Charlie Hebdo, a Beheaded Teacher and the Abuse of Free Speech

Could we possibly imagine a serious ethical and moral framework that would justify the killing of a person who, under the guise of artistic creativity or political freedom of expression—despite being degrading to specific individuals or groups—expressed their convictions? Of course not. The brutal beheading of the teacher must be unequivocally condemned. There may be causal explanations for such an act, but there is no excuse for it.

However, the horrific act that led to the teacher's death should not obscure the fact that the teacher himself made a mistake. Rather than using the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad from Charlie Hebdo as an example of the abuse of free expression, he used them to justify and exemplify free speech. In doing so, he unintentionally triggered a misguided radical to commit a politically and religiously motivated murder.

The reactions to the French teacher's beheading by an Islamic extremist further reveal, with few exceptions, how inadequately educated many of the so-called "educated" people are and to what extent they lack the capacity for critical thinking.

It should be the task of every educator to convey that freedom of expression is not absolute and, therefore, not unlimited. Like all other areas of human activity, free speech must be limited by the responsibilities inherent in the exercise of human freedom. Elsewhere, I have discussed the connection between freedom and responsibility and made clear that they are two sides of the same coin. We cannot think of freedom without responsibility, and responsibility is void if one is not free to act. The liberty of human beings is, therefore, about responsible freedom. Irresponsible freedom—defined as the arbitrary exercise of will, manifesting itself in unchecked egoism—gives only the illusion of freedom. A person who is a prisoner of their impulses and self-centeredness is not free; rather, they are held hostage by their own morally deficient personality.

From my essay on the Crisis of Morality: "True human freedom is finite freedom, limited by the conditions of social coexistence and the legitimate aspirations of all other individuals. We must not mistake freedom for independence from everything; instead, it must be understood as a choice within the framework of something larger."

This quotation highlights that our responsibility as human beings extends to all other individuals and living organisms, in every social and political context, because they hold relevance in relation to our actions. The boundary between our freedom and the freedom of others, when expressed in a formal and universally applicable manner, is what we commonly refer to as justice.

Injustice, therefore, occurs when one's freedom extends beyond the boundaries of justice and infringes upon the freedom of another, thus preventing them from exercising their own choices. When we meet the demands of justice through our own actions, we practice ethical and moral righteousness. This principle also establishes the ongoing responsibility of the legislature to define, at any given time and place, the legitimate claims to freedom of all individuals in relevant contexts and to codify them into law. The application of justice is dynamic, as it must account for the evolution of human coexistence and its respective contexts, but the concept of justice remains timeless and unchanging. This truth explains why positive legislation that neglects this normative principle can embody wrong—something that has occurred throughout history.

As a result, it becomes clear how utterly irresponsible and morally unjustifiable any form of blasphemy is, as it violates the legitimate claim of religious practitioners to freedom, without justification for such interference. Even if a legal provision (whether immoral or ill-conceived) were to permit blasphemy, it would never be ethically justifiable to mock or ridicule another person's faith. Provoking Muslims by making fun of the Prophet Muhammad is just as inappropriate as provoking Christians by mocking Jesus Christ in satirical works or art. In Paris, Charlie Hebdo was misguided and irresponsible when it mocked Islam's religious figures in its satirical magazine, just as Pamela Geller’s cartoon contest "Draw Muhammad" in Garland, Texas was irresponsible. In both cases, the agitators hid behind misinterpretations of the principle of free expression—either a misguided understanding of the U.S. First Amendment or a neglect of the moral-philosophical ideal that dictates responsible action.

Truly free and responsible individuals have long understood that responsible behavior is never simply about complying with the law. They recognize that legal provisions primarily set the boundaries for what one cannot do to avoid harm, while moral responsibility dictates what we must do and how we should act.

 

 

A Nation Threatened by Ignorance

---

The Ancient Adage of Democracy’s Fragility

The ancient adage that democracy can easily degenerate into its evil opposite, an ochlocracy—a reign of the mob—materializes in the reality of our everyday lives.

What is unfolding before our eyes is something I once thought possible only as speculation, something that could exist merely as an ideal representation in political philosophy. Yet here it is. We are witnessing in real time what happens when a society loses touch with the essential social ingredients of democracy—human freedom and its complement, individual responsibility—and succumbs to a chaotic wave of lawlessness and disorder.

---

Mob Rule and the Plebeians of Our Time

The rise of mob rule has not occurred overnight, and if it ever ends, it will not vanish quickly. I first warned of the looming "mental dictatorship" and the ideological despotism of the leftist mob in my January 31, 2017 post, "The Tyranny of the Mob." Link

In that post, I addressed a phenomenon that has gained prominence today. The mob—the plebeians of our time—is no longer made up of illiterate citizens as in ancient times. Today, the unruly crowd consists of the poorly educated and morally confused individuals from all walks of life: workers, teachers, journalists, academics, scientists, and politicians. Among this group, I count many, if not most, Democrats in both the Senate and Congress, as well as neoconservatives among Republicans and the neoliberal elite in the State Department and other governmental bodies. This includes the vast majority of faculty in higher education.

However, never before has the harm caused by political illiteracy and moral confusion been so profound, pushing the country to the brink of destruction. Misconceptions about political and social coexistence have reached dangerous levels. In my November 2015 blog post, I explored the fallacies and educational delusions that have brought the U.S. and, to a lesser degree, Europe to this point of societal disintegration. Link

---

The Mob’s True Aim

I doubt I would find a single person among the recent protesters—whether peacefully demonstrating or participating in the looting and violence—whose awareness would include a sound political philosophy for human and social existence. It wouldn’t matter whether the individual came from a highly educated background (college graduates, mayors, senators, media figures) or from less educated participants.

They have all fallen victim to the imposition of a “Culture of Insanity,” which has suffocated the basic reason necessary for stable social coexistence. By pretending to protest against alleged systemic anti-Black racism in the police force following the tragic killing of a Black man by a white officer, protests and riots broke out across the country. In many cases, law enforcement, ordered to stand down by Democrat governors and mayors, could only watch as looting and violence unfolded.

It soon became clear that the mob, acting under the guise of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, was pursuing a different agenda. Their indifference toward Black-on-Black violence and the struggles of disadvantaged Blacks in society reveals that they are using the issue of systemic anti-Black racism as a smokescreen for their true objective.

---

The Radical Left’s True Purpose

Once calls to defund the police became widespread within leftist circles and the mob began establishing anarchistic “autonomous zones” and purging the nation’s history by destroying monuments, their true aim became clear: to disrupt national cohesion, overthrow the government, remove President Trump, transform the U.S. into a secularist Marxist-Socialist collective, devoid of its Christian social ethics, and ensure permanent Democrat control of the nation’s political institutions.

We are witnessing the collapse of a mighty nation, on the brink of civil war or disintegration—a fate that awaits any country that renounces law and order and surrenders its monopoly on power. Can this destruction be the goal of the broader leftist and progressive movements in the U.S.?

No longer can there be any doubt. The proponents of mob rule seem to believe that abolishing law enforcement and experimenting with new approaches to crime and disorder will lead to better, more humane governance. They believe that peaceful social coexistence and the political structures it requires can be subject to trial and error. They argue for “Reimagining Public Safety” as though eradicating law and order could lead to a more just society. But history has shown that dismantling the State’s monopoly on force inevitably leads to chaos, as evidenced by the failure of the CHAZ experiment in Seattle.

---

The Crisis of Moral and Political Understanding

A dreadful blend of ignorance and moral deficiency has taken hold of this country, the result of decades of indoctrination and an education system devoid of classical erudition. The disregard for the wisdom of the great traditions of classical liberal arts and the unbending desire to destroy monuments—attempting to erase history deemed objectionable from an ideological perspective—can only be explained by this education crisis.

What we are witnessing is the consequence of the collapse of foundational moral and civic values. The common denominator for what is right and wrong, lawful and unlawful, good and bad—the minimal agreement required for stable social coexistence—has been dismantled by this culture of ill-education and indoctrination. I addressed this phenomenon in my March 2015 post, "The Crisis of Morality," where I explained what happens when a society faces such a profound moral crisis. Link

---

The State of National Emergency and Constitutional Weakness

The mayhem of recent months has exposed a severe weakness in the U.S. Constitution that has yet to be publicly acknowledged. This weakness relates to the question of national leadership during times of distress. The rift between federal authorities (the President) and local and state authorities (governors and mayors) has demonstrated the lack of clear constitutional provisions for leadership in times of national crisis.

The chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent unrest following George Floyd’s death revealed the inefficiencies of the current leadership structure. Several left-wing governors and mayors acted against federal policy, turning their cities into war zones for political reasons. The President’s occasional mobilization of National Guard troops and the passing of executive orders to protect monuments may have prevented the worst, but the overall situation—where lawlessness dominates many cities—is unacceptable.

---

The Need for a Strong Executive in Times of Crisis

What we see unfolding in the U.S. makes clear the need to strengthen the President's executive powers in times of national crisis. While the Constitution grants the President special powers during emergencies, there is no clear preponderance for the Executive to act unilaterally, without legislative constraint. The President’s ability to protect the nation during crises must be paramount, and this requires revisiting the constitutional framework to allow for decisive action without undue interference from local and regional authorities.

This issue may be too important to ignore any longer. The survival of the nation depends on it.

---

A Path to National Salvation?

With the presidential election just months away, the nation finds itself at a crossroads. The chaos and unrest continue unabated. Radical leftists, and even some Republicans and Never-Trumpers, seem willing to support the rioters and lawbreakers, as they push to remove President Trump from office at all costs, even if it destroys the nation.

Restoring order may require extensive use of force—both law enforcement and military. In some areas, martial law or military rule may be necessary. Yet, ironically, it is often the media outlets that support the mob, such as CNN, who have called for martial law—projecting their own culpability onto the opposition.

The radical left and its enablers know the gravity of the situation. They will not relent unless the mob’s lawlessness ceases, either through exhaustion or by the force of an iron fist. The nation’s survival depends on decisive action, and it may fall to President Trump to lead the way.

---

Conclusion

The path ahead is grueling and costly. To restore order, we may have to return to a more traditional political order, rooted in our Christian heritage. Time will tell if it is too late to reverse course

A Brief Metaphysics of a Pandemic

---

Distress, panic, and outright hysteria offer profound insights into the human soul—revealing the essence of individual character as well as the psyche of entire cultures and civilizations. These situations expose moral and intellectual deficiencies and reflect the state of civic arrangements, political order, and constitutional designs.

It is a sobering spectacle to witness a hedonistic civilization, worn out and vain after decades of venerating money and material pleasures, confronted with a potentially deadly pandemic. In this moment, society becomes consumed with a trivial obsession with physical survival. Almost all politicians, medical experts, and advisors surrounding the U.S. President, as well as leaders in most European countries, focus exclusively on survival rates and the protection of lives at all costs. Nations like Sweden, which seem to maintain a more open societal approach, justify their actions by referencing liberal values and the right to self-determination. However, a deeper understanding of why the near-total shutdown of our societies—and the widespread submission to the virus—is problematic is, at best, lacking.

Interestingly, the much-maligned President Trump, while not articulating it philosophically, questions the very maxim that most are acting upon. While many are intent on saving lives and resisting any moves to reopen the country, Trump wisely points out that the cure must not be worse than the disease.

What sounds like a simple truism reveals profound philosophical wisdom: If any society elevates the value of physical survival to an absolute, they have declared moral bankruptcy and are on the path to ruin. Indeed, we must be willing to take risks and navigate the trade-off between physical survival and preserving our social and economic livelihoods. Trump, in this regard, grasps what many are unwilling to even consider.

Frank Dietrich, a philosopher at the University of Düsseldorf, captured it well (my translation): “If the crisis continues for an extended period and the economic turmoil reaches extreme levels, we must reconsider the primacy of saving lives.”

In other words, the young and healthy—those up to retirement age without serious medical conditions—must return to work and keep the nations functioning. While some may fall ill, and a few may even die, we cannot hide away until every trace of the virus has disappeared, a vaccine is found, and no one is at risk anymore.

Our societies must “man up” once again. We must remind ourselves of Plato’s concept of thymos—the spiritedness that lies within the human soul. Without this, neither individuals nor societies can survive in the long run. If we are no longer willing to risk our lives for each other, we are essentially enslaving ourselves. Looking back, we will feel ashamed of our cowardice.

It is crucial not to confuse or misinterpret this principle. Of course, all reasonable measures to preserve lives and protect people must be embraced. However, the preservation of life and physical survival should not become an absolute goal.

If nothing else, this crisis provides an opportunity to rediscover the dignity of human existence—reminding ourselves that life is about more than mere self-preservation or the fear of death. Ultimately, each of us—and, most importantly, our political leaders—will be judged based on this standard of self-respect and esteem.

It is time to emerge from our shelters and sanctuaries and face life once again.

COVID-19 Crisis Lays Bare Wicked Character of the Left

It is an adage of philosophical wisdom that crises and emergencies reveal both the worst and the best in humans. It brings out the finest in the good and the most awful in the bad.

Sadly, in times of a pandemic and a threat to all of humankind, the U.S.'s national political discourse proves this saying to be true. Those of us hoping that the COVID-19 crisis would unite us and help bridge the chasm of hate and destruction that has ever deepened in this country ever since Mr. Trump ran for office go through constant disappointment. The Democrats, the Fake News Media, throngs of prejudiced and mindless pundits, the majority of the ill-educated and deranged Hollywood celebrities (example par excellence Alec Baldwin) keep attacking and instrumentalizing the crisis for some gain in the November presidential elections. 

Disparaging and bringing down Trump is still the motto. Nothing has changed. As I have described it in previous blog entries, the destructiveness of the left, their intellectual and moral bankruptcy, even accelerates and reaches ever-increasing hysterical proportions. Yet, the left and their communication outlets don't care. They have already realized and count on it that a significant portion of the public has succumbed to the barrage of disinformation and distortion of recent years and abandoned their moral and rational judgment. Equally consumed by irreconcilable disdain for President Trump and his administration, they accept whatever nonsense Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer and their henchpeople at CNN, NBC, MSNBC, or the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Atlantic, to name a few, put forward.

Not to be misunderstood. It is legitimate in an open society to engage vigorously in the struggle for political power and to prevail in elections. But only within the boundaries of mutual recognition and a minimum degree of honesty and truthfulness. From the beginning, the Trump-hating liberal crowd did not heed these limits. Very much to the contrary, they used innuendo, distortion, and fabrication of facts, outright lies, and personal attacks to attain their goals. No signs whatsoever that the Democrats and most establishment media – while promoting their ideas – intend to engage in loyal opposition work. 

After the unsuccessful and dishonest, painfully stupid, and unlawful impeachment attempt (compare my previous blog https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2020/01/when-breakdown-of-rationality-becomes. html), the COVID crisis is now about to be abused for another illicit effort to bring down President Trump before he reaches the November Elections. In which – unless colossal voter fraud takes place – he will be victorious against the probably weakest candidate the Democrats have had in a long time. The probably most loathsome individual among the Democrats, the vile and mendacious Adam Schiff, who drove the impeachment charade against the President, has already announced via Twitter – supported by Nancy Pelosi on TV – to establish a nonpartisan commission to review the country's coronavirus response. The partisan dishonesty of this man and the bulk of his party is so blatant that such a proposal is positively laughable. Everybody with the smallest amount of fair-mindedness left knows that this pathetic attempt would be nothing but to lay whatever blame – speculative and unsubstantiated as it may be – at the President's doorstep. 

 

On occasion, fortunately, a glimmer of decency emerges. It gives hope when presidential candidate Joe Biden after he accused Mr. Trump of xenophobia and racism about his travel ban on China and Europe, reverses his verdict and now acknowledges that it was the right thing to do. But such cases of honesty are rare. Unfortunately, the distortion of facts (i.e., the timeline of President Trump's response to the pandemic), the emphasis on selective information disapproving of the President and his Coronavirus Task Force (i.e., the misrepresentation of Mr. Trump's support for the off-label use of the anti-malaria drug hydroxychlorochine), and the push to make the crisis to appear much worse than it, in reality, is, dominate the public dialogue. 

Aside from bashing the President, the liberal left hampers any steps to support businesses and workers financially, instead of attempting to put ideological, not corona-related pork in the relief bills to promote their socialist agenda. Since a swift return to regular operation and a speedy economic recovery would help Mr. Trump regain the main achievement of his presidency's first three years, the left is bent on not letting that happen. There is no doubt that a health crisis is exploited for political reasons, even at the substantial detriment to the entire nation. 

No matter how many infections and deaths, no matter how the crisis will play out, we are in to continue the campaign to take down President Trump. Despite the awfulness of the preceding years, the dumbest and most reprehensible social and political discourse is yet to come.

When the Breakdown of Rationality becomes a Habit

I have been commenting on the political spectacle unfolding in U.S. domestic politics ever since Donald Trump first ran for office. From the beginning, I argued that the undignified scale of it was truly mortifying.

Over the years, my analysis of this mortifying spectacle has proven accurate. However, I was wrong about one prediction: I expected that the irrational Trump-hatred would subside within a reasonable time frame, and that fairness would return to the mainstream media.

That prediction has certainly not come to pass. On the contrary, the madness has continued and even intensified. While sane minds might assume it couldn't get worse, it somehow does. For now, it has culminated in the utterly unreasonable impeachment spectacle in the House of Representatives. This farce represents the shameful continuation of the tragicomedy of U.S. domestic politics that I first outlined in my post on October 12, 2019 (link).

The impeachment investigation in the House committees was a futile waste of time. For the most part, partisan, one-sided witnesses and so-called constitutional experts simply parroted their preconceived ideas. As the process dragged on, it became clear that the Democrats' conduct was fueled by an intent to destroy rather than to seek common ground. It was clear they had no interest in ending this political charade.

Even more astonishing, the forces opposing impeachment—including the majority of Republicans and President Trump himself—allowed themselves to be tricked into debating a phony cause. They fell for a scam, a scheme devoid of substance and reality. It is inconceivable that those who opposed the impeachment would participate in the charade with such willing participation.

Instead of refusing to dignify the unreasonable show trial orchestrated by the Democrats in the House, Republicans and others played along as though there were any real substance to the impeachment claims. This only fueled the out-of-control Trump-haters, who, completely neglecting the basic principles of governance, continued and even exacerbated the already appalling situation.

It was absolute nonsense when Democrat Representative Adam Schiff—a cold-blooded ideologue, liar, and Trump-hater—initiated the impeachment proceedings by claiming to have found “incontrovertible evidence” that President Trump abused his power.

The truth, however, is quite different. Mr. Trump’s request for Ukraine to investigate was legitimate and in the interest of the United States. When Joe Biden was vice president, the Biden family's actions already appeared corrupt on the surface. Who would want a politician to rise to the highest office in the land when he had previously abused his power in the second-highest office? Why should a presidential candidate’s bid for nomination shield them from criminal investigation? Moreover, why would President Trump even consider Mr. Biden a serious rival more than a year before the next presidential election, especially when it was still highly uncertain whether “Sleepy Joe” would even be the Democratic nominee? Schiff’s claim that Trump sought to “defeat Mr. Biden in the 2020 presidential election and enhance his prospects for reelection” is utterly foolish and beside the point.

The mental disorder of the Democrats became even more evident when they argued, through their henchman Adam Schiff, that Trump was undermining “a nation at war with our adversary, Vladimir Putin’s Russia” by withholding $391 million in military aid.

As far as I know, neither Ukraine nor the U.S. is at war with Russia. Neither the Democrats' Russia-hatred nor the lies of Schiff can make it so. In fact, as I pointed out in my blog entries in 2015 (link) and 2014 (link), the U.S. and the EU instigated a coup in Ukraine, installing a Washington-friendly figure, Poroshenko. Then, under the pretense of Russian aggression, the U.S. deployed armored troops and anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and the Baltics. There has never been a legitimate security reason for the U.S. to station troops in Ukraine or provide massive military aid at the expense of American taxpayers.

The Cold War-minded, Russophobic factions in the U.S. State Department and the Deep State national security complex fabricated the idea of Russian aggression and war. They continued to deceive the American public, including during the impeachment trials.

As the primary actor in foreign affairs and national security, President Trump was fully entitled to withhold military aid to Ukraine while assessing corruption. He also had the authority to alter the failed foreign policy toward Ukraine, though that didn't happen. Nonetheless, the proceedings revealed how the left distorts facts, obstructs presidential power, and undermines constitutional principles.

The Democrats also disregarded the conclusions of special prosecutor Robert Mueller, who confirmed after two years of investigation that there was no collusion between Russia and Trump's 2016 campaign. Yet Schiff tried to link Trump’s alleged abuse of power regarding Ukraine to the disproven allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

No matter the facts, the Democrats have remained steadfast in their false beliefs. Trump Derangement Syndrome at its peak.

Now, the impeachment trial has moved to the Senate, where the Republican majority could easily dismiss this sham process. But instead, the Republican Party is allowing the ludicrous articles of impeachment concocted by the Democrats to go forward with a trial. This shows that ill-will and anti-Trumpism are not confined to the Democrats and the radical left; they have spread through the Republican Party as well.

Someone once said the U.S. has two political parties: one, the Democrats, is evil; the other, the Republicans, is foolish. I would add that the Republican Party is also utterly cowardly.

Syria - President Trump One-Ups Security Experts Again

To further elaborate on the previous post, I’d like to first present a truth before discussing Syria’s conflict. It seems that almost everything the Democrats, Never-Trumpers, Neoliberals, and Neocons claim is a reliable indicator of falsehood and nonsense. Thus, judging the situation has become relatively simple: One can often get closer to the truth by simply opposing what figures like Pelosi, Schiff, Sanders, Graham, Romney, Bolton, and the majority of mainstream pundits claim. The legitimacy of opposing viewpoints then becomes a matter of personal perspective and emphasis.

This logic is useful when analyzing the US withdrawal from northeastern Syria and the alleged abandonment of the Kurds. By considering the opposite of the artificial outrage from the political swamp inside and outside the Beltway, the reality becomes clearer.

The argument that the US has betrayed the Kurds, who fought alongside us to defeat ISIS, is absurd. With the ISIS caliphate eliminated, Turkey sought to establish a safe zone to counter Kurdish forces in Syria, which it views as an anti-Turkish terror group. US intelligence observed preparations for a Turkish operation over several weeks and concluded that Turkey had serious intentions, which even last-minute calls between Presidents Trump and Erdogan couldn’t prevent. Clearly, the US administration neither approved nor could deter Turkey’s actions. Even if US forces had been reinforced, the few dozen special forces in northeastern Syria could not have stopped or repelled a Turkish incursion.

Therefore, the decision to withdraw US troops was the right one. It avoided conflict between NATO allies and allowed the Kurds to turn to the Syrian Army for protection. The Syrian Army is now moving to the border, assuming control of the region and safeguarding the Kurdish population.

The military leadership and the armchair generals in Congress (led by warmonger Senator Lindsey Graham) who accuse the US of abandoning its Kurdish allies fail to recognize (and likely never will) that the Syrian crisis began with the misguided US regime-change operation against Assad nearly seven years ago.

In my May 10, 2013 blog post (https://www.edwinseditorial.blogspot.com.edwinseditorial.com/2013/05/disastrous-foreign-policy-failures.html), I criticized the disastrous decision to politically and militarily support radical insurgents in Syria. This followed similar mistakes in Egypt and Libya, which already yielded terrible outcomes.

Since then, the chaos caused by the US’s failed regime-change effort has become evident. The US worked alongside the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a group composed of Kurds and Sunni Arabs, and the Kurdish PYD, which is aligned with the PKK, a group Turkey considers a terrorist organization.

When Russia intervened in 2015 to prop up Assad and restore Syrian territorial integrity, it was clear that the US intervention – illegal under international law and ethically questionable – was doomed to fail. In its Russophobic, regime-change mindset, Washington rejected Russia’s offer to fight ISIS together and instead continued supporting Kurdish-dominated forces with money, weapons, air support, and special forces.

In my September 27, 2017 post (https://www.edwinseditorial.blogspot.com.edwinseditorial.com/2017/09/why-my-north-korea-resolve-could-have.html), I predicted the inevitable failure of US foreign policy in Syria and its resulting embarrassment.

President Trump's decision to avoid engaging in a war with Turkey prevented yet another costly intervention. This decision, heavily mediated by Russia, allowed the Kurds to finally turn to Damascus for protection. It seems that Syria is now taking advantage of the ceasefire negotiated by US envoys Pence and Pompeo to regain control of its territory. Once sovereignty is restored and national security is assured by Syria’s armed forces, there will be no justification for further Turkish incursions.

Let’s be clear: The US’s former “Kurdish allies” were essentially mercenaries, bought with vast amounts of money and weapons, carrying out the US’s bidding. Their commitment to fighting ISIS was likely more about carving out territory for themselves, potentially creating an autonomous region in Syria or even parts of Turkey.

The outcry from the left and neoconservatives in the US is not only unwarranted, but downright foolish. Notable exceptions, such as GOP Senator Rand Paul and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, criticized the interventionist policies and supported President Trump’s shift in foreign policy. Meanwhile, the discredited Hillary Clinton, who pushed disastrous policies under President Obama, derides Gabbard as a Russian agent for her stance.

What’s also disturbing is the lack of loyalty within the Republican Party, as 129 of its members signed on to a House vote condemning the President’s troop withdrawal. The military-industrial complex's hold on Washington, combined with the Trump Derangement Syndrome, seems to stifle any reasonable debate on war, even among conservatives.

The disregard for the President’s prerogative to set foreign policy and the viciousness with which the Washington establishment opposes any correction to failed policies over the last two decades is alarming. It reflects a deep corruption of minds and morals in the capital, along with a concerning lack of professionalism and understanding of civic and human affairs.

It’s clear: as far as its political culture is concerned, the Republic is in serious trouble.

---

 

An Earnest Facade of Lunacy: The Tragicomedy that is U.S. Domestic Politics

People who are interested in politics may not yet fully comprehend the magnitude of the undignified and mortifying political spectacle unfolding in this country.

There is no doubt that the U.S. is far too powerful to be destroyed from the outside. However, those outside powers with such intentions need not worry. There is plenty of evidence suggesting that this destruction is more likely to come from within, courtesy of the American people and their political representatives.

The lunacy of the situation is starkly visible in the field of more than 20 candidates initially running for the Democratic nomination to challenge President Trump in the 2020 election. Their stances on political issues are not just different; they are utterly unreasonable, if not downright insane and incompetent. Watching these candidates try to out-left and out-Trump each other in their bids to appear distinctive and exclusive makes it clear: they are unqualified for the office they seek.

Their ideas on issues like open borders, healthcare, voting rights for illegal immigrants, abolishing ICE, Medicare for All, Green New Deals to fight climate change, and a wealth tax—just to name a few—are completely out of touch with the needs of a functioning and orderly society. Even more astounding is the seriousness with which media outlets cover the absurdity and futility of this contest. One can only wonder at the time and effort being wasted.

The overall lawlessness and foolishness of the Democratic Party only serve to reinforce the ridiculous picture painted by these candidates. Need examples?

• Watch Democrat Jerry Nadler abuse his role as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to stoke partisan divisions and perpetuate the baseless effort to impeach the sitting President.

• Watch Democratic Party leaders and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam "Pencil Neck" Schiff, supported by elements of the Deep State, continue to push the Russia collusion narrative despite the conclusions of the Mueller Report, after two years of investigation, which disproved it.

• Watch Democrats and Never-Trumpers in the State Department, along with foreign relations pundits on nearly all news stations, interpret President Trump's legitimate foreign policy efforts to improve relations with Russia as treasonous—some even insinuating that Trump is a Russian agent.

• Watch neoconservative and neoliberal figures push for war with Iran under the pretense of the recent attack on Saudi oilfields, despite the Yemeni Houthi rebels claiming responsibility and the U.S. insistence on solely blaming Iran.

As I write these lines, a new opportunity for the Democrats to impeach Trump has presented itself. A whistleblower claims that Trump acted inappropriately during a telephone call with the newly elected President of Ukraine. While Trump sees this as just another witch hunt aimed at taking him down, impeachment proceedings are set to begin, further damaging the Democratic Party. In the end, it will likely lead to nothing. Three years of irrational Trump-hatred have clearly drained the radical left of reason and common sense. They seem impervious to more conciliatory approaches in domestic political relations.

Ultimately, if the anti-Trump forces are unable to remove him from office before the 2020 election, their final recourse to regain the White House will likely be a massive, all-out effort to commit voter fraud. This will be the subject of one of my next blog post.