Americans have very little patience for being told to stay quiet. As far as they are concerned, their speech is a God-given right they should be able to exercise at all times despite any minor extenuating circumstances, like war. That was certainly how Americans felt in the twilight hours of World War One, and it continued to be how they felt during the presidential election of 1920 when nearly a million of them (6 percent) cast their votes for a man sitting in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. (READ MORE from Aubrey Gulick: Where Are All the Airships?) Eugene V. Debs was the kind of man who had read Karl Marx’s Das Kapital, had decided that it was time to move on from American capitalism, and therefore called himself a socialist. But it was an American flavor of socialism. Debs thought the American Founding was great and democracy was a swell idea. American socialism was simply the next natural step in the progressive narrative of American development, and he was there to help make it happen. In 1901 Debs founded the Socialist Party of America and remained its charismatic face and go-to presidential candidate for years — but that wasn’t why he ended up in federal prison. (READ MORE: NY Judge May Get Trump Elected) The immediate cause was a speech he gave in 1918 in Canton, Ohio. Like many Americans, Debs didn’t like that America was at war and he liked the draft even less. As far as he was concerned, the draft was essentially a way to drag the proletariat onto the battlefield to fight for the petty causes of the bourgeoisie. In American terms, he believed the war to be preeminently undemocratic. The problem with openly expressing that opinion from a podium on a July day in Ohio was that it was illegal in 1918 under that year’s Sedition Act. It should have been an easy conviction, but it wasn’t really. The stenographer tasked with recording Debs’ speech had done a bad job of it and the witnesses were hardly helpful. Debs, of course, immediately admitted his guilt and proceeded to talk for another two hours. The jury had no problem indicting him. (READ MORE: Are Trump’s Polls Understating His Lead?) By the time 1920 rolled around, Debs not only received the nomination of the Socialist Party of America on May 13, he then garnered 913,693 votes (although he didn’t manage to obtain any electoral votes). Despite being unable to campaign effectively from his prison cell it was the most successful presidential campaign Debs ever ran. Americans didn’t need to be socialists to vote for him, they just needed to be opposed to the wartime suspension of their constitutional rights. This article originally appeared on Aubrey’s Substack, Pilgrim’s Way on May 13, 2024. The post The Time Prison Was an Effective Campaign Strategy appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Oatmeal can be a healthy breakfast option, but there are some store-bought options that are best avoided. We take a look at some of the worst offenders.

Steve Albini wasn't completely opposed to eating at restaurants, but he found more satisfaction in home cooked food. The reasons for that went beyond taste.

Both institutionalized plunder and illegal plunder harm society, but profit does not. Despite the qualms of many socialists, the voluntary nature of profit means that business owners benefit society by creating supply for what their consumers wish to buy. Frédéric Bastiat in his book The Law distinguishes between profit and plunder. Profit is financial gain earned through industrious behavior. Business owners make a profit by selling products at a greater amount than what it costs to produce that product. Plunder, by contrast, is the theft of property through nonvoluntary means, such as theft, coercion, or fraud. Bastiat noted that while most plunder is illegal, there remains one major exception: the state. All plunder is an act of aggression against someone else’s natural rights, hence why it is morally wrong. Regular plunder is a tough business, even for delinquent thieves. There is risk involved in robbing or defrauding someone, leading to no return on the effort of the thief. There is also the issue of the victim or potential victims of plunder being more aware of and resistant to future attempts at plunder. Despite the inclinations of a few thieves toward high-risk, high-reward plunder, most thieves prey upon the vulnerable. Further, if a thief’s activities are discovered, he is socially excluded from the rest of the population. In addition to plunder being vilified, there are natural constraints based on the nature of plunder that heavily discourage attempted theft. However, our world today consists of legalized plunder in addition to illegal plunder. The policies of states across the world amount to no less than institutionalized plunder. Bastiat wrote that plunder tends to occur when it is less burdensome than labor. States, by virtue of having a monopoly on the legitimate force of violence within their territory, are in a prime position to benefit immensely from plunder. An example of institutionalized plunder is taxes. Taxes are a mandatory contribution to state revenue by individual citizens and businesses. One cannot opt out of paying taxes to a state, making them involuntary and an aggression on the natural rights of citizens. In most countries, the penalty for not paying taxes ranges from the seizure of assets to imprisonment. In this way, the state operates in a similar way to a gang would. You either have to pay up or have violence unleashed against you. States, however, have realized that they cannot plunder endlessly. Hans-Hermann Hoppe in Democracy: The God That Failed makes the case that historically, monarchies would not plunder to the extent that the value of their estates would drop. While modern democracies do not have this constraint, a feature that Hoppe argues causes them to be a worse form of governance, they are constrained by potential resistance from the population. A tyrannical government that sets a tax rate of 100 percent would almost instantly be overthrown. Thus, the need to creatively disguise the true effects of taxes comes into being. Examples are redistribution schemes, public goods funding, and national security achievements. While the intentions of some of these policies may seem noble, they weren’t funded voluntarily, signaling that plunder was employed in the fulfillment of these goals. Money is redirected away from the preference of the worker or business owner to the preference of a bureaucrat. As a result, states impoverish the societies they control rather than benefit them.Save 10% on ALL storable food and Alexapure Pro Water Filtration Systems! Secure your independence with our delicious kits TODAY to beat the coming demand! Both institutionalized plunder and illegal plunder harm society, but profit does not. Despite the qualms of many socialists, the voluntary nature of profit means that business owners benefit society by creating supply for what their consumers wish to buy. This is a symbiotic relationship between producer and consumer as opposed to the parasitic relationship between state and taxpayer. Therefore, prosperity is a result of voluntary exchanges between consenting parties. Expanding the role and power of the state is antithetical to striving for a prosperous society. Bastiat presented three options for how a society structures its laws. The first is where the few plunder the many. The second is where all plunder all. The last one is a society where none plunders none. It is clear that our current economic woes are in some part caused by being a society increasingly based upon plunder. EMERGENCY FINANCIAL NEWS: Economist Warns The Collapse Has Already Begun – Will Be Worse Than The Great Depression

"People don’t realize that the government is the source of inflation. And Wall Street and academia helped fool the public by talking about inflation as if it were rising prices." On Wednesday, Peter appeared on This Week in Mining with Jay Martin. Jay and Peter discuss the state of the economy, the government’s assault on sound money, and why the mining sector constitutes a good investment. Early on in the interview, Peter lays out the dilemma the Federal Reserve will face in the near future: “Inflation is going to get much stronger as the economy weakens and enters recession. … Then the Fed has to choose, and it’s going to be at the point where it’s damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. But it’s going to have to make a choice, a very unpopular choice. Does it fight inflation, which means much higher rates than the rates we have now (the rates we have now are not high enough)? Does the Fed hike rates even though there’s a recession and even though the hikes will make this recession worse and potentially cause a massive financial crisis? … Or will the Fed ignore the inflation problem and try to rescue the economy by creating more inflation?” As the government continues to grow and encroach on individual liberty, Peter explains what would happen if gold is ever outlawed, as it was in the 1930s: “There always will be a market. If it’s illegal, then there’s a black market. People sell all kinds of drugs in this country, and they’re not legal. But there are plenty of buyers. It just means the market is underground, and of course, even if it’s illegal in America, that doesn’t mean it’s going to be illegal in every country, so there will be plenty of legal gold markets. If they ever make it illegal to own gold, the one thing you want to own is gold. They’re not going to make it illegal because nobody wants it and the price is really low, right? They’re going to make it illegal because everybody is buying gold and it’s really expensive.”Save 10% on ALL storable food and Alexapure Pro Water Filtration Systems! Secure your independence with our delicious kits TODAY to beat the coming demand! They also discuss central bank digital currencies, the latest fad in authoritarianism: “The more power you give to the government to interfere with the economy, the worse the economy is going to be, because you don’t want the government to interfere at all. The smaller the government, the better. But central bank digital currencies are just a way to make government a lot bigger and a lot more powerful and a lot more intrusive and a lot more oppressive, and so I don’t want it! Actually, ideally, I don’t want the government involved in money at all. I think it should just be created by the private sector.” It’s important that citizens recognize the true cause of inflation: “People don’t realize that the government is the source of inflation. And Wall Street and academia helped fool the public by talking about inflation as if it were rising prices. And they talk about ‘food price inflation,’ ‘healthcare inflation,’ ‘housing inflation,’ right? All this stuff is designed to push the blame for inflation onto the farmer, onto businesses, onto labor unions. All inflation has only one source, and that’s government.” Both Jay and Peter see opportunity in the mining sector, especially if gold stays on its current trajectory: “If all of a sudden a lot of gold that is unprofitable to mine at, let’s say even $2300 an ounce, when gold is $5000, $10000, wherever it’s going to be, even though the costs of mining will have gone up, they’re not going to go up anywhere near that proportion. So I think [gold] reserves that may be valued at zero are going to be worth billions of dollars on the books of these companies. So I think that’s a huge call option that’s free in these gold mining stocks.” Royalty companies like Franco-Nevada offer investors additional protection from rising costs in the mining sector at the expense of reduced exposure to the price of gold: “Look at the leader, Franco-Nevada. I mean look at where Franco-Nevada was 10 years ago, and look at where it’s at today. It’s a huge gain! But then look at Barrick and Newmont and all these other stocks— they’re lower than they were 10 years ago. Why? Because they got killed by rising costs. But Franco-Nevada didn’t have to deal with the costs. They just got the benefit of the rising price.” Listeners interested in the mining sector will especially enjoy this interview, so make sure to watch the entire program at VRIC Media. EMERGENCY FINANCIAL NEWS: Economist Warns The Collapse Has Already Begun – Will Be Worse Than The Great Depression

Why the sudden split, Melinda? Melinda Gates revealed on X that she is resigning as co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with her final day being June 7. “After careful thought and reflection, I have decided to resign from my role as co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.My last day of work at the foundation will be June 7th.” She plans to focus on her own philanthropic efforts, supported by a $12.5 billion grant. Gates said:Save 10% on ALL storable food and Alexapure Pro Water Filtration Systems! Secure your independence with our delicious kits TODAY to beat the coming demand! She continued: Gates explained more about her new chapter in life:  Let’s examine the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in depth. Here, data from the research firm Sayari shows its complexity.  Source: Sayari Back to Bill and Melinda, they divorced in 2021 after a 27-year marriage.  Melinda ends her goodbye letter by saying she’ll explain more about her new philanthropic efforts at a later date.  Why the sudden split, Melinda? 

Since Keith's death, his children have made appearances to accept multiple awards and honors. Continue reading…

If you want to watch every NFL game this season, it is going to cost you. Continue reading…