Communism economics War on the Right


Today is finally the day that most American landlords can begin getting rid of the people who have been stealing their property. That’s right, the eviction moratorium is finally going to be allowed to expire. The Biden administration refused to extend it and even the Communist wing of the Democrat party couldn’t muster the votes in Congress to make it a law.

For some landlords, it has been YEARS since they were paid a cent in compensation for the use of the property that they purchased and were still required to maintain, insure, and pay taxes on, while the government refused to intervene as people were living there for free, even while destroying the place.

In the beginning, it was the government who created the problem- they forced everyone to stay home, which caused businesses to shut down, some permanently. What began as “two weeks to flatten the curve” became “until there is a vaccine.” Then the government mailed out billions in free money, paid billions more in enhanced unemployment benefits, all the while telling people that they didn’t have to pay rent because evictions were prohibited.

Instead of paying their bills, many Americans went on a shopping spree. Amazon, Netflix, and other companies saw record profits. Many businesses, including landlords, were bearing the costs of this orgy of spending. A year and a half later, and people are now upset that the evictions are coming, as if landlords are the villains.

Yes, landlords are being made into the villain here. Read this piece from Politico. They claim that 12 million people are behind on rent, including 50 percent of all black families. The article blames landlords for that, pointing out that  Forty-eight percent of voucher holders are Black and 18 percent are Hispanic, so the refusal to accept vouchers is a coded form of racial discrimination, in other words, calling landlords racist. Why?

The reasons that many landlords, myself included, don’t accept government Section 8 vouchers is purely financial.

  • People who are poor have poor rental payment histories and are likely to default
  • People who are paying for things with someone else’s money don’t value the things that the money bought, because they didn’t have to work for it
  • the government puts too many restrictions on the landlord, including more paperwork, more bureaucratic administrative burden, and more headaches. All in exchange for taking less money

All of the above increases my financial risk, my workload, and decreases my income. The only way to make money with Section 8 is to buy cheap, shitty, substandard housing. In other words, be a slum lord. I don’t want to do that, so I avoid Section 8.

The fact that most people who are receiving Section 8 housing vouchers are black has nothing to do with it. I am not in business to do people favors, I am in business to make the most money that I can by doing the least amount of work and taking the smallest risk that I possibly can. If I could make money selling goods to black people by taking little risk and expending minimum effort, I would do so. The money just isn’t there.

That isn’t enough. Some governments have made it illegal to discriminate against those who are receiving Section 8 vouchers. The latest effort is a push to get banks behind an effort to refuse loans to landlords unless they agree to rent to low income, Section 8 recipients. This will drive more landlords out of the market, especially smaller ones, leaving nothing but larger, self funded landlords in the market.

This is a push for the removal of the entrepreneur from the American experience.

Cancel Culture

Cancel culture

A guy in Sweden was getting a BJ from his girlfriend. They were both underage. He took a picture of her blowing him, albeit without her knowledge. He then showed it to his teammates. She eventually found out and called the cops. He was arrested and had to pay a fine.

Now I am not sure what exactly was in the photo because the cops sealed the record, as both of the people involved were minors. It couldn’t have been all that bad though, because the only penalty was a fine. The charges were “Kränkande fotografering” (offensive photography constituting an invasion of privacy) and “Förtal” (defamation).

Flash forward a year, and the young man, now 18, is about to enter the NHL draft. The story of what happened hits the news, and thanks to cancel culture, he was forced to withdraw his name from the draft.

Since the records were sealed, how did this hit the news? The woman scorned decided to give an interview to the media because the young man didn’t apologize to her. So, for the crime of not being sufficiently contrite, she decides to activate her victim status and ruin his life. Note: when the young man told his friends what he did, the round heeled woman had her reputation irreparably damaged, but when SHE did it, well that makes her an innocent victim.

Who is the real victim here? The woman endured a short period of embarrassment for being a tramp. Now he must endure the destruction of his entire life’s goal of being an NHL player, even though he already paid the penalty for his crime.

Well, the Montreal Canadiens drafted him anyway. The left has gone apoplectic. The press is hammering them for daring to give this canceled pariah a job. Good for the Canadiens, and that little whore needs to just get over herself.

Anti American left Police State

Felony photography

Disney claims that it is a felony to take photos of their behind the scenes areas from your car, if you are driving on roads owned by Disney. Many of the roads near the Orlando theme park are actually private property. When you arrive at the gate to the Magic Kingdom parking lot, you have been on Disney property for 7 miles or so.

Any lawyer types here care to specify what specific felony is being committed by taking pictures?

Anti American left

Their tactics are fun

For years, decades even, those on the left have been throwing useless little sayings at gun owners that are annoying because they are overly simplistic. You spend hours refuting them, then they come back with a pat little phrase that they think is humorous while displaying their own ignorance:

  • You can convert a semi auto to a machine gun by changing a spring
  • Guns are simply a substitute penis
  • You own guns because you want to kill people
  • Second Amendment is a collective right
  • and more

So I have begun doing the same thing. It really pisses them off. Take a look at this article. I posted (it’s been ‘deactivated’ for violating community guidelines) a comment reading: “If the vaccine works, then why do the vaccinated need to wear masks?” Read the hilarity that results.

Anti American left


New Mexico and Tennessee have something in common. New Mexico’s Supreme Court decided to hold gas stations accountable for the acts of drunk drivers. The theory is that a drunk driver couldn’t get in an accident if he didn’t have the gas to drive around. This is the same theory that lies at the heart of suing gun manufacturers for the acts of a mass shooter: companies are now responsible for the criminal misuse of their products, bars for serving people who get drunk and then get in an accident on the way home.

This policy deflects responsibility from the person who committed the act onto a third party who had little to nothing to do with what happened. This is something that “no recovery/no fee” ambulance chasing trial lawyers LOVE. Drunk drivers generally don’t have deep pockets. Gas stations, bars, and their insurance companies do.

It flips liability on its head, in that companies engaged in legal commerce are now charged with law enforcement. This is a path to tyranny, and appears to be the perfect end run around the restrictions placed upon our government by the Constitution. Want to enforce an unconstitutional edict? Use the courts to create a liability upon companies. Their corporate policies will make a defacto law.

We saw that happen in the 1980s. For those of you old enough to remember, every newspaper in America used to have a firearms section of the classifieds. People could run an ad in the paper, advertising their personally owned firearm for sale, and sell it there. It was kind of like Gunbroker, but every newspaper in the country used to participate. I bought my very first handgun that way, a Smith and Wesson Model 59.

So what happened? Newspapers decided that they would no longer allow ads for firearms.

This policy will have far reaching consequences, and it will allow the courts to shape our nation in multiple ways. Now any liberal judge will be able to apply this doctrine to any business or industry that they wish to see destroyed.

Business and government, working together for tyranny. That is the very definition of Mussolini Fascism, the granting of powers to business.

Communism The Collapse

Communism in disguise

I want you to look at this cartoon from a California school system.

One thing that is completely ignored by this cartoon is that the three people peering over the fence are watching the game without having paid for admission. In other words, the three in the picture are stealing the labor of the baseball players, in that they are receiving their labor without having paid for it.

Even ignoring that, this is a poor example. In economics, there are no boxes that people can stand on. The additional height that is provided by the box must come from somewhere. A more accurate creation of the differences would be to dig a hole under the tall person’s feet, and use the fill dirt to create a mound upon which the others would then stand.

With all of that, this ‘equity’ movement is being taught to our children. It is being forced upon us through corporate culture. Overly simplified, it ignores reality in favor of a pipe dream where everyone gets to watch free baseball. In other words, our schools are teaching communism. Sure, they will deny it, but that is the essence of communism.

They begin with a premise: that some group or another is the recipient of an unfair advantage. Let’s call that group the bourgeoisie. They have an unfair advantage in that they own the means of producing and creating wealth and are concerned with the value of their property and the preservation of capital to ensure the perpetuation of their economic supremacy. In other words, they have made it and are now using the laws of society to keep everyone else from making it. They have gotten rich and are staying rich by ensuring that poor people stay poor.

They do this through two means:

  • One group of the bourgeoisie steals wealth by forcing the workers to build things for low wages (employers).
  • The second group of the bourgeoisie steals wealth by charging the workers rent for either property (landlords) or money (bankers).

Let’s contrast them with the second group: Let’s call them the proletariats. The proletariat are forced to accept low wages in return for operating the means of production, which belong to business owners, the bourgeoisie. In this way, the bourgeoisie steal the property of the proletariat by forcing them to work for low wages, then taking those wages away by charging interest and rent for property that they own.

Now let’s mix in a racial component to make the picture complete. The white man is the source of all of the troubles of POC. You see, whites stole this land from the peace loving POC, then through the use of slavery, built the entire nation. Now that they are all bourgeoisie, the whites have set up this system to keep themselves rich, and the proletariat poor.

The only way to fix this, is to place whites at a disadvantage to the point where we all can watch the baseball game together. Does this sound familiar? It sounds remarkably like the speeches of Adolf Hitler, who blamed the Jews for all of the problems of the Aryan Nation.

I have seen this movie before. It always ends with box cars and systemic extermination of the bourgeoisie. Make no mistake, the war has begun. Whether you want it or not, it’s here.

As for me, I won’t be loaded into a box car, nor will my wife.

I leave you with the words of the rock band Rush:

The end was begun, it would hit everyone
When the chain reaction was done
The big shots try to hold it back
Fools try to wish it away
The hopeful depend on a world without end
Whatever the hopeless may say



Leftists desperately need to disarm American citizens. One way to so that is to bankrupt American gun manufacturers. So they claim that guns are being deliberately marketed to mass murderers. A judge in California has agreed.

Race baiting

Racism lawsuit

A family is suing Universal Studios because their half black daughter allegedly had a “white power” symbol placed upon her shoulder by a costumed character while visiting the Orlando theme park in 2019.

(the news channel blurred out the gesture, not me)

The man in the costume was fired, and now the family is seeking $30,000 in actual damages, plus whatever other bonus money the jury sees fit to give them as winners of the ghetto lottery.

Let’s see who else we can sue. William Shatner, who was a part of the first interracial kiss to appear on American television. Racist.

Usain Bolt. I had no idea he was a closet racist.

Eddie Murphy. Of course he is a racist. He was also a huge homophobe, so why not a secret racist?

Oh shit, not you too, Oprah.

The first black president.

No, not THAT one, this one:

Race baiting

Shut up, white boy

Shannon Lee, the daughter of Bruce Lee, says that she is tired of white men telling her father’s story. Why does she think that they are incapable of telling it?

“I’m tired of hearing from white men in Hollywood that he was arrogant and an asshole when they have no idea and cannot fathom what it might have taken to get work in 1960s and ’70s Hollywood as a Chinese man with (God forbid) an accent, or to try to express an opinion on a set as a perceived foreigner and person of color.”

Note that she doesn’t deny that he was an arrogant asshole, but instead excuses it because racism, or something. I would point out that Ms. Lee, who was born in 1969, wouldn’t have any idea about what it was like to get work in 1960s and ’70s Hollywood, either. So maybe she should shut the fuck up. But that isn’t what she is saying. What she is saying is that Whites need not have an opinion about anything because we can’t know what its like to ever be discriminated against because of the color of our skin. The irony completely escapes her.

Anti American left Purge of history

Not a Fig Leaf

According to the New York Times, the American Revolution was “less as a glorious liberty struggle than as a hyper-violent civil war that divided virtually every segment of colonial society against itself, and left many African Americans and Native Americans worse off, and less free.”

Of course it was a violent civil war. Most wars ARE violent. The British Empire was the most powerful military in the world. England had acquired territory all over the world through conquest and they weren’t nice about it. As ugly as you think American history was, British history was even worse.

The indigenous people in the areas colonized by the British were treated little better than cattle. The modus operandi was to capture some of the natives, give them some military training, then place them under the command of British officers and use them to control the remainder of the local population.

The wars that resulted were horrific. The American Revolution was no different. The homes of tax collectors were burned to the ground. Politicians were tarred and feathered. There was much cruelty and a lot of killing on both sides.

The concept that had existed for hundreds of years was that royalty owned the land, along with everything and everyone who lived upon it. Then along came Thomas Paine. Now Paine was not as popular at the time as he should have been, but he made a great impression on the Founding Fathers with his treatise Common Sense, published on February 4, 1776. (pdf warning)

In Common Sense, he declared and proposed that “in America the
law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in
free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no
other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the crown at
the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered
among the people whose right it is.”

Paine himself was greatly influenced by John Locke, who himself rejected the divine right of kings to rule. He believed that all humans when born live in their natural state- free to do as they please. In this “state of nature,” humans are entirely free. But this freedom is not a state of complete license, because it is set within the bounds of the law of nature. It is a state of equality, which is itself a central element of Locke’s account. According to this philosphy, there is no natural hierarchy among humans. Each person is naturally free and equal under the law of nature, subject only to the will of their creator.

Each person, moreover, is required to enforce as well as to obey this law. It is this duty that gives to humans the right to punish offenders. But in such a state of nature, it is obvious that placing the right to punish in each person’s hands may lead to injustice and violence. This can be remedied if humans enter into a contract with each other to recognize by common consent a civil government with the power to enforce the law of nature among the citizens of that state. Although any contract is legitimate as long as it does not infringe upon the law of nature, it often happens that a contract can be enforced only if there is some higher human authority to require compliance with it. It is a primary function of society to set up the framework in which legitimate contracts, freely entered into, may be enforced, a state of affairs much more difficult to guarantee in the state of nature and outside civil society.

As you can see, this idea is the central core that the Declaration of Independence was based upon:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Locke also thought that property was important to the natural state. Each person, according to Locke, has property in his own person—that is, each person literally owns his own body. Other people may not use a person’s body for any purpose without his permission. But one can acquire property beyond one’s own body through labor. By mixing one’s labor with objects in the world, one acquires a right to the fruits of that work. If one’s labor turns a barren field into crops or a pile of wood into a house, then the valuable product of that labor, the crops or the house, becomes one’s property.

For this reason, the communists HATE Locke with a burning passion. Communism says that each person’s labor belongs to everyone. This means that people have no rights to their own body, their labor, and therefore no right to the fruits of that labor. Instead, you and everything you produce are community property. So they are trying to rewrite history to discredit him. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

So you can see that the authors of our founding documents were not in favor of slavery. However, since slavery had been a part of the British past for several hundred years, they also knew that a new nation would never receive support from those whose livelihoods depended on slavery. The new nation would be dead before it even began. Even Foote realized this when he said:

a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial
appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in
defence of custom. But tumult soon subsides. Time makes more
converts than reason.

As a compromise, slavery would have to remain for the time being.

The fact that the US didn’t have a ideologically pure beginning doesn’t invalidate any of the ideas that it was based upon, nor does it mean that the entire nation should be dismantled, nor is the declaration “a philosophical fig leaf hung over a grubby battle to defend white liberty grounded in slavery and Native dispossession” as the New York Times asserts that it is. (They even warped the quote “a Republic, if you can keep it” quote.

So as we enter the early stages of the collapse and latest version of American civil war, remember the foundations of the First American Civil war and hope that whatever the results, at least one nation that values the natural rights of man survives.