&#8217;ll beat Trump&#8217;s a**.&#8221;
Yet in mid-November, Ruffalo made sure to push his new movie, which one would suppose will only increase his vast wealth, tweeting, “Today’s a big day for not only me but also for the entire team behind <a href="https://twitter.com/DarkWatersMovie">‪@DarkWatersMovie</a>. If you&#8217;re in NY or LA, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DarkWaters?src=hashtag_click">‪#DarkWaters</a> is playing in theaters NOW, it opens everywhere else 12/6. I can&#8217;t wait for you all to see it.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Today’s a big day for not only me but also for the entire team behind <a href="https://twitter.com/DarkWatersMovie?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DarkWatersMovie</a>.
If you&#39;re in NY or LA, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DarkWaters?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DarkWaters</a> is playing in theaters NOW, it opens everywhere else 12/6. I can&#39;t wait for you all to see it ➡️ <a href="https://t.co/mYCWPLWDRp">https://t.co/mYCWPLWDRp</a> <a href="https://t.co/ljgUfKbE3h">pic.twitter.com/ljgUfKbE3h</a>
&mdash; Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/1197987645261066241?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Social media users expressed their disgust with Ruffalo&#8217;s attack on capitalism. YouTuber Tim Pool: “Prove you mean it. Donate your excess wealth until you are at the threshold of the 1%. You’ll still be rich but you’ll give millions to help the needy. I mean this seriously.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Prove you mean it
Donate you excess wealth until you are at the threshold of the 1% You&#39;ll still be rich but you&#39;ll give millions to help the needy
I mean this seriously <a href="https://t.co/9lT75vN9xx">https://t.co/9lT75vN9xx</a>
&mdash; Tim Pool (@Timcast) <a href="https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1201295751973879809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senior contributor to The Federalist Chad Felix Greene: “Says the guy worth $30 million and got paid to play a giant green monster in movies.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Says the guy worth $30 million and got paid to play a giant green monster in movies. <a href="https://t.co/HbPcTWxGZ4">https://t.co/HbPcTWxGZ4</a>
&mdash; Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) <a href="https://twitter.com/chadfelixg/status/1201334762448785408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Actor and director Nick Searcy: “Start by giving up your capital, Mark.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Start by giving up your capital, Mark. <a href="https://t.co/WlmLfZUBwL">https://t.co/WlmLfZUBwL</a>
&mdash; Nick Searcy, ESCHEWER OF MALARKEY AND STAR (@yesnicksearcy) <a href="https://twitter.com/yesnicksearcy/status/1201251303034220544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And others:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hulk smash brain <a href="https://t.co/6BOXsgN6kB">https://t.co/6BOXsgN6kB</a>
&mdash; Heimish Conservative (@HeimishCon) <a href="https://twitter.com/HeimishCon/status/1201271384900542464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Ruffalo

Multi-Millionaire Mark Ruffalo: ‘Capitalism Today Is Failing Us, Killing Us’

Mark Ruffalo

Today, news broke that former New York City mayor and prominent billionaire philanthropist Michael Bloomberg is considering tossing his hat into the dystopian ring that is the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary. The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/michael-bloomberg-preparing-to-enter-2020-democratic-race-11573167459?mod=hp_lead_pos3">quotes</a> a Bloomberg adviser named Howard Wolfson, who suggests that the main reason Bloomberg might jump in is his fear that none of the current 2020 Democrats can defeat President Donald Trump at the ballot box.
<blockquote>
&#8220;Mike believes that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented threat to our nation,&#8221; Mr. Wolfson said.
&#8220;Mike is increasingly concerned that the current field of candidates is not well positioned to [defeat Trump],&#8221; Mr. Wolfson said. &#8220;If Mike runs he would offer a new choice to Democrats built on a unique record running America’s biggest city, building a business from scratch and taking on some of America’s toughest challenges as a high-impact philanthropist.&#8221;
</blockquote>
By all means, Bloomberg should enter the fray if he feels called to do so. But we should not mince words here: There is no chance whatsoever that Bloomberg would successfully win the Democratic presidential nomination if he were to enter the field. And the chief reason for that is very simple. Bloomberg would have no shot because he is a somewhat sane person who would be seeking the presidential nomination of a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-democratic-party-has-become-parody-itself-josh-hammer">fully insane</a> political party.
Bloomberg, who has made a veritable fortune over the course of a lifetime working in the financial services industry, is an ex-Republican who openly identifies as a <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/01/30/bloomberg_we_shouldnt_be_embarrassed_about_capitalism_non-capitalistic_venezuela_is_collapsing.html">capitalist</a>. But he would be seeking the presidential nomination of a political party whose grassroots <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725/democrats-positive-socialism-capitalism.aspx">increasingly identify</a> as more socialistic than capitalistic. He would be seeking the presidential nomination of a political party in which the leading sources of disagreement over the course of the past few televised primary debates have been whether the harebrained &#8220;Medicare for All&#8221; nostrums has a bankrupting price tag best estimated at $40 trillion or $50 trillion, and whether it is appropriate to literally eliminate private health insurance for over a hundred million American citizens while implementing that quixotic socialized medicine scheme.
Bloomberg, furthermore, is nothing if not a lifelong friend of the Jewish state of Israel. In 2014, when anti-Israel President Barack Obama oversaw a temporary <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/213288-obama-defends-israel-flight-ban">U.S. flight ban</a> to Israel amidst the jihadist rocket fire that rained down on the Jewish state that summer from the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-israel-must-destroy-hamas-once-and-all-josh-hammer">Hamas</a>-controlled Gaza Strip, Bloomberg personally <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2014-07-23/why-i-flew-to-israel">flew to Israel</a> solely to demonstrate to his fellow Americans that it was safe to do so. Bloomberg may not be a hardcore <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-the-pro-israel-case-against-u-s-military-aid-to-israel">Caroline Glick-style Zionist</a>, but he is, at minimum, an AIPAC-style pro-Israel advocate. But the modern Democratic Party is no longer an AIPAC-style pro-Israel political party. On the contrary, the 2020 Democrats now shirk AIPAC en masse in favor of obeisance at the sycophantically pro-Palestinian altar of the vehemently anti-Israel group <a href="https://www.creators.com/read/ben-shapiro/10/19/the-j-street-democrats">J Street</a>.
Additionally, it must be noted that Bloomberg, while hardly Orthodox in identification, is nonetheless proudly and publicly Jewish. This too is a problem for the modern Democratic Party, which extols the virtues of Holocaust deniers like Palestinian Authority chieftain Mahmoud Abbas, glorifies Jew-haters like Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and is being rapidly Corbynized into an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-stark-choice-facing-jewish-democrats-josh-hammer">overtly anti-Semitic</a> political vehicle. It is difficult to see how Bloomberg&#8217;s proud Jewishness counts, in the eyes of today&#8217;s Democratic Party, as anything other than a net negative.
Bloomberg would have no chance for the Democratic presidential nomination were he to formally enter the fray. He is a sane Jew who would be seeking the presidential nomination in a fully insane, socialist, increasingly Jew-hating political party.

Michael Bloomberg.

HAMMER: Michael Bloomberg Would Have No Chance At The Democratic Presidential Nomination

American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)

Anti-Semitism

Democratic Party

Israel

Judaism

Michael Bloomberg

People seem shocked that recent polls show millennials are enamored of socialism — an economic system that reasonable and educated Americans have long known is disastrous. They shouldn&#8217;t be; this has been a long time coming.
The latest survey by Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation shows that 70% of millennials are likely to vote socialist. Adding insult to injury, only 57% believe the Declaration of Independence &#8220;better guarantees freedom and equality&#8221; over &#8220;The Communist Manifesto.&#8221; The worst part of this is that it is real, not a parody piece in &#8220;The Onion.&#8221;
Now do you finally believe that our schools and universities, Hollywood and the liberal media are brainwashing our kids? Are you taking this seriously?
I&#8217;m taking it very seriously, which is why I devoted three of the 16 chapters of my just-released book, &#8220;Guilty by Reason of Insanity: Why the Democrats Must Not Win,&#8221; to discussing socialism and capitalism. I cite earlier polls showing this same disturbing trend concerning young people&#8217;s attitudes toward socialism.
A 2015 YouGov poll showed that 43% of Americans between 18 and 29 years of age had a favorable opinion of socialism and preferred it to capitalism. Then, in 2015, a Pew poll found that 69% of those under age 30 would be willing to vote for a socialist for president. Further, a Gallup poll revealed that only 45% of Americans ages 18 to 29 have a positive view of capitalism, while 51% have a positive view of socialism. No offense, but it&#8217;s like a wave of stupid has washed ashore.
Significantly, these kids are not only drawn to socialism but also repelled by capitalism — two distinct but related points. Their attraction to socialism partially stems from their aversion to capitalism. The leftist establishment has bombarded us for decades with socialist propaganda. Former Hillsdale College professor Burton Folsom notes that while America was founded on the idea of preserving individual liberties through limited government, many prominent American history textbook writers are strongly biased against America&#8217;s free market tradition and believe that America must be liberated from predatory capitalists. These teachings have now yielded an abundance of poisonous fruit.
A 2018 study by the National Association of Scholars showed that some 40% of colleges in the United States have no Republican professors. &#8220;The political registration of full-time, Ph.D.-holding professors in top-tier liberal arts colleges is overwhelmingly Democratic,&#8221; writes Mitchell Langbert. &#8220;Indeed, faculty political affiliations at 39 percent of the colleges in my sample are Republican free — having zero Republicans.&#8221; In the other 61% of schools, the ratio is &#8220;absurdly skewed against Republican affiliation and in favor of Democratic affiliation.&#8221;
It is astonishing that an economic system that has enslaved and impoverished nation after nation and was responsible for more than 100 million murders in the 20th century is portrayed as utopian, and that capitalism, which has liberated hundreds of millions from poverty, is depicted as evil.
The left works 24/7 to disseminate its destructive ideas. Chrissy Clark writes for The Federalist that Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, two prominent economics professors from the University of California, Berkeley, have been instrumental in designing economic policy for Democratic presidential hopefuls Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Despite their dubious calculations on such socialistic proposals as &#8220;Medicare for All,&#8221; the liberal media is working hand in hand with them to spread their propaganda — including the oft-repeated canard that the wealthiest Americans have the lowest tax rates. This type of coordinated effort, argues Clark, could &#8220;affect the way young people view economics for the rest of their lives.&#8221;
Here&#8217;s the point: Leftists have to lie to persuade people that socialism works and capitalism is evil. At some point, we must successfully make the case that the left must be judged by its policy failures rather than its supposedly good intentions. Here&#8217;s the other point: Leftists are seemingly more committed to their goals of fundamentally transforming America than conservatives are to preserving it.
One of the purposes of my book is to alert our side as to how urgent our situation has become and how critical the 2020 presidential and congressional elections are for us. Evidence abounds that many Americans are losing sight of the unique gloriousness of America&#8217;s founding ideas. I try to give patriots abundant ammunition to make our case for preserving these ideas and rejecting the insane ideas coming from the left, from socialism, to gender, to race, to abortion, to immigration, to the Constitution and much more.
If we are concerned, as we claim to be, about bequeathing to our children the free and prosperous America we have enjoyed, we better get to work.
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is &#8220;Guilty by Reason of Insanity: Why the Democrats Must Not Win.&#8221; Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

Bernie Sanders.

LIMBAUGH: Exposing The Fraud Of Socialism

PragerU founder Dennis Prager and comedian/podcast host Adam Carolla team up for &#8220;<a href="https://nosafespaces.com/">No Safe Spaces</a>,” a documentary covering the hot topic of political correctness and how it has infected everything from politics to educational institutions to the entertainment industry. From getting speakers banned to harassing public officials, this “woke” crowd is targeting anyone that disagrees with them, and this documentary highlights some of the most egregious examples of bad actors trying to stop free speech.
Prager and Carolla travel the nation, documenting high-profile moments of protest against Conservative speakers. This includes a 2017 speech given by Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro at UC Berkeley, which was violently protested by far-left students and outside Antifa activists who were bent on stopping anyone who supposedly &#8220;offended&#8221; them from engaging in freedom of speech.
The film shines a spotlight on these incidents and does a good job of exposing the bad actors who are trying to do an end-run around of the First Amendment in order to block people they do not like from simply stating their opinion. There is no debate allowed by these hecklers, who only want to stamp out — sometimes literally — the beliefs of others.
The film is well-developed, and moves at an easy pace, interviewing newsmakers, celebrities, authors, educators, and many others who have experienced backlash over their refusal to kowtow to the politically correct. Some of the unforgettable footage burns in your memory. For example, a group of far-left students hold a meeting with one university&#8217;s faculty. When one teacher refuses to pander to their whims, the students take over and overreact.
The most sobering aspect of the film are the personal testimonies of Prager and Carolla. Often, documentary filmmakers are simply observers, but these two have themselves been targeted by the PC crowd. Carolla’s irreverent comedy and Prager’s stand for traditional values have made them both targets of the Left who, at one time, tried to silence them or deplatform them over their views.
Of course, the mainstream media have tried to dismiss &#8220;No Safe Spaces.&#8221; Writing for the AV Club, critic Vadim Rizov <a href="https://film.avclub.com/debate-me-you-coward-takes-movie-form-in-adam-caroll-1839268667" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">opines</a>, &#8220;This isn’t an argument for free speech, it’s just paranoid whining, complete with a roundtable of comics sympathetically agreeing how sad and scary this all is, plus images of the Statue of Liberty with tape over its mouth.&#8221;
This, of course, is echoed by its &#8220;rotten&#8221; status on film rating aggregator website <a href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/no_safe_spaces" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Rotten Tomatoes</a>. This has done nothing to stop audiences, where it has a stunning 100 percent rating at the time of this review.  
Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/no-safe-spaces-free-speech-documentary-box-office-1-screen" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reports</a> that at its first showing in Phoenix, Arizona, on October 25th, “No Safe Spaces” proved a box office success, producing the “second-highest ever box office gross for a documentary playing on just one screen, according to the movie&#8217;s producers.” Heading into week two of its release, the momentum does not seem to be slowing down, with a distribution expansion planned. 
Despite the mainstream media’s sabotage attempts, “No Safe Spaces” is going to reach more Americans who are fed up with the pandering to college students, Antifa mobs, and woke thinkers who are making conversation, debate, and free speech harder and harder in American life. 
Check out the trailer below:
<iframe title="NO SAFE SPACES Trailer" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TTOQGvXbZY8?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This article has been revised for clarity.

No Safe Spaces title art

‘No Safe Spaces’ Review – How Far Will Political Correctness Take Us?

academia

Adam Carolla

Constitution

Dennis Prager

On Wednesday’s episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” the Daily Wire editor-in-chief talks about a new radical proposal that Elizabeth Warren mentioned at the Democratic primary debate. Video and partial transcript below: 
This is the constant theme from Elizabeth Warren: She&#8217;s either saying stuff that is so radical that it’s impossible to fact-check it because she&#8217;s making moral claims, or she is saying stuff that she herself cannot back up because the data simply do not back it up.
 I mean, here is one of her radical proposals. So Elizabeth Warren is asked about jobs, and Bernie Sanders has already claimed that he wants a universal jobs guarantee, and then you see my boy Andrew Yang, the only person with half a brain onstage, saying Americans don&#8217;t want to work for the federal government. All of that&#8217;s true. 
Then Elizabeth Warren comes in like the Kool-Aid Man, just boom, right through the wall — a very mild-mannered Massachusetts Kool-Aid Man. She is red, so I mean, I guess that works. In any case, Elizabeth Warren explains that what she actually wants to do is force every corporation in America to have 40% of its board elected by the employees of the corporation. That&#8217;s ridiculous. 
You think that I&#8217;m going to let the employees over at The Daily Wire vote on their own wages? You think that&#8217;s a thing where they get a vote? That is not a thing where they get a vote, because if they did get a vote, then they would probably bankrupt the company because you have a collective action problem. In the companies where you do have employees voting on their own wages, effectively speaking, at the major car manufacturers for example, they basically bankrupted the car industry through private unionization and government cram-downs over the course of decades.
You know who knows how to run the corporations? The people who are interested in the profits of the corporation and the business workability of a corporation, not the people who are seeking to suck money out of the corporation in shortsighted fashion. And now, there are private sector unions that are willing to work with employers in sort of cooperatives [and] adversarial fashion — with the tug and pull — but Elizabeth Warren effectively unionizing every business in America is going to be a giant fail. 
And by the way, if you really believe that all employees want to be unionized, you&#8217;re gonna have to explain the 7% private sector unionization rate in this country. It turns out that most employees in this country want to be able to independently negotiate their salaries with the bosses.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sYc932aNgwQ?start=1443" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
In any case, here&#8217;s Elizabeth Warren:
<blockquote>WARREN: But the principal reason has been bad trade policy. The principal reason has been a bunch of corporations, giant multinational corporations, have been calling the shots on trade — giant multinational corporations that have no loyalty to America. They have no loyalty to American workers, they have no loyalty to American consumers, they have no loyalty to American communities. They are loyal only to their own bottom line. I have a plan to fix that, and it&#8217;s accountable capitalism. It says, &#8220;You want to have one of the giant corporations in America? Then by golly, 40 percent of your board of directors should be elected by your employees.&#8221;</blockquote>
That is an insane violation of freedom of contract. It is an insane violation of freedom of association. Who the hell is Elizabeth Warren to decide how I run my business? She has never made a dollar, not a dollar for me. She has not run my business — not in any way. Not in any way, shape, or form. Warren says something similar later. So Warren actually comes forward and she says she doesn&#8217;t have a beef with billionaires, and then she explains in very much Barack Obama fashion — because Barack Obama actually ripped the speech off from her years ago — she basically says you didn&#8217;t build your business yourself.
<blockquote>WARREN: So I&#8217;m really shocked at the notion that anyone thinks I&#8217;m punitive. Look, I don&#8217;t have a beef with billionaires. My problem is you made a fortune in America. You had a great idea. You got out there and worked for it, good for you. But you built that fortune in America. I guarantee you built it, in part, using workers all of us helped pay to educate. You built it in part getting your goods to market on roads and bridges all of us helped pay for. You built it, at least in part, protected by police and firefighters all of us helped pay the salaries for. </blockquote>
Now, this is the same exact argument that Barack Obama made in 2012. He said, &#8220;You didn&#8217;t build that.&#8221; Except guess what? All of those things are being paid for by the people who create businesses. Who does she think pays taxes in this country? Who pays the income tax in this country? And by the way, the people who are salaried at these corporations, they get paid, they&#8217;re not wage slaves. They&#8217;re getting paid, and they are paying taxes in their neighborhoods. If the corporations disappear, who do you think is going to pay all that local property tax that supports the school? Who do you think is going to pay the police and firefighters? 
<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ben-shapiro-show/id1047335260">Listen to full episodes 0f “The Ben Shapiro Show” on iTunes. </a>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show">Watch “The Ben Shapiro Show” on-demand!</a>

Elizabeth Warren

SHAPIRO: Elizabeth Warren’s Latest Plan To Meddle In Your Business

Barack Obama

On Tuesday’s episode of “The Andrew Klavan Show,” Klavan talks about the appalling pro-communist antics happening in the NBA. Video and partial transcript below: 
When I was a kid, we used to wonder: If you&#8217;d dug a hole deep enough, would you come out in China? Well, the National Basketball Association (NBA) is apparently going to try that experiment and find out. 
They started digging after Houston Rockets [General Manager] Daryl Morey tweeted his support for the demonstrators in Hong Kong — the brave men and women fighting to keep their liberty as China slowly closes its iron grip on the formerly free British colony. The NBA apologized for Morey’s righteous tweet. They&#8217;ve apologized, disgustingly, in English and even more disgustingly in Chinese. They started ejecting fans who openly supported freedom in the face of communist tyranny. Morey had to apologize to the Chinese tyrants. Players apologized. Golden State [Warriors] coach Steve Kerr, who is Superman when it comes to attacking the American president, suddenly turned into a mealy-mouthed worm, drawing a comparison between the 65 million Chinese murdered by the communists and something, something, something about America.
It was appalling crap, and now LeBron James — King James — has turned himself into Chairman James with this stupid statement:
<blockquote>JAMES: We all talked about this freedom of speech. Yes, we ought to have freedom of speech, but at times there are ramifications for the negative that can happen. When you&#8217;re not thinking about others, you know, and you’re only thinking about yourself. So, I don&#8217;t believe — I don’t want to get into a word or sentence feud with Daryl Morey, but I believe he wasn&#8217;t educated on the situation at-hand and he spoke. And so many people could have been harmed, not only financially but physically, emotionally, spiritually. So just be careful what we tweet, what we say, and what we do even though, yes, we do have freedom of speech there can be a lot of negatives that come with that, too. </blockquote>
Yeah, James tried to explain that away but it just got worse — and the thing is, I don&#8217;t even want to pick on LeBron. His job is to put a ball through a hoop; He&#8217;s very good at putting balls through hoops — he may be the best putter of balls through hoops since balls were hooped. But I do think the situation &#8230; has besmeared not just him and everyone in the sport, not to mention ever-so-woke ESPN, which suddenly went morally dark on the Chinese subject, and Disney, who owns ESPN and isn&#8217;t about to lose access to that big ol’ Chinese audience for its films. 
And by the way, let&#8217;s not forget the NFL, where all those oh-so-brave Kaepernicks disrespect the American flag. They apologized to China back in 2004 for accidentally airing a &#8230; long image of Tiananmen Square during the Super Bowl halftime show. Same exact thing. 
This situation brings a lot of things into focus and into question. It brings into question celebrity culture. Why does putting a ball through a hoop or reciting lines someone else wrote for you elevate LeBron James — his opinion or Robert De Niro&#8217;s opinion — to relevance? That is corrupting. That attitude is corrupting. It brings into question our reliance on capitalism and free trade for moral guidance. Without the brave and moral hearts of human beings, these systems will operate only on the basis of profit, and that&#8217;s corrupting. 
It brings into question the drive toward globalism. It sounds pretty to say we should all act as one world, but if we don&#8217;t act under truly moral rules as opposed to Chinese rules, then economic and military might will decide what&#8217;s right, and that&#8217;s about as corrupting as you can get. Freedom is the first moral good of politics, because without freedom, every other good is just oppression with a smiley face. If you can&#8217;t choose your own path, and speak your own mind, and spend your own money as you see fit, you&#8217;re nothing. You&#8217;re no one. No matter how much free stuff or law-and-order the state gives you in return for your soul, and no matter how much good the government tells you it is doing with your money.
I support capitalism because it&#8217;s the most free system. I support free trade because it supports capitalism. And it&#8217;s wonderful that capitalism, when it&#8217;s done honestly, raises everyone to a higher economic level. But if you put the economics before the freedom, you become corrupt and that&#8217;s what&#8217;s happened to the NBA and the NFL and Disney and a lot of other people who sold their values for the almighty yuan. No system can do the moral thing for you. Shareholders are not an excuse; cultural sensitivity is not an excuse. No one can demand that you be willing to die for freedom — not everyone&#8217;s a hero. But we can hold you in contempt when you won&#8217;t even speak up for freedom when there are people in the streets of Hong Kong risking everything.
<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-andrew-klavan-show/id1045171376?mt=2">Listen to full episodes of “The Andrew Klavan Show” on iTunes. </a>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show">Watch “The Andrew Klavan Show” on-demand!</a>

LeBron James in China

KLAVAN: Economics Should Never Come Before Freedom

China

LeBron James

On Tuesday’s episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” Shapiro talks about how Senator Bernie Sanders’ proposed wealth tax goes farther to the Left than even Senator Elizabeth Warren. Video and partial transcript below: 
Bernie is starting to open up his guns — as I suggested he would have to — on Elizabeth Warren. Earlier today, he proposed a super wealth tax, not just a wealth tax, a super wealth tax, in which he would reduce the ability of billionaires to be billionaires. 
He literally tweeted out, [Sanders impression] Billionaires should not exist! Perhaps we should put them on trains to very cold places, you know like Montana or something, and we will build — we won&#8217;t call them gulags, but they will be kind of like gulags, and we&#8217;ll put them there and then they won&#8217;t be billionaires anymore, and we will liquidate the Kulaks and we will unite the workers of the world. 
Bernie Sanders was really going for it. He tweeted out: &#8220;There is no justice when three billionaires are able to own more wealth than the bottom half of the entire country.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
There is no justice when three billionaires are able to own more wealth than the bottom half of the entire country.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) <a href="https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1176492974877945856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
Well no, there might be justice depending on whether they also employ hundreds of thousands of Americans, made millions of lives better with their products, and engaged in voluntary exchange. So in his new plan, Bernie Sanders is going to go for the super duper wealth tax, and you knew this was coming, right? Elizabeth Warren proposed her 2% wealth tax, which is unconstitutional and would not raise anywhere near the kind of money she&#8217;s talking about. Because you know what wealthy people are very good at? Tax avoidance. Very, very good at it.
In fact, it&#8217;s one of the reasons why you see Democrats say stuff [like], &#8220;Well you remember back in the 1960s when the top tax bracket was 91%?&#8221; Right, and the effective tax rate on rich people was pretty much the same because rich people started taking their money and putting it in places that were not taxable. The tax revenue of the federal government versus the GDP of the United States has basically remained stable since the reduction of war spending after World War II. So that has not really changed. 
But Bernie Sanders is proposing a new wealth tax, a 1% tax on net worth over $32 million every year, 2% from from $50-250 million, 3% from $250-500 million, 4% from $500 million to $1 billion, and 8% on wealth over $10 billion. He says this will raise $4.35 trillion per decade, and then he says this would be used to fund Bernie’s affordable housing plan, universal childcare, and would help fund Medicare For All. That’s sort of a problem considering that Medicare For All is supposed to cost something like $34 trillion, so if he raises $4.35 trillion over the next decade, where is the other $30 trillion is going to come from? But this is Bernie Sanders upping the ante. 
Also, Bernie Sanders is more of a true believer than Elizabeth Warren, and you&#8217;re gonna see him make that case. So just in the last 24 hours, Bernie Sanders is drawing the contrast between Elizabeth Warren and her supposed warm embrace of capitalism and his own love for socialism. Here&#8217;s Bernie saying that people are brainwashed to believe in capitalism, someone says this to him and, of course, he fully agrees. 
[Sanders impression] Even though I have a lake house, and I love pudding, many types of pudding. Pudding is delicious.
<blockquote>AUDIENCE MEMBER: I think that the kind of brainwashing, or the idea at least that I grew up with, is that our definition of success, is like the American dream, and in capitalism, you&#8217;re rewarded for getting everything and just keeping it to yourself and not worrying about everybody else, and that&#8217;s sort of like a psychology that we&#8217;ve all been taught. 
SANDERS: I think Lizzie is exactly right, that a profound — it’s a profound point. </blockquote>
Oh it&#8217;s super profound to believe that capitalism is good. People have been brainwashed to believe that capitalism is good by, you know, the immense prosperity that capitalism has created … I don&#8217;t know how he claims that he is in favor of quote unquote “Democratic Socialism,” Norway, Finland, Sweden-style when he is ripping on capitalism, which provides the entire growth basis for the Nordic countries — as every politician in Norway, Sweden, and Finland will tell you openly. But Bernie is trying to draw a contrast with Elizabeth Warren. 
<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ben-shapiro-show/id1047335260">Listen to full episodes of “The Ben Shapiro Show” on iTunes. </a>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show">Watch “The Ben Shapiro Show” on-demand!</a>

Alex Wong/Staff via Getty Images

SHAPIRO: Bernie’s Plan To Crumble The Billionaire Class

Ben Shapiro

Democratic Socialism

On this week&#8217;s episode of &#8220;The Sunday Special,&#8221; Yaron Brook, the chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Insitute, explains the misconceptions around altruism and the moral case for capitalism. Video and partial transcript below: 
SHAPIRO: Let&#8217;s talk about the free-market philosophy because when people think of Ayn Rand, particularly in American politics, they tend to think specifically in the economic context. They think, ok greed is good, Gordon Gekko, selfishness is a virtue and they think that that is a villainous conceit — that basically the only way that we can live in a society together is not to be selfish. And particularly they hold this is true in the realm of economics. You make the counter-case. You say selfishness is really the only value in economics that&#8217;s going to forward yourself, and also for the society at large. What&#8217;s the case for selfishness?
BROOK: Well the case of selfishness is that you only have one life and you have a fundamental choice that you have — to live or not to live right. And that every choice should be made around living. That this fundamental alternative shapes your values or your values should be geared towards your survival and survival as a human being, which means survival as a full human with your rational capacity, your spiritual capacity, your capacity to live a complete and full life.
So the argument for self-interest, in the broader sense, is the argument that basically says, you know, it’s your life. It&#8217;s nobody else&#8217;s life. It’s your life. Live it for your own sake — live it to achieve your own personal happiness. And I believe one of the challenges with capitalism is that too many people over — you know really since Adam Smith including Adam Smith — have tried to justify capitalism not from an egoistic perspective, not from a selfish perspective, not from the perspective of individuals pursuing their own happiness — individual pursuing their own values their own rational values — but from the perspective of what it does for society.
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z55TXWTRHW0?start=313" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
So Adam Smith says, the baker doesn&#8217;t bake the bread for you, he bakes the bread for himself. He&#8217;s being selfish. But we don&#8217;t like selfishness, Adam Smith says. This, we know, it&#8217;s not a virtue, it&#8217;s really deep down a vice. But when you add up all the vices it turns into a virtue. Society is better off if everybody pursues this.
And I&#8217;m like, no, nobody believes that if you add up vices it turns into a virtue. I&#8217;m saying, the baker taking care of himself and his family and feeding them and making a profit for himself: that&#8217;s virtue. Right. And that&#8217;s the moral justification for capitalism. You can&#8217;t justify capitalism from the perspective of, no Gordon Gekko is really greedy but it turns out that if they do that, the world&#8217;s a better place so we&#8217;ll let them do it. Nobody believes you, and nobody is going to allow that to happen. The regulatory state is built around the idea that those greedy selfish businessmen are going to cheat. They&#8217;re going to steal. They&#8217;re all crooks because that&#8217;s what we associate with self-interest. And therefore we have to regulate them and control them.
SHAPIRO: Now this is where I got in trouble with some of the Objectivists — when I was on Dave Rubin&#8217;s show. You&#8217;re talking about capitalism. And one of the things I suggested, as I said, that it effectively has the same consequence as forced altruism. If that actually works you can&#8217;t force altruism from other people because then it loses the actual character of altruism. But more than that, what I was trying to say is that free exchange is — I don&#8217;t get what I want from you, unless I give you something that you want. So the effect is that you get what you want from me. But that&#8217;s only because I&#8217;m also getting what I want from you. So the effect is the same, I think the linguistic kind of approach is different.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/series/sunday-special">Watch &#8220;The Ben Shapiro Show: Sunday Special&#8221; on-demand!</a>

Yaron Brook

Yaron Brook To Ben Shapiro: Here’s The ‘Moral Justification’ For Capitalism

Over the weekend, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who positions himself as somewhat of a &#8220;centrist&#8221; within the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/43796/hammer-bernie-sanders-entire-worldview-grotesquely-josh-hammer">increasingly</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/44424/hammer-stark-choice-facing-jewish-democrats-josh-hammer">far-left</a> Democratic Party, spoke at the California Democratic Party convention. In the speech, Hickenlooper, who <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/446660-hickenlooper-calls-medicare-for-all-green-new-deal-massive-government">opposes such massive government intervention programs</a> as &#8220;Medicare for All&#8221; and the &#8220;Green New Deal,&#8221; decided to take a very, very brave stance &#8212; at least as far as 2020 Democratic nomination candidates are concerned. Hickenlooper went so far as to &#8230; wait for it &#8230; come out in opposition to socialism.
Gasp!
And yet, amazingly, the California Democratic Party convention attendees had the audacity to boo Hickenlooper for his very, very brave stance against the most <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/43796/hammer-bernie-sanders-entire-worldview-grotesquely-josh-hammer">immoral</a> and destructive economic worldview ever known to man.
Per <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/john-hickenlooper-booed-socialism">TheBlaze</a>:
<blockquote>
While speaking at the California Democratic Party convention, Hickenlooper told the San Francisco crowd that if Democrats want to defeat President Donald Trump in 2020, they will need traditional Democratic values in their corner &#8212; not socialism.
&#8220;If we want to beat Donald Trump and achieve big progressive goals, socialism is not the answer,&#8221; Hickenlooper said.
The denunciation was met with immediate blowback, including a sea of boos lasting more than 30 seconds.
</blockquote>
After the speech, Hickenlooper elaborated to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/446500-hickenlooper-booed-in-san-francisco-for-denouncing-socialism">The Hill</a>:
<blockquote>
&#8220;If we don&#8217;t draw a clear distinction between Democrats and our candidates and socialism, the Republicans will paint us into a corner that we can&#8217;t get out of. Massive government expansions may not be strictly speaking socialism, but trust me Republicans will make it seem like socialism. In places like Ohio and Michigan and North Carolina and Wisconsin, places we have to win to beat Trump, we&#8217;ll be starting out ten yards behind.&#8221;
</blockquote>
Hickenlooper further elaborated on his opposition to massive governmental intervention in the economy in an <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2019/06/03/daily-202-socialism-is-not-the-answer-john-hickenlooper-discusses-his-sister-souljah-moment-after-boos-in-s-f/5cf41a821ad2e52231e8e927/?utm_term=.6ffd8dbca00e">interview</a> yesterday with The Washington Post:
<blockquote>
&#8220;[&#8216;Medicare for All&#8217; and the &#8216;Green New Deal&#8217;] are the kinds of things that Republicans will try to turn into &#8216;socialism.&#8217; They&#8217;re going to call it &#8216;socialism,&#8217; and they&#8217;re going to say this is taking away the freedom and independence of the individual,&#8221; he added. &#8220;They&#8217;re going to try and twist it in every way they can because that&#8217;s about the only card they&#8217;re left holding as long as they&#8217;re still supporting Trump.&#8221;
</blockquote>
Alas, Democratic Party activists in the year 2019 apparently consider such talk to be anathema. What a time to be alive!
Hickenlooper <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/democratic_nomination_polls/">barely registers in current 2020 Democratic presidential nomination polling</a> and ranks extraordinarily low at election prediction market website <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination">PredictIt.org</a>.
As the case may be, the California Democratic Party convention is probably reflective of the Party&#8217;s broader electorate. A <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725/democrats-positive-socialism-capitalism.aspx">Gallup poll in August 2018</a> amazingly showed that there are more Democrats who support socialism than there are Democrats who support capitalism:
<blockquote>
For the first time in Gallup&#8217;s measurement over the past decade, Democrats have a more positive image of socialism than they do of capitalism. Attitudes toward socialism among Democrats have not changed materially since 2010, with 57% today having a positive view. The major change among Democrats has been a less upbeat attitude toward capitalism, dropping to 47% positive this year &#8212; lower than in any of the three previous measures.
</blockquote>

Democratic Presidential Candidate Booed By San Francisco Crowd For Criticizing Socialism

California

John Hickenlooper

San Francisco

Some Americans have much higher income and wealth than others. Former President Barack Obama explained, &#8220;I do think at a certain point you&#8217;ve made enough money.&#8221; An adviser to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who has a Twitter account called &#8220;Every Billionaire Is A Policy Failure&#8221; tweeted, &#8220;My goal for this year is to get a moderator to ask &#8216;Is it morally appropriate for anyone to be a billionaire?'&#8221; Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren, in calling for a wealth tax, complained, &#8220;The rich and powerful are taking so much for themselves and leaving so little for everyone else.&#8221;
These people would have an argument if there were piles of money on the ground called income, with billionaires and millionaires surreptitiously getting to those piles first and taking their unfair shares. In that case, corrective public policy would require a redistribution of the income, wherein the ill-gotten gains of the few would be taken and returned to their rightful owners. The same could be said if there were a dealer of dollars who &#8212; because of his being a racist, sexist, multinationalist and maybe a Republican &#8212; didn&#8217;t deal the dollars fairly. If he dealt millions to some and mere crumbs to others, decent public policy would demand a re-dealing of the dollars, or what some call income redistribution.
You say, &#8220;Williams, that&#8217;s lunacy.&#8221; You&#8217;re right. In a free society, people earn income by serving their fellow man. Here&#8217;s an example: I mow your lawn, and you pay me $40. Then I go to my grocer and demand two six-packs of beer and 3 pounds of steak. In effect, the grocer says, &#8220;Williams, you are asking your fellow man to serve you by giving you beer and steak. What did you do to serve your fellow man?&#8221; My response is, &#8220;I mowed his lawn.&#8221; The grocer says, &#8220;Prove it.&#8221; That&#8217;s when I produce the $40. We can think of the, say, two $20 bills as certificates of performance &#8212; proof that I served my fellow man.
A system that requires that one serve his fellow man to have a claim on what he produces is far more moral than a system without such a requirement. For example, Congress can tell me, &#8220;Williams, you don&#8217;t have to get out in that hot sun to mow a lawn to have a claim on what your fellow man produces. Just vote for me, and through the tax code, I will take some of what your fellow man produces and give it to you.&#8221;
Let&#8217;s look at a few multibillionaires to see whether they have served their fellow man well. Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, with a net worth over $90 billion, is the second-richest person in the world. He didn&#8217;t acquire that wealth through violence. Millions of people around the world voluntarily plunked down money to buy Microsoft products. That explains the great wealth of people such as Gates. They discovered what their fellow man wanted and didn&#8217;t have, and they found out ways to effectively produce it. Their fellow man voluntarily gave them dollars. If Gates and others had followed President Obama&#8217;s advice that &#8220;at a certain point&#8221; they&#8217;d &#8220;made enough money&#8221; and shut down their companies when they had earned their first billion or two, mankind wouldn&#8217;t have most of the technological development we enjoy today.
Take a look at the website <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yd6mme37">Billionaire Mailing List&#8217;s</a> list of current billionaires. On it, you will find people who have made great contributions to society. Way down on the list is Gordon Earle Moore &#8212; co-founder of Intel. He has a net worth of $6 billion. In 1968, Moore developed and marketed the integrated circuit, or microchip, which is responsible for thousands of today&#8217;s innovations, such as MRIs, advances in satellite technology and your desktop computer. Though Moore has benefited immensely from his development and marketing of the microchip, his benefit pales in comparison with how our nation and the world have benefited in terms of lives improved and saved by the host of technological innovations made possible by the microchip.
The only people who benefit from class warfare are politicians and the elite; they get our money and control our lives. Plus, we just might ask ourselves: Where is a society headed that holds its most productive members up to ridicule and scorn and makes mascots out of its least productive and most parasitic members?
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

WILLIAMS: Is Income Inequality Fair?

Taxes

Menu