Citizens Liberty Party News Network

In addition to the 1619 White supremacy hoax, the Russia hoax, the climate change hoax, the January 6, 2021 insurrection hoax etc., we argue that the Democrat Marxists are perpetuating a gigantic economic hoax about the purported moral goodness of the Marxist economic system. The entire Democrat Marxist justification for getting rid of the capitalist system lies in the false argument that communism would be a more fair and inclusive economic system than capitalism. The main tenet of the Marxist hoax is to replace the current American corporate crony capitalist system with the state communist crony corporatism of China, which would, supposedly, end the White supremacist reign of terror. Text version available at clpnewsnetwork.com

We begin our argument against Trump in 2024 with a citation to Sebastian Gorka's recent article that Trump would do things differently, after Trump wins the 2024 election. Gorka's unstated premise is that Trump has learned valuable lessons about American politics that would cause him to modify his policies to correct the mistakes he made in his first term. The flaw in Gorka's unstated premise is that the American political reality has changed, permanently, and the characteristics of Trump's leadership style have not changed to fit the emergence of the changed reality of Marxist Democrats. The MAGA policies that worked in 2017 are not relevant for confronting the evils of the Marxist tyranny. Marxism is an evil, coherent, dangerous ideology that requires something more than ephemeral MAGA policies to vanquish. MAGA is a set of superficial, temporary policy options. Trump is a pragmatist. His 2017 MAGA policies were aimed at fixing the American economy and limiting illegal immigration. His ephemeral policy victories were undone in the first 10 days of Biden's illegitimate regime. continue reading at www.clpnewsnetwork.com  

We wrote this document to provide natural rights conservatives with a first draft of our thoughts about the new government. We consider our contribution as a first step in developing an ideology of individual liberty that vanquishes the ideology of Marxist collectivism.   Our ideology of natural rights is based upon the philosophical lineage of Locke-Jefferson-Lincoln, which we are fighting to conserve. We begin with a confession. We believe that the Former United States of America (FUSA) ended early on the morning of November 4, 2020, when the vote counting stopped, to allow truck loads of fraudulent ballots to be counted. We believe that the Former United States of America was overthrown by a Democrat Marxist coup that installed an unelected, illegitimate tyrant as a fake President. We believe that every act this illegitimate tyrant takes to impose Marxism on citizens is an illegal and criminal act. Democrat Party Marxism is a permanent feature of the American political system, and nothing of institutional or cultural value will be left to restore, even if election integrity is restored.

Our podcast is titled The Gigantic BLM White Supremacist Hoax: How the Black Marxists Exploit the White Race to Extract Surplus Labor Value. We explain how the entire repertoire of Black Marxist hoaxes about racism and white supremacy in the American founding fits into the Marxist paradigm of the Black Marxist exploitation of White people’s surplus labor value. In other words, we apply Marxist theory to explain the strategy of Marxist Democrats to extract unearned income and wealth from White American citizens. We provide an economic/political model of how the hoax of white supremacy works, when it is successful, in extracting surplus labor value from the White race. This podcast is the introduction to a much longer article, available for free, for one week, at clpnewsnetwork.com The entire archive of all CLP articles is available for an annual subscription of $30. A copy of this single episode is available at Books2Read for $5.50

Note to viewers. Entire written article available at clpnewsnetwork.com Episode 72 April 13, 2021. The Precarious Natural Right of Liberty in the Failed Nation State of America: Applying the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms. Introduction. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network, for April 13, 2021. Our podcast is titled, The Precarious Natural Right of Liberty in the Failed Nation State of America: Applying the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms. We begin our argument that the failed American nation state cannot be rehabilitated, which leaves the natural right of liberty in a precarious, unprotected, condition. We begin our argument by first reviewing the Patriot’s logic, in 1775, about why war with England was inevitable, because the natural rights of the Patriots were being destroyed by the King. On July 6, 1775, the Continental Congress  approved  the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms. The Patriot’s logic and circumstances of tyranny, then, are the same as the Trump voters, today, who are called domestic terrorists by the Marxist tyrants. Back then, the King said that all the Patriots,           “All of them, either by name or description, are rebels and traitors.”

We use the recent series of articles by Patrick Byrne, on Deep Capture, (How DJT Lost the White House), as a way of describing a fake Republican Party narrative, called restoring “election integrity,” to make our argument that fixing the voting system of the Former United States of America, (FUSA) is an absurd idea for Trump voters. (RNC Chair McDaniel announces group's new Election Integrity committee, Just The News, https://bit.ly/3qvj6Pr).

Episode 69.  February8, 2021. Reclaiming The Spirit of 1776: Jettisoning Madison’s Constitution in Order to Connect the Declaration to a Nation of Independent Producers in an Entrepreneurial Capitalist Economy. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. www.clpnewsnetwork.com. We begin our advocacy of creating a new constitution with a criticism of the sloppy intellectual offering of The President's Advisory 1776 Commission, which co-joins and conflates the principles of liberty in the Declaration, with Madison’s class-based, flawed Constitution of 1787. The writers of the President's Advisory 1776 Commission continue the historical charade that the two documents are linked. As an example of a professional historian making this charade, in Property and the Pursuit of Happiness, Edward J. Erler uses the vague phrase “the founders” to refer to both the patriots of 1775, and to the 38 elites who signed Madison’s constitution, in 1787. This podcast is the audio introduction to a much longer written article, available for free, at www.clpnewsnetwork.com The sections of the longer article are: Section 1. Originalism and Original Intent of Madison’s Class-Based Constitution. Section 2. Contemporary Intent: The 1619 Ideology of Marxism. Section 3. Linking Jefferson’s Declaration to the Democratic Republic of America. The End of the Global Kleptocracy. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the  CLP News Network. www.clpnewsnetwork.com.

Our podcast today is titled, Politics Beyond Trump: Conservative Politics After Biden’s Illegitimate Transition of Power. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network for January 26, 2021. We begin our podcast about conservative politics, after Biden’s illegitimate transfer of power, with a review of Ann Coulter’s recent article about Trump, in order to make our argument that a new type of conservative politics is required that focuses on promoting liberty. Our intent in using Coulter as the starting point is to make our argument that Trump voters must move beyond Trump in order to deal with the arrival of a Marxist totalitarian regime. The new politics is not about electing Republicans. The new politics is about conservatives adopting the tactics of the Marxists in order to take back the legitimate power that was stolen from them, and to vanquish the Marxists with their own petard. Ordinary, normal, two-party politics ended November 3, 2020, and that part of American history is over. A new type of more aggressive, confrontational, and ideological class war politics is required to engage the Marxists on the field of battle.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network. We begin our advocacy of a new democratic republic by extending the question asked by C. Bradley Thompson “What type of person is attracted to Marxism?” In his article, Why Marxism—Evil Laid Bare, Thompson writes, “The better question here is: What kind of person is attracted to Marxism? The best scholarship now tells us that between 1917 and 1989 approximately 100 million people were murdered by various Marxist regimes, and millions more were tortured, starved, exiled, enslaved, and sent to concentration camps. Collectivization, one-party rule, man-made famine, secret police, arrests, propaganda, censorship, ethnic cleansing, purges, show trials, reeducation camps, gulags, firing squads, and killing fields—all these defined life under communism. Nothing in the long span of human history comes close to the tyranny, terror, and mass genocide caused by Marxism in power—nothing.” Some conservative proponents of secession have questioned whether American Democrat Marxists would be willing to use violence and repression against their enemies. For example, Michael Anton, in his new book, The Stakes: America at the Point of No Return, suggests that American Marxists may not have the right stuff to inflict violence against their enemies. His phrase for the issue is whether American Marxists have the right “grit.” Anton writes,           “The destruction of enemies has never failed to whet the insatiable           appetite [of Marxists] for more. At this point, policing their own           would require our rulers to be copies of Stalin. They don’t have the           grit for that.” We disagree with Anton’s assessment that American Marxists do not have the right grit to inflict police state violence against their enemies. Our disagreement is based upon our understanding of the type of logic and reason used by Marxists to impose socialism on conservatives.

Our podcast today is titled Confronting Evil: The Trump Voter’s Moral Duty to Defend Liberty. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network, for December 16, 2020. Our intent of this article is to persuade Trump voters that they have a personal, moral duty, to restore American liberty. We begin by noting the odd circumstance of being both in agreement with Victor Davis Hanson’s analysis of the chronology of the Democrat’s deep state “slow-moving coup,” and in disagreement with his interpretation of the implications of the coup for the future of liberty. We define a coup d'etat as an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power, conducted by an enemy of the existing government. The initial planning to unleash the American coup began on November 14, 2016, just two weeks after the election. According to Joe Schoffstall, writing in the Washington Free Beacon, Soros gathered with top Democrats in D.C to plot the coup. Schoffstall writes,   “Liberal billionaire George Soros is meeting behind closed doors with top         Democrats to plot a resistance strategy against President-elect Donald Trump and         Republicans. The three-day conference began Sunday at the Mandarin Oriental   hotel in Washington, D.C., and is sponsored by deep-pocketed liberal members        of the dark money Democracy Alliance donor network. The group will seek to       pick up the pieces from the 2016 election, plot its strategy for upcoming      elections, and map out a game plan to battle Trump during his first 100 days in     office.” Obama implemented the elements of the Soros plan, in Obama’s office, with Joe Biden, on January 5, 2017. In contrast to Hanson’s term of a “slow-moving coup,” our term for the Soros Democrat coup is sedition. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, Obama's Deployment of the FBI As A Political Weapon, https://bit.ly/37YXC5u, December 14, 2017). We link the Democrat election fraud of 2020 as a part of the on-going Soros coup of 2016. Unlike Hanson’s interpretation of the coup, we argue that the consequence of the election fraud is the end of Madison’s representative republic, with the installation of an illegitimate leader, also known as an unelected dictator. Like Maduro in Venezuela, Biden has seized power without the consent of the governed. His seizure of illegitimate authority is more than just the end of the Republic, it is the end of the American principle of individual liberty. Like Maduro, Biden seeks to impose socialism against the will of the majority of citizens. Biden fulfills one of Madison’s fears that the framework of government could end with a dominant faction over ruling a defenseless faction. In Biden’s case, it is not Madison’s fear that the majority of common citizens would dominate the minority natural aristocracy. Rather, Biden seeks to impose a minority ideology of Marxist slavery on the majority of middle and working class citizens. We allege that the coup’s last act of election fraud, in 2020, constitutes a premeditated evil act to deprive Trump voters of their God-given natural rights of liberty and self-government. We claim that the Democrat’s destruction of natural rights obligates Trump voters to confront the evil in order to restore their natural rights. The moral duty of Trump voters is obedience to Locke’s definition of the natural law. In other words, the Trump voter’s duty to confront Democrat evil is obedience to God’s natural law because it restores God-given natural rights. Hanson was one of the first national observers to label the Democrat’s activity as a coup. Beginning with his first column, in February 2017, Hanson has written a compelling series of articles describing how the coup was conducted. Hanson wrote his first article about the coup one week after Rush Limbaugh first wrote about the coup (The Barack Obama Shadow Government Coup Against Trump, February 15, 2017).       Limbaugh had written,           “The deep state, the embedded bureaucracy where the Obama shadow           government is doing everything it can to overthrow the Trump presidency... our    country today is not functioning as a representative republic.” In his February 21, 2017 article, titled, Seven Days in February, Hanson expanded on Limbaugh’s analysis that the nation was not functioning as a representative republic. Hanson wrote,   “Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the Ukraine whistleblower, boasted in two         recently discovered tweets of ongoing efforts to stage a coup to remove Trump…           the political and media opponents of Donald Trump are seeking to subvert his       presidency in a manner unprecedented in the recent history of American   politics…The question, then, arises: Why were former Obama-administration          appointees or careerist officials tapping the phone calls of an incoming Trump        designate (and Trump himself?) and then leaking the tapes to their pets in the        press? For what purpose?.. ending Trump one way or another is apparently the   tortured pathway his critics are taking to exit their self-created labyrinth of    irrelevance.” In his October 31, 2017, article, The Advantages of Liberal Insurance, Hanson suggests that the ruling class would suffer the humiliation of being exposed as illiberal, if the intent of their coup was uncovered. Hanson writes,           “The more fervently progressives seek to redistribute income, or use diversity quotas      to ensure proportional representation in hiring and           admissions, or suspend    constitutional free speech and due process to suppress individualism, the more likely         that socialist elites will risk being exposed or convicted as illiberal.” In his July 31, 2018, National Review article, The Origins of Our Second Civil War, Hanson shifts the consequences for the elites, from being exposed as illiberal and irrelevant, to precipitating a civil war. Hanson cites two major causes underlying the cause of the second civil war. He writes,           “How, when, and why has the United States now arrived at the brink of a veritable       civil war?           Globalization          Globalization had an unfortunate effect of undermining national unity. It created                   new iconic billionaires in high tech and finance, and their subsidiaries of coastal      elites, while hollowing out the muscular jobs largely in the American interior.           Illegal Immigration          Immigration was recalibrated hand-in-glove by progressives who wanted a new           demographic to vote for leftist politicians and by Chamber of Commerce   conservatives who wished an unlimited pool of cheap unskilled labor. The result was        waves of illegal, non-diverse immigrants who arrived at precisely the moment when    the old melting pot was under cultural assault.”   Several months later, Hanson sounded the “all clear” that the coup, and threat of civil war, was over. He wrote, with a sigh of relief, (February 17, 2019), in Autopsy of a Dead Coup, that the ruling class elites had been soundly driven back from the brink of civil war.           “The illegal effort to destroy the 2016 Trump campaign by Hillary Clinton         campaign’s use of funds to create, and disseminate among court media, and then salt         among high Obama administration officials, a fabricated, opposition smear dossier    has failed. So has the second special prosecutor phase of the coup to abort the Trump     presidency failed.” We disagree with Hanson that the coup had failed in 2018, because we assert that the coup of January 5, 2017, did not end in 2018. The coup ended in victory for the Democrats on November 3, 2020. We disagree with Hanson that the coup was the pre-cursor of a civil war. A civil war ends with one side subjugating the losing side to the winner’s ideology, and continuing as one nation. The Obama-Soros coup is a pre-cursor to the second American revolution, where Trump voters seek an absolute civil dissolution of the existing nation, and start over with a democratic republic. We agree with Hanson’s assessment that the coup established a political precedent in American politics that is permanent. Our argument is that the precedent of the coup means that Madison’s constitution is irreparably damaged, and cannot be rehabilitated. Hanson wrote on November 12, 2019,   “10) Precedent. The indiscriminate efforts to remove Trump over the       past three years, when coupled with the latest impeachment gambit, have now set a precedent in which the out party can use impeachment as a tool to embarrass, threaten or seek to remove a sitting president and reverse an election.” And, while Hanson’s careful 4-year analysis of the chronology of the coup is correct, he reaches the wrong conclusion about the significance and consequence of the election fraud in November of 2020. Like so many other skeptics of the evidence of the Democrat’s election fraud, Hanson continues to cling to the false belief that there is something of credibility and value in rehabilitating Madison’s flawed document. As long as Trump voters continue to be swayed by Hanson’s logic, those voters will also cling to the false belief that their liberties were not stolen, along with Trump’s victory, and that the United States can return to normal. In his National Review article, Trump Faces a Critical Choice About His Political Future, (November 26, 2020),  Hanson writes,   “But so far none of these advocates (of voter fraud) have produced the       requisite whistleblowers, computer data, or forensic evidence to prove         their astounding charges. If they do not produce evidence in a few days, then the   pilloried Republicans may well lose the Senate races in Georgia… What       matters now are the interests of the country first and Trump’s constituents   second.” We disagree. What matters now is restoring the liberties of Trump voters, because the United States constitutional government ceased to exist, after the election of 2020. We argue that Hanson has his priorities reversed. Without citizen liberty, there is no American nation, because liberty is the foundation of voluntary obedience to the rule of law. In other words, without liberty, the voluntary obedience to the rule of law is replaced by the socialist police state enforcement of the rule of law. We agree with the conclusion of Angelo Codevilla, that America, as you knew it, prior to November 3, 2020, is over. Codevilla writes, “This election (2020) is about whether the Democratic Party, the   ruling class’s          enforcer, will impose its tastes more strongly and arbitrarily than ever, or      whether constituencies (Trump voters) opposed to that rule will get some ill-    defined chance to strike back. Regardless of the election’s outcome, the        republic established by America’s Founders is probably gone… The (Marxist)       revolution long since destroyed the original American republic in the minds,   hearts, and habits of a critical mass of citizens. Loudly, (the Marxists) declare      that the rest of us are racists, etc., unworthy of self-     government. No one can undo   that (precedent).” In his article, Revolution 2020, written 5 weeks before the 2020 election, Codevilla explains why the transformation of the nation is beyond redemption. His explanation centers on the Marxist revolution in government principles that undermined Madison’s constitution. Codevilla writes,           “The ruling class was able to transform America’s constitutional regime because its   collective partisanship bridged the divisions between the federal government’s parts,         the states, as well as between public and private power…the ruling class effectively      repealed the Constitution and the laws of the United States.” Codevilla is correct that the mission of the ruling class revolution was not simply and solely about getting rid of Trump. Codevilla writes, “Let there be no doubt: the ruling class’s focus on Donald Trump has been incidental. America’s elites do not fear one pudgy orange-haired septuagenarian. They fear the (majority) millions of Americans whom they loathe, who voted for Trump, who gave his party control of House and Senate, and who will surely vote for folks these elites really should fear… For the ruling class, crushing Donald Trump is only incidentally its objective—that of crushing the spirit of independence in America’s “deplorable” population is its essential objective.” We agree with Codevilla that the ruling class intent is to crush individual liberty, in order to establish totalitarian, one-party global rule by the elites, which we call the global crony capitalist class. We argue that it is the moral duty of Trump voters to defend liberty, and that the defense of liberty means engaging the Democrats, and the crony capitalist class, in a second American revolution. As we explained in our earlier article on the moral justification of revolution, the second revolution can either take the path of a peaceful civil dissolution of the Former United States of America (FUSA), or it can easily devolve into a bloody violent revolution, the end of which ushers onto the field of battle, the second enemy of American freedom, the Chinese Communist Party. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, The Moral Justification for the Second American Revolution. The Citizens Liberty Party News Network, November 17, 2020, https://bit.ly/3lXpz2R). Our podcast today is the introduction of a much longer article, available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. The Moral Duty of Trump Voters to Defend Natural Rights of Liberty and Self-Government. Section 2. The Trump Voter’s Duty To Confront Evil. Section 3. The Trump Voter’s Strategy of Confrontation With Democrat Marxists. Conclusion: The Restoration of Liberty.   I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network.

Episode 62 November 25, 2020. CLP Topic: The Destruction of America. Title: The Last American Thanksgiving. Laurie Thomas Vass, The Citizens Liberty Party News Network. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 25, 2020. Our podcast today is titled The Last American Thanksgiving. We begin our podcast at the point where Angelo Codevilla ends his recent article, From Ruling Class to Oligarchy. Codevilla explains the difference in government regimes, between a ruling class, that operates within a representative republic, and an oligarchy, that rules in a totalitarian kleptocracy. Codevilla argues that,   “Half the country (Trump voters) is living under an alien regime   (oligarchy) that means to harm us socially, politically, and   economically… the (oligarchy) set about compelling obedience to an openly manipulated election.” He ends his article by stating, “Plainly, we find ourselves in a (mostly not yet violent) state of war.” We agree with Codevilla that we are in a war, but it is not a civil war, it is a revolutionary war, where the end goal is to separate the two warring factions into two new nations. We echo the words of Patrick Henry, just prior to the start of the first American Revolution, that we are already in a war..     Henry said,           “The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north           will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are           already in the field! Why stand we here idle?” We would add to Codevilla’s list of American values that are under attack by Marxist Democrats, the cultural values that held this nation together, specifically, Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving began in 1621, and ended in 2020, a 400-year American cultural tradition of giving thanks to God for the miracle of self-government, by sharing food with friends and family. Codevilla argues that the election of Trump, in 2016, was the last American legitimate election. Codevilla writes,           “But by November 2016 this oligarchy had yet to articulate itself into           something capable of acting for a common purpose. That is why the           2016 election may prove to have been the last more-or-less bona fide           free election in America’s history.” Having gained illegitimate power in the 2020 election, the oligarchy will never voluntarily relinquish power, and the old political adage of “voting the bastards out of office” does not apply anymore, because the oligarchs control the Dominion voting machines. We argue that 75 million Trump voters were disenfranchised in 2020, and lost their natural God-given right to self-government. We disagree with Codevilla that the name of the new form of rule, where citizens have no right of voting for elected representatives, is oligarchy. It is Marxist tyranny, whose intent is to destroy all vestiges of American history and culture, such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, and replace it with the totalitarian ideology of Marxist collectivism. We extend Codevilla’s analysis to claim that 2020 will be the last national American Thanksgiving celebration. The intent of the Marxists is to cancel the traditions of Thanksgiving because those traditions celebrate the beginning of American self-government, under the Mayflower Compact. The goal of the Marxist Democrats is to eradicate American individualism, and replace it with a social structure that mirrors the Chinese communist society. The two classes at war in the second American Revolution are the elite oligarchy, and the plebeians. Our term for oligarchy is crony corporate globalist capitalism, which is comprised of 3 American components in society, which function just like the society controlled by the Chinese Communist Party: The three main components of both the American global crony national economic structure and the Chinese communist economic structure are: The global firms in the military-industrial complex. The global manufacturing industrial firms with a financial interest in obtaining foreign trade benefits, especially with China. The global banking and investment firms who coordinate global financial transactions in conjunction with global central banks.   Like the top-down, one party political system in China, the American global corporate crony political system is a one party top down system, based in Washington, which functions entirely independent of the consent of the governed. The American oligarchy operates through the political apparatus of the Marxist Democrats, in collusion with the Republicans. The common characteristic of government of global cronyism, in both China and America, is a preference for one-world collectivist globalism, as opposed to promotion of a sovereign national economic interest. In an earlier article, we argued that there was a slight window of opportunity for Trump to replace the crony capitalist Republican Party with a new national sovereignty party that represents the interests of working and middle class citizens. (Trump’s 4 Year Window of Opportunity to Replace the Crony Capitalist Republican Party With a Conservative National Sovereignty Party. https://bit.ly/33id3UV). That window of opportunity no longer exists. As Codevilla correctly notes, after the election of 2020, the oligarchy is entrenched in the national government and will not give up power voluntarily. We advise Trump voters to embrace this last American Thanksgiving, and give thanks to God for the blessing of the 400 years of the American cultural tradition of self-government. And, we advise Trump voters to ask for God’s blessing in delivering us from the evil of Marxist tyranny, in what will likely be a protracted, violent encounter with the oligarchs, to regain our freedom of self-government and liberty from government oppression. This podcast is the introduction to a much longer article, available for free at the CLP News Network. The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. The Lessons of History the Indians Taught About the Meaning of Thanksgiving. Section 2. The Marxist Covid Cancel Culture. Conclusion: The Last National Celebration of Thanksgiving.   The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.    

Please distribute widely. Introduction. Our podcast today is titled, The Moral Justification for the Second American Revolution. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the Citizens Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 17, 2020. We begin our argument for the moral justification of a second American revolution in agreement with a passage from Gordon Wood’s book, The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Wood wrote,           “To be an American could not be a matter of blood; it had to be a           matter of common belief and behavior. And the source of that    common belief and behavior was the American Revolution: it was the      revolution and only the Revolution that made them one people.” The point Wood is making is that the first American Revolution forged a common set of national cultural and social values that bound all citizens together into a shared national mission of liberty. A second American Revolution is justified to restore the moral philosophy of the shared national mission of liberty, obtained in the first revolution. Bradley Thompson, in his book, America’s Revolutionary Mind, describes the constellation of common beliefs of the Revolution, as the “American Moral Philosophy,” and cites Locke’s admonition that citizens who adhere to the American civic virtue do not undermine the liberty of other citizens.   Thompson wrote,           “Locke's fundamental law of nature (i.e., to follow right reason) issues           two commands: first, each and, every man should pursue his rational,           long-term self-interest; and, second, "No one ought to harm another in           his life, health, liberty, or possessions." No common set of cultural or social values currently bind the socialists into a common mission of liberty. The nation is evenly divided between citizens who desire socialism and citizens who desire freedom, and those two conceptions of America are incompatible and irreconcilable. In the election of 2020, in order to impose socialism, the socialists transgressed Locke’s second law of nature in the code of American Civic Virtue by taking away citizen’s rights to vote, and the socialists, have, therefore, abrogated their claim of American citizenship. Jefferson sought to keep a moral society separate and apart from government power. In subverting the election laws, the socialists seek to subordinate all of society under the jurisdiction of  a totalitarian government. Socialists seek to replace an independent moral society with the arbitrary power of government, that they alone control, through the agencies of their vanguard socialist party. The socialists knew, in advance, the damage their transgression would cause to the Trump voters, and proceeded anyways, to inflict that damage. The socialists did not limit their attack to subverting the American idea of individual rights, but, in evading the election laws, they also subverted the collective American right of self-determination and self-government. The socialists have claimed an illegitimate authority to govern, not derived from the consent of the governed. Having engaged in an immoral act to gain political power, the Democrats, will never return to the original contract, or voluntarily adhere to America’s civic virtue. Democrat socialists seek to elevate the attainment of raw political power of government over the natural rights of citizens. The socialists deny the claim of individual moral responsibility and seek to replace it with the principle that only socialist elites can judge morally correct behavior. Locke sees individual citizens as owners of their own labor. Socialists see citizens as property of the Socialist State. Locke sees each individual as a moral agent, able to reason, and entitled to freedom. Locke states that the moral system is based upon individualism. Daniel Webster stated, “Our system begins with the individual man. The public happiness is to be the aggregate of the happiness of individuals.”  Socialists seek to substitute Marxist ideology of class conflict for Locke’s reason and replace individual reason with a totalitarian obedience to the Socialist State, where citizens have no capacity for individual reason. Locke wrote that the single most important duty of government is to protect the God-given natural rights of their citizens. Locke stated that citizens possess a moral right to revolt when government violates those natural rights for the protection of which it was created. In return for security, Locke expected those citizens to follow the legal laws enacted by the government to translate the consent of the governed into elected representatives. Trump voters expected socialists to follow the legal laws of the code of American civic virtue of playing by the rules, established by common moral understanding of American values, and the socialists failed to follow the laws. This article does not seek to persuade the revolutionary leaders of the second revolution of the validity and morality of America’s common mission of liberty. This article is aimed at persuading those Trump voters who must make a personal, moral decision, that a second revolution is justified, and to persuade them to join the revolution to restore American civic virtue. A second revolution is morally justified to restore the original national social contract that established liberty and self-government. When the Democrats failed to follow the laws on election, they broke the original social contract of Jefferson’s Declaration. Trump voters now have a moral right to abolish and replace that illegitimate government. We explain that the purpose of Jefferson’s law of nature, translated into civil law, is to secure the natural rights of individuals. The moral justification of the first American Revolution was the belief that the British authorities intended to enslave the colonists. As early as 1765, John Adams raised the alarm in his 'Dissertation on the Feudal Law," in response to the Stamp Art. (C. Bradley Thompson, America’s Revolutionary Mind). Adams wrote,           "Nothing less than this seems to have been meditated for us, by           somebody in Great Britain. There seems to be direct and   formal           design on foot, to enslave all America."' In 1767, in response to the Townshend Acts, John Dickinson of Pennsylvania pursued the revolutionary logic in his Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. He wrote,           “Some person may think this act of no consequence, because the           duties are so small. A fatal error. That is the very circumstance most           alarming to me. For I am convinced, that the authors of this law would           never have obtained an act to raise so trifling a sum.... In short, if they           have a right to levy a tax of one penny upon us, then they have a right to levy a million upon us.” Jefferson wrote in 1774,           "Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a           day, but a series of oppressions begun at a distinguished  period, and           pursued, unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly           prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.” Patrick Henry wrote,           “There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are           forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war           is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come… Is life so           dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and           slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may           take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” The socialists now seek to enslave Trump voters in a socialist tyranny. The avoidance of socialist slavery, imposed upon Trump voters by an illegitimate authority, justifies revolution today, just as it did in 1775. It is not the goal of this second revolution to impose individualist Lockean principles of government upon the socialists in order to force them to return to the original social contract. It is not the goal of this revolution to take control over the socialist national territory. It is not the goal of this revolution to employ lethal force against the socialists to eradicate them from the territory of the new nation. The goal of this revolution is a peaceful, civil dissolution of a currently irreconcilably divided nation into two new nations, one that restores the principles of liberty stated by Jefferson in the Declaration, and the other that seeks to subordinate the free will of citizens to the socialist will of the State. This podcast is the audio introduction of a much longer article, available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The other sections of the longer podcast are Section 1. The Moral Philosophy of Revolution. Section 2. The Restoration of American Moral Philosophy. Section 3. The Restoration of Jefferson’s American Mind. Section 4. Correcting Madison’s Constitutional Flaws. Section 5. The Indictment of the Democrat Party’s Crime to Destroy Liberty. Conclusion:  Is Life So Dear, or Peace So Sweet, As To Be Purchased At The Price of Chains and Socialist Slavery? I am Laurie Thomas Vass. This is the CLP News Network podcast for November 17, 2020. Please distribute widely.

Episode 60. November 6, 2020.   CLP topic: The Crony Capitalist Republican Party. Trump’s 4 Year Window of Opportunity to Replace the Crony Capitalist Republican Party With a Conservative National Sovereignty Party. Introduction: Our podcast today is titled Trump’s 4 Year Window of Opportunity to Replace the Crony Capitalist Republican Party With a Conservative National Sovereignty Party. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for November 6, 2020. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com. We begin our podcast promoting a new political party by examining the logic of the Anti-Trump Lincoln Project to make our argument that the lobbyists and PR firms of the group constitute the authentic Republican Party of crony corporate capitalists. In other words, we deny that there is some shadow conservative version of Republicans, who are in competition with the so-called RINO wing of the Party. There is only one institutional Republican Party, and that is the RINO Republicans, who represent what Angelo Codevilla describes as America’s ruling class. We argue that there is a slight window of opportunity for Trump to replace the crony capitalist Republican Party with a new national sovereignty party that represents the interests of working and middle class citizens. We place our analysis of the Lincoln Project into the bigger analytical framework of 5 distinct American social classes, defined by their source of income and their political ideology. Following Codevilla, (The Ruling Class, 2010), and William Domhoff, (Who Rules America? Power and Politics in the Year 2006), we argue that the characteristics and attributes of the ruling class constitute a distinct social class awareness of their power and privilege, represented by the type of Republicans who make up the Lincoln Project. The ruling class is engaged in a gigantic global financial scheme to use the Republican Party, in conjunction with the agencies of the U. S. government, to skew income from the global economy to themselves. In our earlier articles, we identified the Marxist Democrat social class as earning income from skimming revenues from government spending, similar to the activities of the Biden family. We allege that this Marxist Democrat social class is developing a class consciousness of envy. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, The American Left’s Emerging Social Class Consciousness of Envy In Collusion With the Existing American Ruling Class Consciousness of Greed. CLP News Network, October 16, 2020). The ideology of the Marxist Democrat social class is based upon the concept of social justice, and that new allegiance is so strong that it overrides the prior Democrat emphasis on policies that favored the working class. The ideological commitment to Marxism is one explanation of why Democrat voters ignored the flaws of Biden. It was not the (D) behind Biden’s name, it was the (S) behind the names of 70 million Biden voters. The main voting block of constituents for the Marxist Democrats constitute the third social class of non-working poor who earn their income from government welfare payments. In the prior, traditional two party framework, before the advent of Marxist Democrat ideology, the Democrats claimed to represent the working class. The prior faux representation of the working class by Democrats would be called a false class consciousness, by Marx, which was effective in keeping Blacks and white working class voters voting for Democrats. Their social class awareness, now, is based upon grievance against the capitalist system, which is a class antagonism promoted by the elites in the Democrat Marxist social class. We explained that the Democrat Marxist have formed an alliance with the Ruling Class to promote a one-world global system of totalitarian rule. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism. CLP News Network. July 26, 2020). The logic behind this alliance, for leftists, is that their own ideology of envy is defective in producing economic value from production, and that they must be able to share profits with the large global corporations, in order to have the tax revenues they need to implement their communist ideology, similar to the big business/socialist collaboration model of China and Europe. The essential key to understanding the logic of the Lincoln Project is their hatred of Donald Trump, because Trump opposes globalism, and totalitarian globalism is the end goal of both the ruling class crony Republicans, and the Marxist Democrats. Trump represents the financial and political interests of both the working classes, and the middle classes, in American society. The ideology of the American working classes is to be left alone by government elites, in order to pursue the working class idea of happiness. They derive their income from skilled trades, service sector jobs, and manufacturing production. The American working class does not have social class consciousness. The ideology of the middle classes is upward occupational mobility, as represented by the “American Dream.” They earn their income from small business ownership and professional occupations. Codevilla suggests that the middle class has a budding social class awareness that can vaguely be seen in the “resistance” of their vote against ruling class elites, in favor of Trump, in 2016. Unlike the empirically identifiable social class consciousness of the ruling class and the Marxist Democrats, the American working and middle classes do not currently have a political party that represents their interests, based upon a social class consciousness of their own social class. And, while Trump represents their economic interests in his Make America Great policies on immigration and taxes, Trump does not have a coherent political strategy, after 2020, that would lead to the formation of a political party, designed to protect the working class and middle class, after he is gone. We conclude that the last 4 years of the next Trump administration offers a small window of opportunity for working and middle class voters to create a new political party. The first step in creating that new political party is the development of a social class consciousness that unites, or fuses, the economic class interests of working and middle class citizens with Jefferson’s philosophy in the Declaration. That potential new political party would be anethma to the anti-Trump Lincoln Project, because it would disrupt their sources of income derived from the crony corporate Republican Party. In the absence of the new political party, the legacy of the Trump presidency will end just like the administration of Reagan, as a cult of personality, with the restoration of the hegemony of the ruling class Republicans. The mission of the Lincoln Project is to keep the institutional Republican organization operational in order to resume operations, after Trump. And, in the absence of creating working and middle class consciousness, America, as you know it, will be over. This podcast is the introduction, available at podbean, of a much longer podcast, The other sections of the podcast include: Section 1. The Logic of Hate of the Lincoln Project Republicans. Section 2. Trump, The Man and Trump, the Movement. Section 3. The Restoration of Ruling Class Republicanism. Section 4. The New Populist Fusion of a Working/Middle Class Conservative Political Party. Conclusion: The 4 Year Window of Opportunity to Replace the Crony Capitalist Republican Party. The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

Episode 59. October 19, 2020 CLP topic category: Democrat Police State Socialism Title: The American Left’s Emerging Social Class Consciousness of Envy In Collusion With the Existing American Ruling Class Consciousness of Greed. Introduction. Our podcast today is titled The American Left’s Emerging Social Class Consciousness of Envy In Collusion With the Existing American Ruling Class Consciousness of Greed. This is the Citizens Liberty Party News Network podcast for October 19, 2020. Our podcast topic begins in the aftermath of the 2016 election with the entry of the term “resistance” by Democrats into the American political lexicon of social justice. Resistance is a new term in American political discourse, and our podcast explores how the idea of the left’s resistance to the election of Donald Trump explains a new class consciousness emerging among Democrat voters. We contrast the left’s resistance to Trump with Angelo Codevilla’s insight that the resistance could also mean the resistance of Trump voter’s to the power of the American ruling class. (Codevilla Angelo, Revolution 2020.The American Mind, September 23, 2020. https://bit.ly/3jvV83k). Codevilla creates a hypothetical dynamic in class consciousness between BLM Democrats and middle class Trump voters, using the concept of resistance. Codevilla states, “The party of the ruling class—that this party, having lost the 2016 elections, would refuse to accept popular rejection and launch a full-court “Resistance” against the voters who had rejected them. But that is what happened. In fact, the election’s outcome had resulted from the general population’s resistance to the ruling class further solidifying its oligarchy. Hence the self-described “Resistance” was but a continuation of its longstanding oligarchic revolution.” In an earlier article, we explained that the American ruling class, which we call crony corporate capitalist globalism, has a well defined and established class consciousness of greed. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, The Unintended Consequence of the BLM Marxist Allegation of “White Supremacy.” CLP News Network. September 28, 2020 https://bit.ly/3lgOmip). We explain that the left is in the early stages of developing a class consciousness of envy. In contrast to the left’s emerging class consciousness, we argue that the American middle class has not yet begun to develop a class consciousness. The dimly perceived resistance to the ruling class of Trump voters that Codevilla sees is a latent middle class consciousness that has the potential to develop. We explain that the left’s emerging class consciousness is facilitated by its alliance with crony corporate capitalism. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism. CLP News Network. July 26, 2020). We predict that the collusion between BLM Democrats and the ruling class will cause the American middle class to develop a class consciousness consistent with the predictions of Nash equilibrium theory. We place the start of left’s emerging class consciousness of envy around 1985, with a new development in the globalist corporate behavior that shifted the traditional allegiance of large corporations from national sovereignty, to an allegiance of a one-world global government. Applying Nash equilibrium theory, the shift in tactics by the crony capitalist class caused a change in the status quo arrangement of power, which caused the left to change its behavior. Prior to 1985, the essence of the two party arrangement between Democrats and Republicans was special financial group interest negotiations over the distributing the spoils of plunder. All of the political party special interest elites, what Codevilla calls the ruling class, shared a common cultural value that the end goal of the American political system was to grow the economic pie bigger in order to allow them to plunder the system by distributing the spoils to their voters, after an election. Prior to 1985, the BLM Democrats did not make changes to the two party status quo power arrangement because no other group in society was making changes to the political status quo. After 1985, that national elite interest in growing the domestic economy changed, and the national special interest two party consensus about plunder, that held the political system together, eroded. In response to the change in global capitalism, the Democrats shifted their ideology from being a political party whose mission was to extract plunder for the working class to a political movement of global socialism, in collusion with global crony capitalists. The left’s growing class consciousness of envy is in the process of replacing the former allegiance of the Democrats from the party of the working class, to the party of the oppressed, within the existing two party framework of American politics. In other words, in the absence of changes to the status quo, prior to 1985,  the two party American political system had settled into a Nash equilibrium. As a result of the changes that BLM Democrats are making to the new global power arrangement, we predict that the middle class will adapt to the changes by becoming more aware of their own vulnerability, and begin the process of protecting their own class interests. In the existing two party system, neither the Democrats, nor the Republicans, represent the interests of the middle class. Consequently, the middle class will be forced to create a new political party. The great predictive value of Marxist class conflict theory is the insight that the capitalist class always co-opts its opposition by undermining the ideology of its enemies. The crony corporations are currently in the process of undermining the emerging leftist class consciousness of envy by buying off the leaders of BLM and elite Democrats in order to convert the movement into a political force that supports global crony capitalism. It is likely that as the middle class begins to develop its own class consciousness, that the ruling class will attempt to subvert its new enemy. The crony capitalist class sets the terms and limits for the left’s social justice movement, and nothing about the left’s goal of cultural social justice disrupts the elite’s power or threatens their unequal wealth distribution. As Emily Jashinsky writes in her Federalist article, How Capitalists Enrich Themselves By Co-Opting Social Justice Movements, BLM Democrats are attacking cultural values, not global capitalist hegemony. Jashinsky writes,           “Corporations are partially motivated by a sincere interest in helping    the black community by announcing donations and flooding social media with their statements of solidarity. But they also fear losing       business for staying silent, and they are increasingly convinced shifts     in consumer preferences make their overtures good for business too.” The elements of both grievance and entitlement of the new class consciousness of envy explains leftist social class behavior. We argue that the social class behavior of American leftists is based on the collective social psychology, not the individual leftist’s psychology, of envy. The envy of leftists is based upon the concept of group relative deprivation perceived by the entire social class as undeserved, unfair, collective disadvantage. We agree with Walker and Smith that social group deprivation reliably predicts political protest and active attempts to change the social system. (Walker, Iain, Smith, Heather, Feeling Relative Deprivation: The Rocky Road From Comparisons to Actions, Cambridge University Press, 2002). As a social class, leftists envy the unfairly obtained wealth of the ruling class. In their world-view, the wealth of the rich eluded the entire class of non-wealthy, not because of the absence of merit, but because an unfair capitalist economic system deprived the entire BLM under-class of obtaining a fair distribution of wealth. The social class envy creates a feeling of resentment and grievance in the Democrat socialist voting constituency. The sense of grievance causes a sense of entitlement to the wealth because, in the BLM perspective, the rich did not justly earn their wealth. Someone else built that wealth. Rather than attack the ruling class, we argue that the left uses the allegation of middle class white supremacy as a way of projecting a false race-based class consciousness onto all White people. The BLM Democrats imagine a hypothetical existence of a white race-based consciousness that allows all White people to be seen by BLM Democrats as a social class, similar to their own leftist class consciousness, based upon envy. In contrast to Codevilla’s use of resistance of Trump voters to the ruling class, the term “resistance” by Democrats translates to opposition to tolerating any more of the unfair, middle class white supremacist system of capitalism, in spite of the election results in 2016. The left’s emerging class consciousness of envy is based on the historical animosity of class envy between people who have succeeded financially in America, and people who have not. The historical class animosity, from 1787 onwards, was often called “sectional animosity,” between the commercial North and the agrarian South. In the earlier period, the wealthy in the North competed for power with the wealthy in the South. In the contemporary setting sectional animosity is converted to a race-based animosity between citizens in metro regions, and citizens in the interior of the United States. The left packages the ideology of grievance into the theoretical Marxist class conflict between workers and the capitalist elite. The packaging and placement of race-based grievance does not fit into the Marxist class conflict because the grievance of the left is based upon the notion of “white supremacy” not economic class exploitation. Race-based envy does, however, fit neatly into America’s two party hegemony. William Domhoff explained the utility and permanence of the two party system in Who rules America? Power and Politics in the Year 2006,           “The two-party system provided yet another demonstration of just           how the two-parties really compete with each other, only as rivals in           their unblinking servitude to money and power. The two-party system           learned to translate insurgent concerns into a “public opinion” that           permitted an ongoing renewal of the legitimacy of the existing power           structure. The two parties did not take opposite positions on the           permanent wartime economy and offer voters a choice between them.” After 1985, both the BLM Democrats and the Republican crony capitalists favor globalism, but for different reasons. The socialist Democrats embrace globalism because they sense an opportunity to gain unelected power to extract profits from the seamless global corporate economy, in a global socialist administrative state. The left’s ideology of racial envy is best seen as a modification of the ruling class hegemony of exploitation, not as a revolutionary overthrow of America’s ruling class. Reparations for slavery to overcome the current unfair wealth distribution is an emulation of the ruling class ability to rip-off the political system. In this case the intent of the BLM Democrats is to gain their fair share of plunder by ripping off the middle class, in collusion with the ruling class, within the existing institutional structure of the two party system. As Domhoff explains,           “This (BLM) dogma asserts that it is more damaging to progressive           interest to challenge the two-party system than to accept the need to           stay within it. The more the evidence demonstrates that their own           dogmatism has produced only bleak disasters, the more they ascribe           those disasters to those who rejected their groundless faith-based           strategy of “working within the Democratic Party.” As Codevilla explains,           “The black-clad burners and looters were the very opposite of a           proletariat and that, Marxist rhetoric aside, they never attacked the           wealthy or the powerful—not Wall Street, nor major corporations,           certainly not any government, never mind Google, Facebook, or           Twitter, America’s most powerful monopolies, or corporate officials.           Instead, they received financial contributions from these sources.” Promoting the class envy of White people heightens the sense of oppression and grievance of the BLM Democrat constituencies, and eventually leads to a one-party dictatorship that does not require voting to maintain power. That anti-democratic authority system would not disrupt the ruling class’ ability to use the agencies of government to direct the flow of global financial benefits to themselves. The new tyranny would only require that the ruling class share profits with its new junior partner, eliminating the need for any further BLM political resistance to Trump voters. This podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. The podcast is the introduction of a much longer article. The other sections of the podcast include: Section 1. The Consciousness of Greed of the American Ruling Class. Section 2. The BLM Democrat Politics of Envy. Section 3. The Emerging BLM Democrat Concept of Social Class Consciousness. Conclusion: The Radical Egalitarianism of the Democratic Republic of America.   The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

Our podcast today is titled “The Unintended Consequence of the BLM Marxist Allegation of “White Supremacy.” I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network, for September 28, 2020. Our podcast examines the use of the allegation of “white supremacy” by BLM Marxists, and its unintended consequence of instigating a class consciousness among White citizens. We argue that the allegation of “white supremacy” today, plays the same type of political propaganda purpose for Black Marxists as the issue of slavery played during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, and then 70 years later, in the first Civil War. In the early history of the Nation, the term “sectional animosity” was used to describe the two irreconcilable cultures between the commercial North and the agrarian South. Today, the term sectional animosity between two alien cultures has a historical continuity with the ideological animosity between Marxists and conservatives, not over the credibility of the allegation, but over the stark difference in the mission of America, much like the issue of slavery did then, in the sectional animosity between the North and the South Slavery, then, served as a convenient ground of dispute between the two alien cultures, in the same way that Marxist white supremacy plays today between the alien cultures of Marxists and natural rights conservatives. Something real, slavery, then, acted as the precursor agent to solve the historical animosity between North and South, in the same way, today, that something real, racism, acts as the agent to impose Marxism on natural rights conservatives. Madison attempted to combine two alien cultures under one government, and now, Madison’s flawed arrangement is allowing two distinct ideologies  to, once again clash, over the future of the nation. We argue that Madison did not get the right institutional framework in place to ameliorate the sectional animosity. His grand compromises over slavery, in order to get the new constitution ratified, left the issue of slavery to fester, before the start of the Civil War, and after the Civil War ended. When the 38 elites (one delegate signed twice, once for himself, and once for his buddy, who could not make it to Philadelphia that day), walked out of the Convention, on September 17, 1787, they knew that their compromises on slavery would lead to Civil War. We agree with Ta Nehisi Coates, a Black Marxist writer at The Atlantic, who claims that the Civil War did not solve the issues of sectional or ideological animosity. Coates argues that the Civil War solved nothing, and, therefore, that reparations are due to Black people for the ensuing racism, after the War ended. In contrast to Coates’ conclusion about reparations, we argue that the conclusion of the Civil War did not provide the common cultural or moral values that bound the citizens together into a shared national mission of individual liberty because Madison’s constitution was not a moral document, but rather a legal framework of economic and financial civil rules of procedure. We argue that the genesis of modern racism in America is not 1619, and that the ensuing racism is not due to white supremacy. The modern version of racism began with the globalism of the large corporations, around 1985. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, The Origins of Modern Racism in the United States and Black Economic Dysphoria Under Global Corporate Crony Capitalism and the COVID Economic Lockdown Shock (June 11, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3625160). As in 1787, and later in 1860, there are now two distinct cultures, and two different nations in America. As the British observer in America noted, in 1860, there were two nations operating under one government. The British observer stated:           “In order to master the difficulties of American politics, it will be very           important to realize the fact that we have to consider, not the action of           rival political parties, or opposing interests within the limits of one           body politic, but practically that of two distinct communities or   peoples, speaking indeed a common language, and united by a federal     bond, but opposed in principles and interests, alienated in feeling and        jealous rivals in the pursuit of political power.” Further, we argue that today’s conflict cannot be solved peacefully under Madison’s flawed document because its civil rules of procedure permanently elevated the power of the natural aristocracy over the howling masses. The ongoing racial hatred in America is due to a defect in the Preamble of Madison’s constitution, which failed to link his constitution to Jefferson’s Declaration, that all men are created equal. For Madison, a “more perfect union” was a union that corrected the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation by permanently placing men who had “virtue” in unchecked economic power. “A more perfect union,” said Thomas Paine, about Madison’s flawed Preamble, “meant a nominal nothing without principles.” For BLM Marxists, a more perfect union means a communist tyranny. Madison’s flawed, vacuous Preamble can mean anything to whoever happens to control the U. S. Supreme Court at that moment in time. Madison’s two-class arrangement makes the constitution vulnerable to the ascendancy of the elite Marxists, who assume the authority and functions previously reserved by Madison for the natural aristocracy. We raise the same issue about a future civil war that Edward Pollard raised in 1866, in his book, The Lost Cause: A New Southern History of the War of the Confederates. Pollard wrote,   “It is obvious that the controversy is no narrow one of party, that   it involves the traditions and spirit of government, and goes to   the ultimate contest of constitutional liberty in America. Regarding these issues, the question comes forcefully to mind:           Has the past war merely laid the foundation of another? The      pregnant lesson of human experience is that few nations have      had their first civil war without having their second.”   The essence of the ideological division today is over the difference between a society founded on individual freedoms, and a society organized under Marxist collectivism. No force on earth will make the BLM Marxists suddenly decide to become individualist patriotic citizens, and give up their dream of imposing Marxism on the citizens. The ideological conflict between Marxist collectivism and conservative individualism is permanent and irreconcilable. That Marxist ideological recalcitrance will lead to a second civil war, unless a peaceful civil dissolution occurs first. In its relationship to Marxist class theory, the term white supremacy is used by BLM Marxists to describe the dynamics of the American social class of white capitalists who exploit the disadvantaged under classes. In the logic of BLM Marxists, the white capitalist ruling class has an objectively verified, identifiable class consciousness that allows the Marxists to target the White capitalist class as a collectivist group. The term white supremacy of the capitalist class has been broadened by BLM Marxists to include all White people, not just the capitalist class, who benefit from white privilege. In contrast to the objectively verified class consciousness that the BLM Marxists project onto all White people, all White people do not identify themselves by race. White people, as a collectivist entity, do not possess a class consciousness in the same way as the term is used by Marxists to identify the ruling capitalist class. In other words, White people in America do not think of themselves as a collectivist social class, and do not think of themselves as a part of a white supremacist nation. Following Madison’s idea about economic and commercial factions, between the natural aristocracy and the common citizens, White people today think of themselves in terms of economic and social status, and vote for either the Republican Party or the Democrat Party to represent their financial interests. White people, applying Marxian analysis, do not have class consciousness. However, one of the unintended consequences of the continued invocation of the term “white supremacist” by BLM Marxists, is that the Marxist ideology will cause the formation of racial class consciousness among White people, who had never before identified their common political and economic interests with other White people. The media and cultural agencies will continually reinforce the message that all White people are racists, leading to the realization by White people that BLM Marxists consider White people to be an identifiable collective social group. There is nothing in Marxist theory that suggests that the outcome of a new White class consciousness will lead to a pre-determined communist state. A more plausible outcome of emerging White class consciousness is a revolutionary ideology of radical egalitarianism, based upon an individualistic entrepreneurial society. The historical antecedent of that radical egalitarianism is found in the agrarian populist philosophy of North Carolina, as described by Cecil-Fronsman, in his book, Common Whites: Class and Culture In Antebellum North Carolina. Cecil-Fronsman quotes an observer traveling through the South in the early 1800's.           “The observer remarked that common whites, in North Carolina, were           "...extremely tenacious of the rights and liberties of republicanism.           They consider themselves on equal footing with the best people in the           country, and upon the principles of equality, they intrude themselves           into every company." The feelings of social and political equality of common North Carolina White people arose from the priority they attached to attaining self-respect and economic independence from the Southern plantation elite. They believed that their own moral worth as individuals did not derive either from their initial endowment of labor, or from their accumulation of property from market transactions. Paul Escott notes, in Many Excellent People, that           “North Carolina’s yeomen were, in reality, a self-directed, stubborn           and independent group. Theirs was a traditional way of life based           upon subsistence farming. It was neither luxurious not easy, but it           offered self-reliance and self-respect.” Escott goes on to write, that from the eyes of the plantation elite, the (White) yeomen were not respectable, and tended to view them as unreliable and in the same class as free blacks and slaves. In other words, it is more likely that the nascent white class consciousness will not be built upon the existing dialectics of the Marxist antagonistic relations between workers and the capitalist class, but will be built upon the social class awareness that Hobbes and Locke were correct that the best social welfare outcomes are achieved under a regime of private property and individual initiative. The philosophical mistake made by BLM Marxists is to substitute the concept of “white supremacy” of all White people for the more cogent Marxist economic theory of ruling class exploitation. The white supremacy of all White people, as a social class, does not fit into the Marxist ideology, but the categorization of the American ruling class does have a collectivist class consciousness that fits neatly into the Marxist two-class theory. The American white ruling class is now busy undermining the Marxists with the tools of co-option and collaboration. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism. (July 25, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3660493). BLM Marxists would probably have attracted more middle class White citizens if the Marxists had stuck with Marx’s original two-class distinction between the ruling class and the proletariat. Following the ruling class theory of American history, promoted by Angelo Codevilla, most White citizens can easily see the unelected power of the ruling class, and realize that the two track justice system generates unfair, unearned, advantages for the ruling class. The common name of this current political condition is “the swamp.” Our term for Codevilla’s American ruling class is a kleptocracy of global crony corporations, which is composed of the senior executives of the 1500 large global corporations who favor a one-world government. We call that system global crony corporate capitalism. We argue that the only peaceful solution to the ideological divisions between BLM Marxists and natural rights conservatives is a civil dissolution of the current 50 states into two new nations, one of which embraces the philosophical roots of individualism of Hobbes and Locke. The other new nation is founded on the collectivist Marxist principles of social justice envisioned by the Black BLM Marxists, and funded by the insane “open society” globalism of George Soros. The ultimate consequence of the market branding of the  BLM allegation of  “white supremacy” and the end goal of BLM Marxism, for the second new nation is a totalitarian dictatorship of the proletariat, with an unspecified economic system, and untested ideas of a communist, one-class society, ruled by Marxist elites. We predict that the on-going invocation of “white supremacy” will create a white consciousness among working class and middle class citizens, commonly called the petty bourgeois by Marx. Marxist theory is defective in its treatment of the middle class because Marx only identified conflict between the working class and the ruling class. We conclude that the solution for liberty lies in the direction of more individualism, and less central government, in a state sovereignty economic commonwealth of independent entrepreneurial producers of the American petty bourgeois. This podcast is the introduction of a much longer article, available at clpnewsnetwork.com. The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. Sectional Animosity As The Historical Antecedent of BLM Marxist White Supremacy Animosity. Section 2. A Second Civil War Over White Supremacy or the Second Revolution Over Individual Liberty? Section 3. Radical Egalitarianism as the Unexpected Outcome of the Unintended Consequence of the BLM Allegation of White Supremacy. Conclusion: The Restoration of Jefferson’s Natural Rights Republic.   The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.

Episode 57. September 11, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Destruction of the Nation. Title: Marxist Legal Theory and the Revenge Prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse. Our podcast today is titled Marxist Legal Theory and the Revenge Prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse, and places the arrest and prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse into the bigger framework of Marxist Critical Legal Theory that guides the behavior of the Marxist judges and prosecutors that Soros has funded. We use the Rittenhouse event as an example in our analytical framework to describe the links between the BLM riots and funding from Soros, which is designed to end the American judicial system of individual natural rights. Diagram 1. Analytical Model of Soros Political Influence. In Marxist Critical Legal Theory, the concept of individual justice is replaced by the concept of group identity social justice. Rittenhouse is being prosecuted as a white supremacist, not as an individual citizen. The Rittenhouse prosecution of first degree murder is based upon the false premise that Rittenhouse is guilty, before the fact, because he is deemed by Marxist prosecutors to be a white supremacist. The premise of white supremacy is a tenet in Systemic Judicial Black Racism, a sub-category of Marxist Critical Legal Theory, promoted by state and local Marxist prosecutors who have been elected to office through funding by Soros, in order to seek revenge for slavery and systemic racism. In the bigger picture, Soros prefers a global, one-world government, managed by elites, like himself. He believes that independent sovereign nation states are obsolete, and should be replaced by a unified totalitarian global government. In order to replace sovereign nation states, Soros believes that the concept of “individual rights” is archaic, and should be replaced by group collectivism, similar to the social structure of Communist China. Soros derives his anti-individual, globalist philosophy from his interpretation of Karl Popper’s work on skepticism and rationalism.  Soros’ interpretation of Popper is terribly flawed and contains an irreconcilable philosophical contradiction, related to Popper’s concept of the “open society.” We explain that Soros’ misinterpretation of Popper allows him to promote Marxist Critical Legal Theory, the antithesis of Popper’s theory of the open society. Soros’ interpretation of Popper’s open society is ass-backwards. He is so morally arrogant as to believe that he, himself, has the sole moral authority to overturn the American individualist principles of Hobbes and Locke. Soros’ one-man crusade to eradicate American individualism is fueled by his $24 billion of family wealth, which he directs to pursue his phantom philosophical goals of a one-world government. A much better philosophical fit for Soros’ moral arrogance is Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche’s explanation of the will to power. In this context, the Soros attempt to impose his model of human society on American citizens, is through the strength of his personality and the use of his wealth. Following Nietzsche, Soros is obsessed with his individual creative powers to overcome the social, cultural and moral defects that he perceives in American individualism, in pursuit of his global collectivist values. Soros’ pursuit of the untried and empirically untested globalist vision is a profound misstatement of Popper’s philosophy of scientific truth through falsification. Soros’ one-man effort to create a global collectivist society can neither be falsified, via Popper, nor tested, via scientific rationalism. The actions of Marxist prosecutors in America, elected by funding from Soros, contradict every tenet of Popper’s open society. For common citizens, there is no exit from the perpetual straight jacket tyranny of global Marxism, which is the ultimate goal of a faux dictator, like Soros. Once the Marxists gain power, there will no longer be a democratic concept of “consent of the governed,” to deploy in order to escape the tyranny. We conclude that the election of Black Marxist judicial racists creates permanent social damage that is irreversible and ultimately leads to the end of the individualistic civil society of the United States. We conclude that the irreconcilable ideological conflicts between Marxists and natural rights conservatives cannot be reconciled under the framework of Madison’s representative republic. Our podcast today is the introduction of a much longer article, available for free, for one week, at the CLPnewsnetwork.com. The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. The Soros One-Man Crusade to End American Individual Rights. Section 2. The Soros Political Network of Promoting Marxist Prosecutors. Section 3. Marxist Legal Theory as Judicial Revenge For White Supremacy. Section 4. The American Individualist Theory of Equal Rights Versus the Marxist Collectivist Theory of Social Justice. Section 5. The Revenge Prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse. Conclusion: America, As You Know It, Is Over. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network.  

Episode 56. August 21, 2020 CLP Topic: Democrat Police State Socialism What Happens to the Nation if Judge Sullivan is Successful In His Prosecution of General Flynn? Marxist Critical Legal Theory as The Judge, The Jury, and The Prosecution. Introduction. Our Citizens Liberty Party News Network podcast today is titled, What Happens to the Nation if Judge Sullivan is Successful In His Prosecution of General Flynn: Marxist Critical Legal Theory as The Judge, The Jury, and The Prosecution. We explore the significance and political implications of Judge Sullivan’s refusal to grant a dismissal in the Flynn case by placing his behavior into the larger context of systemic judicial black racism. We argue that judicial black racism is a sub-category of Marxist Critical Legal Logic. The unifying principle of all Black judicial racists is that the entire American society is governed by “white supremacy,” and that the job of Black lawyers and jurists is to use the judicial system to implement their ideology of communism, in order to eradicate the existing ideology of American individualism. The term “systemic” is used to mean that the white racism is a permanent institutional part of the American society, which existed before the country was organized. Because the white racism is systemic, it cannot be eradicated by policy changes. The only way to get rid of systemic white racism is to eradicate the society and start over, as a communist nation. The moral logic of the critical legal ideology is provided by a Black Marxist writer for The Atlantic, Ta-Nehisi Coates. In his February 8, 2016, article, he states that his end goal for America is based upon his assumption that communism is a better mode of social organization than individualism. Oddly, he criticizes another socialist writer, Cedric Johnson, for not supporting reparations, because Johnson is skeptical that reparations would overcome racism. Coates states, “Johnson denigrates reparations by asserting that the demands for reparations have not “yielded one tangible improvement in the lives of the majority of African Americans. This is also true of single-payer health care, calls to break up big banks, free public universities, and any other leftist policy that has yet to come to pass. For a program to have effect, it has to actually be put in effect. Why would reparations be any different?”           Coates states his unverified assumption about the moral superiority of communism by stating that communism would be a better world,           “white supremacy is a force in and of itself, a vector often           intersecting with class, but also operating independent of it. I think a           world with equal access to safe, quality, and affordable education;           with the right to health care; with strong restrictions on massive wealth accumulation; with guaranteed childcare; and with access to       the full gamut of birth-control, including abortion, would be a better       world.” Like all Marxists, Coates assumes that he has the moral authority to declare that communism is superior to individualism. Because he possesses moral authority, he, therefore, has the moral arrogance to impose his view on non-socialists. This perspective of elite superiority to make decisions on behalf of all citizens is common to all forms of Marxism. The common way of stating this proposition is that communist elites know better than the common citizens what is in the best interests of the common citizens. In Coates’ application, he “knows” that communism is better than individualism, and he is willing to use his superior intellect to impose communism on common citizens. Whereas, Coates criticizes Johnson for opposing reparations, Coates promotes a communist system that has been implemented, and has failed miserably to improve the lives of common citizens, throughout history. Paradoxically, for Coates, the evidence in support of reparations does not exist because it has never been tried, whereas the moral superiority of communism is contradicted by the evidence that does exist, wherever it has been tried. His criticism of Johnson is based upon a distinction among Marxists about the importance of racism versus the Marxist emphasis on capitalist class exploitation. Coates states,           “Johnson doesn’t reject reparations because he doesn’t think they           would work, but because he doesn’t believe specific black injury           through racism actually exists. He favors a “more Marxist class- oriented analysis” over the notion of treating “black poverty as       fundamentally distinct from white poverty.”   Coates continues his criticism of Johnson by stating,                   “whiteness confers knowable, quantifiable privileges, regardless of           class—much like “manhood” confers knowable, quantifiable           privileges, regardless of race. White supremacy is neither a trick, nor a           device, but one of the most powerful shared interests in American           history.” For Coates, the most important enemy is White supremacy, not capitalism. This important distinction between Coates’ emphasis on white supremacy, and Johnson’s Marxist class exploitation is important to understanding Judge Sullivan’s behavior in prosecuting Flynn. Using Coates’ distinction between Marxism and Black racism, Sullivan would be called a “Black racist,” who uses his judicial position to extract revenge on Flynn, a White supremacist enemy, who is aligned with a White supremacist President, Donald Trump. Sullivan is not a Marxist, like Johnson, but a Black racist, like Coates. Sullivan deploys Marxist critical legal theory from the bench to target his White enemies. We conclude that the ideological differences between Marxist critical legal logic and the legal logic of individual natural rights are irreconcilable. Coates does not aim at implementing simple universal social programs, as does Johnson, to alleviate racism, he aims at eradicating the entire white supremacist American society, in order to implement his version of communism. The BLM Handbook on White Supremacy, “me and white supremacy workbook,” explains that white racism is endemic to the functioning of America. No social programs are capable of alleviating the original sin of slavery and the ensuing mindset of white supremacy. The BLM Handbook states,           “The legal abolition of slavery did not abolish the slavemaster’s mindset. People of colour are suffering daily from the effects of     historic and modern colonialism. White supremacy is an ideology, a       paradigm, an institutional system, and a world view that you have         been born into by virtue of your whiteness. I am not talking about the   physical colour of your skin being bad. I am talking about the historic      and modern legislating, societal conditioning and systemic          institutionalising of the construction of whiteness as inherently     superior than people of other races.” Sullivan, like the other Black judicial racists cited below, is a warrior in the war against natural rights individualism. Their unifying code language is “systemic white supremacy”, as actualized in the violence and riots of Black Lives Matter. Their target is the eradication of individual rights. The meting out of justice, for a Black racist, depends on the Black racist  political ideology of the judges, not on the law and the facts. For example, in one case, the two conservative Republican D. C. Court of Appeals judges who heard the Flynn mandamus appeal, ruled that Sullivan should dismiss the case. In a concurrent case, the two socialist Democrat D. C. Court of Appeals judges who heard the Judicial Watch mandamus case against Hillary, ruled that Hillary could escape further testimony. The difference in the judicial opinions in the two cases is based upon the difference between the collectivism of Marxist critical legal theory and the individualism of natural rights law. Our podcast is the introduction to a much longer article, available at for free for one week. https://bit.ly/2EyuXcp   Our entire historical archive of articles and podcasts is available for an annual subscription of $30. The other sections in this podcast are: Section 1. Systemic Judicial Black Racism. Section 2. The Linkage Between Judicial Systemic Black Racism and Marxist Critical Legal Theory. Section 3. Sullivan’s Refusal to Dismiss as A Black Judicial Racist. Conclusion: America, As You Know It, Is Over. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network, for August 24, 2020.  

Episode 55. August 14, 2020 CLP Topic Category. Police State Socialism   Justice Delayed: What Happens to the Nation if Durham Fails to Prosecute? Our podcast today is titled, Justice Delayed: What Happens to the Nation if Durham Fails to Prosecute? We explore three possible reasons behind John Durham’s delay in releasing the report on the Obamagate investigation. We explain that the delay could be a harmless event, due to the meticulous investigative work of Durham.  Even though American voters need the results of the report before the November 2020 election, the meticulous, detailed investigation may not be ready by then, and the priority for the DOJ is to do the job right, no matter how long it takes. We call this first explanation, “No Good Wine Before Its Time.” The second reason follows the social construction of reality logic of left-wing pundits who claim that the delay is evidence that there is nothing of interest that Durham has found that would warrant prosecution. In their logic, there is no deep state, and the FBI and CIA did the right thing in their treatment of the Russia collusion investigation. The Durham delay is because there is nothing there to see. We call this second explanation the “nothing burger” scenario. Finally, we explain that the targets of the investigation are members of the deep state apparatus, and that Durham and Wray will protect them at all costs, no matter if crimes have been committed. If Durham were to pursue prosecution, he would be forced to prosecute the leadership of the Democratic Party, including Obama and Biden, and the damage to the deep state would be permanently debilitating for the functioning of the nation’s political and economic systems. We call this third explanation the “deep state coup protection conspiracy.” Our podcast agrees with the suspicion of Buck Sexton that Durham will not prosecute the felons in the Obamagate case. Sexton states,           “Nobody you or I has ever heard of will be indicted for spygate. The           Durham report will just confirm what we already know in greater detail.           That will be it. Maybe a low level person charged with a minor offense.” We explain why Sexton’s analysis is the most likely outcome and we explain the consequences of Durham’s inaction for the fate of the Nation. We begin our podcast today by placing Durham’s investigation into the bigger, political framework of the American crony capitalist system, in the context of the ruling class, offered by Angelo Codevilla. Codevilla explains that the United States is ruled by a ruling class, which is entirely disconnected from the democratic consent of the governed. We extend his analysis to explain how the Durham investigation fits into what we call the crony capitalist global system. The ruling class coalition of the crony capitalist class includes 3 components: The military-industrial complex of corporations who promote wars in order to obtain government largess. The 5 largest New York banks, operating in conjunction with the Federal Reserve Bank, to coordinate world financial flows with other central banks. The unelected deep state agents who coordinate global government policy with the Chinese Communist Party, on behalf of the large corporations. We begin with 3 observations, or stipulations, that should be obvious to natural rights conservatives when they contemplate the Durham investigation, and one observation that is opaque. First, it is obvious that there are no common cultural or moral values that bind socialists and conservatives together in a common national mission. The ideological differences are irreconcilable and irresolvable, under the current Constitution. In the left’s world view, there is no Obamagate, and there is no “Deep State Swamp.” The conservative view is that Obama perpetrated a silent coup against Trump. The two views are not reconcilable. The left’s perspective is the predominate perspective of the Swamp, and for Durham to pursue prosecution, he would be fighting against the rising left wing tide. Second, it is obvious that the two-party system failed to defend individual rights and freedoms from a tyrannical ruling class elite. Both political parties collaborate to extend globalism, and neither party defends the ideology of individual rights. The two-party system ended in a centralized elite tyranny in Washington, dedicated to using the agencies of government to direct financial benefits to themselves. Durham does not have the support of either political party to pursue prosecution, he only has the backing of Trump, who does not have a political party of his own. Third, it is obvious that America’s largest corporations abandoned their allegiance to national sovereignty when they implemented the NAFTA and China trade deals. It should be obvious that the unifying principle of crony capitalism is globalism, and that Trump’s national sovereignty is a threat to their privileges of crony capitalism. Even if Trump wins re-election in November, the crony capitalist quest for globalism is not going to disappear. In other words, we argue that nothing about the deep state, or crony capitalism, will change, even if Trump wins re-election. The two-party political system is systemically dysfunctional and the rule of law ended with the riots and corruption of Obama. Understanding the connection between the three obvious observations is not difficult. The Trump election in 2016 de-railed the ruling class march to globalism, and the three parts of the ruling class coalition will never stop their hatred of Trump for disrupting their plans. Durham’s delay is due to the power of the ruling class, and neither he, nor Barr, is willing to confront their power. We argue that Durham will not pursue prosecution because the damage that prosecution would do to the Swamp’s decision-making and operations, on a national scale, is permanently debilitating. The deep state is so extensive, to borrow from Senator Grassley’s opinion, that Durham will not prosecute the agents of the deep state. Rather, both Barr and Durham are collaborators with the Deep State and will protect the felons from prosecution. The more likely outcome of Durham’s slow-motion inquiry is a detailed report to Barr, after the election, that crimes may have been committed, but that further investigation is needed before pursuing prosecution. The deep state is betting again, like it did with Hillary in 2016, that the Democrats will win in 2020, and that after November 4, the entire Obamagate investigation will disappear. Understanding the consequences of Durham’s investigation delay is opaque. We ask what happens if Durham fails to prosecute the perpetrators of the coup against Trump, including Obama and Biden? If we are correct that Durham will fail to prosecute, the opaque observation for conservatives, and for the rule of law, is that the United States of America has ended. Something new must replace the old regime. But, for many conservatives it is unclear, or opaque, what should replace the current regime. We conclude that Madison’s representative republic should be replaced by a democratic republic, based upon the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation. This podcast is the introduction to a much longer article, available for free, for one week at the CLPNewsNetwork. The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. No Good Wine Before Its Time Section 2. The Left’s Nothing Burger. Section 3. The Deep State Coup Protection Conspiracy. Conclusion: America, As You Know It, is Over. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for August 11, 2020. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 54. July 24, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Crony Capitalism   BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism.   Introduction.   Our podcast today is titled BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism and it extends the analysis of Richard D. Wolff, in his Salon article, “How racism became the essential tool for maintaining a capitalist order” by placing BLM Marxism within the conventional Marxist analytical methodology of its critique of capitalism. In other words, we use Wolff’s standard Marxist class conflict theory to explain that the BLM alliance with crony capitalism is best understood as the capitalist class co-opting BLM with the tool of racism, in order to perpetuate global capitalism.   We argue that the recent crony corporate capitalist endorsements of the use of the term “systemic racism” enables the capitalist class to reproduce itself by continually pointing out to BLM that their conditions of oppression are caused by racism, not global crony capitalism. Wolff notes,   “Employers (capitalists) played on racialized differences to keep   employees (workers) from unifying against them. The bitter   competition between Black and white  workers acts as a shock-absorber         for cyclically scarce jobs… capitalism fostered and benefited from         racism.” To paraphrase Wolff, the capitalist class pits Blacks against Whites to act as a shock absorber for the lack of jobs and choice provided under the older form of monopoly capitalism. Wolff’s Marxian methodology must be updated from the older interpretation of monopoly capitalism to incorporate the newer concepts of global corporate cronyism. Marxian theory predicted that the older forms of monopoly capitalism had internal contradictions that would, eventually, consign capitalism to the trash heap of history. We argue that monopoly capitalism has been replaced by crony corporate global capitalism. The earlier concept of “working class” in monopoly capitalism must be updated to incorporate the group identity ideology that all social groups are exploited by the capitalist class. In the newer version of crony capitalism, the capitalist class includes all white people, not simply the White cops or the White owners of production capital. The concept of exploitation and increasing misery of the oppressed groups must be updated to include the newer concept of the neo-slavery of global crony capitalism. In the neo-slavery of global corporatism, oppressed people have no choice but to submit to the economic choices, including unemployment and poverty, offered by corporations. The concept of democracy as citizen participation in collective political decisions must be changed to mean equality of incomes, as determined by the elites in the vanguard political party. With these modifications to traditional Marxist theory, the dialectics of two seemingly incompatible world views, the BLM Marxist view of America as systemically racist, and the crony capitalist view that democratic structures and competitive markets are inferior to a seamless global, totalitarian government, can be more easily reconciled. The synthesis between the two seemingly incompatible world views is through the joint understanding and agreement by both parties that the Chinese Crony State Communism model represents the best economic model to replace the free enterprise, individualistic model. The traditional Marxian theory offers both an economic theory of the capitalist’s use of profits obtained through exploitation of the worker, and a theory of history, called the "materialist conception of history.” The truth of the Marxian historical prediction was never verified because capitalism never died, like Marx predicted. Capitalism kept reinventing itself, and seemed to reincarnate into new forms that defied the Marxian historical prediction. The reason for the recent failure of historical materialism is that the older monopoly capitalism, of the 1960s, morphed into global corporate crony capitalism, of the 1990s, which uses state propaganda of systemic racism to direct the benefits of the global economic system to themselves. In Marxist thought, the “state” is the same thing as the “Swamp.” Marx explained that the state is a powerful institution of the ruling class that uses the state apparatus to secure obedience to rules and to enforce its preferred relations of production and exploitation. The economic part of Marxian theory predicted that scientific socialism, at the end of history, would replace monopoly capitalism. The modern form of scientific socialism is the model of Chinese Communism. In the socialist logic of social construction of reality, communism, as an ideal end state, already exists in the imaginations of socialists, and it is manifested, or made real, by the existence of Chinese communism. Marx stated,           "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established,           an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the     real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of       this movement result from the premises now in existence". Communism, as an end state, exists for socialists, in the same way that heaven exists for Christians. In Christian thought, a believer deeply believes in the existence of heaven, but the person must die in order to get to heaven. In Marxism, BLM Marxists deeply believe that socialism is better than capitalism, but capitalism must die in order to get to communism. Communist heaven looks like nirvana to socialists. Communist heaven would abolish all exploitation and all social hierarchy. After the revolution, all social classes would disappear. The state would wither away, as politics ceased to exist. In communist nirvana, technology would be “inherited” from capitalism, in the same way that the Chinese “inherit U. S. technology,” and the inherited technology would be used to produce plenty for all. This concept of Chinese communist heaven is the end goal of BLM Marxism. The two parts of the Marxian theory are in conflict with each other. Capitalism, in materialist history, did not die, and the heaven of scientific socialism, in Marxist economic theory, already exists in the end state of Chinese crony state communism. The crony capitalist are dangling this concept of Chinese communist heaven in front of the BLM Marxists to co-opt the socialist revolution. Our podcast today is the introduction to a much longer article, available for free, for one week, at www.clpnewsnetwork.com The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. The Co-option of BLM. Section 2. The Similarity Between Chinese Crony Communism and American Crony Capitalism. Section 3. The New World Order of Global Collectism. Conclusion. The Emerging Global Corporate Crony Capitalism. The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

Episode 53. July 10, 2020 CLP  Topic. Democrat Party Socialism The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor. Introduction. Our podcast today is titled The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor and we re-examine North Carolina’s history of tyrannical governors, to gain insight into the lessons of history about how common citizens deal with rogue governors. The most important lesson is that when the normal legislative channels do not work, and rogue governors ignore the rule of law, common citizens must take matters into their own hands to protect their liberties. We argue that the citizens must enact a constitutional amendment to clarify the rights of citizens during any future emergency declarations by rogue governors, who may use the emergency powers for political purposes. We argue that modifying, or amending, the defective Emergency Management Act is insufficient protection of citizen rights. North Carolina has a vast, overwhelming population of common, working class citizens, and a tiny percentage of social class elites, compared to other states. North Carolina is unique among the states because of its cultural traditions of radical egalitarianism among common citizens. The cultural value is captured by the phrase “We are as good as anyone. And, anyone is as good as us.” Part of our cultural heritage is that common citizens applied this egalitarian philosophy to social class aristocrats and royal governors in demanding equal and fair treatment on economic exchange issues. The rogue governors, then, and now, never appreciated being equated with common citizens, and used violence and fraud to subjugate Black and White common citizens to the elite tyranny. Part of our egalitarian heritage is derived from the historical fact that North Carolina was initially settled by settlers who were lower class migrants from other states, primarily Virginia. The felons and poor people came to North Carolina to escape elite class tyranny in other states. For many years, the state’s own historians liked to use the phrase “a sea of humility between two mountains of conceit,” to contrast the common class of citizens in North Carolina with the slaveocracy of Virginia and South Carolina. On a per capita comparison, North Carolina had many more common farmers and far fewer slave owners than either Virginia or South Carolina. One of our most honored and highest praise that we can bestow on a citizen is to call the citizen a “yeoman” derived from the tradition of our mountain independent, hard-working farmers. In general, as a people, we are very slow to anger, and very slow to adopt social change to the status quo. But, when we finally reach our limit of toleration, as a people, we are tenacious in defending out social values. For many years, historians from outside of North Carolina called the state “the Rip Van Winkle” state because the citizens seemed to slumber through the crises that affected other states. The Encyclopedia of North Carolina noted,           “There was general political apathy under the state's Democrat-          controlled one-party system, which resulted in widespread           indifference to all economic, social, and cultural improvements. A           letter writer to the North Carolina Farmer in 1845 voiced his           frustration: "O! that our State, . . . would wake up from her Rip Van           Winkle agricultural sleep!!" We were the only state, in 1788, that refused, on a matter of principle, to ratify Madison’s new centralized Constitution, until it contained a citizen’s Bill of Rights. For 3 years after the refusal to ratify, the Federalists inflicted serious economic damage on the citizens, in an attempt to coerce North Carolina into ratifying the defective document. The citizens of North Carolina were extremely reluctant to join the Confederacy, but once committed to battle, the State sent more soldiers to the Confederacy than any other state, suffered more casualties and death than any other state, and had more soldiers skedaddle, from the Army, than any other state. Our proud heritage of tenacity in the face of overwhelming odds is captured in the phrase from the Civil War:           First at Bethel. Farthest at Gettysburg. Last at Appomatox. Robert E. Lee admired the fighting spirit of the North Carolina soldiers by saying that they stuck to the front lines of battle and fought like they had tar on ‘dem’ heels. North Carolina citizens liked Lee’s description of common Confederate soldiers so much that they nicknamed the UNC athletic teams “The Tar Heels.” Silent Sam, the statute torn down by socialists, on the campus of the University of North Carolina, was a tribute to the courage of the common soldier, not to the slaveocracy of plantation owners. The common citizen soldiers of the Confederacy were acutely aware of their economic class differences between themselves and the slave-owners. One of their favorite sayings was that the War “Was a rich man’s war, and a poor man’s fight.” Unlike the plantation elite rendition, after the War as “the lost cause,” the common soldiers said that they were fighting for “a southern commonwealth of independent producers.” Later history, as in the fusion politics of 1890s, confirms that the purpose of the War, for common citizens, would have been to create a southern commonwealth of independent producers which was multiracial and egalitarian. An example of how common North Carolinians citizens have dealt with tyranny, after the War, is provided by the example set by Leonidas Lafayette Polk, the State’s first Commissioner of Agriculture, the founder of N. C. State University, and the leader of the North Carolina farmer’s agrarian populist party, whose political motto was,            “equal rights for all. special privilege for none.” Polk confronted the neo-slaveocracy of one-party rule of the Democrats by creating a third political party, which successfully won the campaign for Governor in 1896.  The Encyclopedia of NC noted,           “thousands of desperate farmers abandoned the Democrats, who           called themselves "the white man's party," for the Populists, who           claimed to be the poor man's party. The Democrat (white mans’s)           Party had abolished the right to vote in local self-governments in a           number of counties having Republican majorities. Local officials in           these counties had been appointed by the Democratic majority in the           legislature.” The Encyclopedia could have been more accurate by noting that fusion was a political coalition between common white farmers, and common Black citizens, that “fused” together to elect Republican Governor Russell, in 1896. We argue that this history of fusion would have been the desired outcome of the War for common citizens, but not for the slave-owners. The Democrat slave-owners organized a violent revolt to kill the populist insurgency, including the use of gatling guns and howitzers to kill unnamed Blacks in Wilmington, in 1898. After the Democrat white man’s party coup d’etat of the overthrow of the Republican Wilmington town council, in 1898, North Carolina endured 70 years of one-party tyrannical apartheid of white man Democrat governors. As Josephus Daniels, the owner of the Raleigh News and Observer, put it, in 1899,           “North Carolina is a WHITE MAN'S STATE and WHITE MEN will           rule it, and they will crush the party of Negro domination (Polk’s           Populist Party) beneath a majority so overwhelming that no other           party will ever dare to attempt to establish negro rule here.” One hundred years before the agrarian populism of Polk, North Carolina’s farmers formed a resistance movement to tyrannical royal governors, who had been appointed by the King’s Privy Council. Known as the Regulator Movement, 6,000 farmers joined forces in an armed revolt against royal officials, who were engaged in corruption and fraud, by charging the farmers with excessive fees, falsifying records, and engaging in other mistreatments. The farmer’s called themselves “regulators” because they wanted to regulate their own affairs, free from centralized tyranny. According to the Encyclopedia of North Carolina,           “A new governor, William Tryon, arrived in 1765; he was a British           army colonel and became the cause of renewed unrest, The           Regulators sought a public meeting with colonial officials to       discover "whether the free men of this county labor under any        abuses of power or not." In March 1771, the governor's privy     council advised Tryon to call out the militia and march against the          rebel farmers.” One lesson from that episode comes from Tryon’s seeking advice from his privy council, modeled after the King’s Privy Council, in London. The historical genesis of the Governor’s Privy Council is derived from John Locke’s first constitution of North Carolina, in 1669. The legacy of the rogue governors caused the common citizens to distribute executive power in the hands of many other elected representatives. From that point forward, all of North Carolina’s Constitutions have included a provision for the governor to seek advice from the privy council, renamed to the North Carolina Council of State. The most recent version of the North Carolina Constitution, adopted in 1971, states,           “Sec. 8.  Council of State. The Council of State shall consist of the           officers whose offices are established by this Article.” The “other officers” mentioned in Section 8, are the ten independently state-wide, elected executive officers, who share co-equal executive powers with the Governor. And, it is to this provision that citizens must now turn for insight into how to deal with Governor Cooper’s rogue Covid lockdown tyranny. (Tyranny Slips Quietly Into the Tar Heel State, Laurie Thomas Vass, The CLP News Network, March 29, 2020.) I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the Introduction of a much longer copyrighted article of the Citizen Liberty Party News Network, for July 13, 2020. The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. Governor Cooper’s Illegal and Unconstitutional Covid Lockdown Edicts. Section 2. The Inadequacy of Reforming the Defective General Statute 166A. Section 3. The Constitutional Amendment Imperative to Protect Citizen’s Right to Work. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Democrat Party Socialism, and is titled, The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 52. July 4, 2020 CLP Topic: Republican Vichy Collaborators The Republican Party After Gorsuch.   Introduction. This podcast is the introduction to a much longer article titled, The Republican Party After Gorsuch. The full article is available at www.clpnewsnetwork.com Since 2008, anxious listeners have been calling into the Rush Limbaugh show asking him if it is time to panic about socialism. Rush always assures his listeners that he will tell them when it is time to panic. Rush generally combines the issue of time to panic with another issue that there is no “pushback,” without ever identifying who or what organization is supposed to be “pushing back.” Rush notes,           “There has yet to be any pushback on this…When there’s no pushback,           you’re gonna feel alone. Not only is there not pushback, the few who do           push back don’t get defended by very many people. You never see any           pushback. You never see anybody responding, so you think that you must be        in the minority.” Tucker Carlson made the same statement about pushing back with regard to the riots,           “No one attempted to stop the Democratic power grab. Where are the           protectors of the American Heritage.” We use the recent Gorsuch decision to explain why the Republicans never confronted the Democrat socialists. (The Restoration of the American Natural Rights Republic: Correcting the Consequences of the Republican Party Abdication of Natural Rights and Individualism, Laurie Thomas Vass. GabbyPress, 2017). The Republicans never pushed back against Black Lives Matter because the Democrats had effectively branded the Republican Party as racist, and the branding by the Democrats was permanently debilitating with a majority of voters on any issue related to social justice. In 2008, the Republicans never pushed back against Obama when he branded them as a racist party, and in 2020, they never pushed back against the rioters. They never attempted to defend themselves or offer their own public relations brand. Being branded as a racist political party did not detract them from the main mission of the National Republican Party to promote corporate cronyism, which they pursue as collaborators with the Democrats. The Establishment Republican Party never pushed back against their branding, because that is not their job, as they see it. Their job is to preserve and protect their heritage of economic advantage. We do not dwell on the legal intricacies of texturalism and originalism in the Gorsuch decision in Bostock, other than to note in passing that “because of” sex redefines the concept of individual natural rights. Prior to Gorsuch, natural rights inured to individual citizens, because they were citizen members of the United States. After Gorsuch, rights inure to gays and trans people because they are members of collectivist identity group, defined by Marxist theology as “oppressed” by the capitalist system. Madison’s Constitution can be interpreted from any texturalist reading, because Madison’s Constitution does not contain the legal maximand of individual freedom  in the Preamble. As the Gorsuch ruling demonstrates, texturalism applied to the Preamble can mean anything. “A more perfect union” depends on whether a more perfect union means more centralized socialism or more state sovereignty freedom. Sandra Sperino, a law professor at the University of Cincinnati, makes this point about texturalism in one of her articles.   She notes that the same text which is used by conservatives to,           “dismiss the statutory discrimination claims of all groups—black and brown          workers, religious minorities, women, people with disabilities, LGBTQ       employees was used by Gorsuch to extend rights to these same groups.” In other words, in one simple stroke, Gorsuch used texturalism to embrace the left’s Marxist ideology of group identity politics, and extended rights to oppressed groups, because of their sex. Our podcast today examines the significance and political implications of the Gorsuch decision on the future of the Republican Party as a repository for natural rights conservatives. We make the point that if the Constitution can mean anything, at anytime, whenever the Court’s majority says it, that it is essential to understand why certain types of Republican appointees are placed on the Court. We disagree with other conservatives who suggest that Gorsuch is a RINO. The only type of Republican that constitutes the Establishment Republican Party are RINOS. We argue that there is no such mythical beast, other than RINOs, that constitute the National Republican Establishment. Gorsuch reflects the ideology of the National Republicans perfectly, and his decision in Bostock was widely acclaimed by the RINO global corporate crony capitalists who run the National Republican Party. We argue that if there is any mythical political beast in America, it is the so-called conservative legal movement, that Gorsuch was rumored to be a member of, during his confirmation hearing. We argue that Trump, the man, is a pragmatist, who wakes up every day trying to figure out how to make America great. We argue that Trump, the man, is not a Republican RINO, but rather a populist, who loves the American people, and a nationalist, who loves the Nation. Trump, the man, does not have a coherent ideology of individualism. When he counterpunches against Pelosi or Schumer, he never places his counterpunch into a coherent ideology of individual freedom, in contrast to the Democrat’s socialism. But, Trump voters have extended to Trump their own natural rights ideology, and those followers are bewildered by the Gorsuch decision, and bewildered by why the Republicans never confronted the Democrat rioters. The Trump followers have been advised by Limbaugh, to continue to vote for Republicans, but, after 30 years of broadcasting the same message, Limbaugh’s political strategy of voting for Republicans is not working to preserve the national culture of individual liberty. In answer to a caller’s question, after Gorsuch, who asks “Why Keep Voting Republican?” Limbaugh answers,           “Here’s the answer: “Because even now, there is no reasonable           alternative.   There isn’t anybody else to vote for.” This is the same advice Jared Kushner gives to Trump about going easy on the rioters. Kushner assures Trump that Trump voters have nowhere else to go. It is the same answer the Democrats have given to Black voters since 1964. Black voters have nowhere else to go, other than continue to vote for the Democrats. The Gorsuch decision lays bare the irreconcilable conflict between a culture based upon individualism and a culture based upon collectivist group identity. There is nothing in the Republican ideology of crony global corporatism about individualism. On the other hand, there is nothing incompatible between a globalist corporate seamless economy and a globalist, collectivist, socialist dictatorship. The Republican Party, and the elite donor class of corporations, after Gorsuch, will increase the intensity of their efforts to destroy Trump’s Make America Great because national sovereignty is incompatible with corporate globalism. We argue that a more accurate description of the National Republican Establishment is Vichy Republican Collaborators with the socialist Democrats. In her recent article, History Will Judge the Complicit, on the origins of the French elite class Vichy collaboration with the Nazis, Anne Applebaum asks, “Why have Republican leaders abandoned their principles?” Her article is mostly an anti-Trump screed, but it contains a valuable nugget of history about wealthy Vichy collaborators, in France, that describes the Republican Party after Gorsuch. She explains, that in the historical context of French Nazi collaboration, a collaborator is,           “Someone who works with the enemy, with the occupying power, with           the dictatorial regime. In this negative sense, collaborator is closely           related to another set of words: collusion, complicity,           connivance…collaborator carries an implication of treason: betrayal of           one’s nation, of one’s ideology, of one’s morality, of one’s values.” Applied to the Republican Establishment today, she notes,           “the (historical) analogy makes sense. The point is not to compare           Trump to Hitler or Stalin; the point is to compare the experiences of high-          ranking members of the American Republican Party, especially those who   work most closely with the White House, to the experiences of           Frenchmen   in 1940, or of East Germans in 194. These are experiences of people who        are forced to accept an alien ideology or a set of values that are in sharp conflict with their own.” Applied to Republicans Vichy Collaborators, they tolerate Trump, but collaborate with Democrats to extend the globalist ideology of a one-world government.   This concludes our introduction to our podcast, which is available at podbean. The much longer article is available at www.clpnewsnetwork.com The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. After Gorsuch, The Death of the Republican Crony Capitalist Party. Section 2. Trumpicans and the Right’s Political Bargain With Republicans. Conclusion: Divided We Stand: The Country Is Hopelessly Split. The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire historical text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

Introduction.  Out podcast today is titled, Chinese Covid Lockdowns, Black Economic Dysphoria, Global Crony Capitalism, and the Killing of George Floyd, and the podcast is the introduction to a much longer article. We begin our podcast with the ideological distinction about societal racism revealed in Rush Limbaugh’s discussion with 3 Black media hosts on the Black radio program The Morning Breakfast Club.  Rush explains that he initially sought out the discussion to see if he could find common understanding with Black activists about the killing of George Floyd. Most of his commentary was with one of the three hosts, named Charlamagne tha God, (hereinafter CTG).  The distinction we make, using Rush’s discussion, is the difference between an individualistic perspective and a group-identity collectivist perspective about racism, in the United States.  Those ideological differences are irreconcilable, and we argue that the two ideologies cannot be reconciled, under Madison’s Constitution.  Part of our argument is that the United States, under Madison’s representative republic, ended in the failure of a centralized global elite tyranny, disconnected from the will of the voters.  We make a distinction between the rules of civil procedure in the Constitution of the United States, and the promise of liberty in the American Declaration. The two documents are not connected in Madison’s Constitution.  This is the same distinction between the United States, and the American promise of liberty in the Declaration that Candace Howze writes about in HuffPost.  She states,            “I admit it, the idea of America is super cool. It really sounds amazing and    yes, it’s a geographically and culturally influential and beautiful place. But     America isn’t really America.”  We agree with her point that the nation of the United States is not the same thing as America.  The founding documents of the new nation were Jefferson’s Declaration, followed by the nation’s first Constitution, The Articles of Confederation, drafted by Thomas Burke, of Hillsborough, N. C., and ratified in 1781. And third, Madison’s Constitution of 1787, followed by the Bill of Rights, in 1791.   Madison organized 38 elites, who met in secret, and executed a quiet coup in replacing the Articles with his Constitution. His rules did not provide a mechanism for citizens to protect their own liberty from the current entrenched elite tyranny.   Only 37 elites signed the Constitution because one elite signed twice, once for himself, and second as a proxy for another elite, not in attendance on the signing day.   Not one common citizen participated in the drafting, and not one common citizen signed the document.   The distinction about the ideology of racism revealed in Rush’s discussion is relevant for the broader distinction in logic between the social construction of reality of socialists and the philosophy of empiricism in Western logic.   In the social construction of reality, the mental image of the cop killing Floyd will never cease to be a useful tool for promoting the socialist agenda because it so perfectly confirms the prior premise that America is a brutal white supremacist society.   We argue that the difference in language and logic between socialists and conservatives is one reason, but not the only reason, why the differences between socialists and conservatives are irreconcilable, under Madison’s Constitution,   As the discussion between Rush and CTG shows, the cultural and moral values of the two-world views, individualism and collectivism, do not connect anywhere. There is no common ideological agreement on the mission of the Nation.   The Black Democrat socialists are correct that the United States must change its economic system, but they are incorrect to argue that the economic change needed is a socialist dictatorship.   The Black socialists will never reject the premise of socialism because their end goal is to replace the existing Constitution with a panel of socialist elites who make judgments about income fairness and justice.   The panel of socialist elites is similar in concept to the non-constitutional authority of Democrat governors to judge what is essential and non-essential, and how long the Covid lockdowns continue.   Rush began his discussion with CTG by making the obligatory genuflection to the murder of Floyd by cops.   Rush states,           “RUSH: ‘Cause I’m fed up with it. (the police killing Black people) I mean,           I’m not tolerant of any of them, but I’m fed up with it, Charlamagne. None         of this, to me, and I know that you’re gonna disagree with me on this. To          me, this is not America.” CTG responded, not on the topic of the cops killing Floyd, but with a much broader statement about institutional, systemic racism.                     CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD: “Oh, no, it’s definitely America.” Rush interprets racism from the individualistic perspective that individual white people are not racists, and CTG interprets the killing from the perspective that the entire white American society is racist. Rush makes his case by using the individualistic evidence that white DNA does not contain a gene for racism.             Rush: “White supremacy to me means somebody, a white person who thinks           that they’re better, that they’re superior, that the white race is superior based       on DNA, based on science. White supremacy and white privilege is a catch-          all for the way the country was designed. It’s a way of saying that America         as constituted will never be fair, will never be not racist. It’s a way of laying          the groundwork for getting rid of the Constitution and transforming the        country, starting over into something it was never intended to be.” CTG does not disagree with Rush about getting rid of the Constitution, but counters with a robust condemnation of the capitalist economic system, that he cites as evidence of systemic, institutional racism.   His main point is that the economic system only works for white privileged people, like Rush.             CTG: “I do think America does work, but it works for the people that it was    designed to work for. It doesn’t work for everybody else the way it works          for you. Let’s not act like there isn’t 40 million people who have filed   for     unemployment in America, folks that have been sitting around   the last three      months waiting on stimulus checks, more than 44% of those people have been   denied unemployment checks are still waiting on ’em tocome.        People of all races are broke. They don’t know where their next meal is         coming from.”   Rush bristled at being called a privileged white person, and noted that he had worked hard for his success, and that if he could do it, anyone could achieve success.           RUSH: “Well, it can work for everyone. That’s the point of America, it can     for anybody who   wants to adapt to it, for anybody who wants to try to take    advantage of the unique opportunities that exist in the United States.We’re          the only nation that’s ever enshrined the concept of individual liberty and       freedom in our founding documents.” The error in the statement Rush made is to conflate and combine the American promise of liberty, in Jefferson’s Declaration, with Madison’s civil rules of procedure, of the United States, that permanently stacked the economic deck in favor the natural aristocracy, which eventually ended in the crony corporate globalist tyranny. Madison feared that the majority of common citizens would use their majority voting power to oppress the minority of wealthy citizens, and his rules for the Senate, the Supreme Court, and runaway slaves, were all part of his grand design to overweight the power of the elite against the common citizens. While Rush can see and condemn the unelected power of the deep state, he cannot bring himself to extend that condemnation to Madison’s rules, which empowered the deep state crony capitalist system of the Republican Party, which is odd because Rush often cites Codevilla’s work on the American ruling class. Rush provides the right analysis of Codevilla’s ruling class, but he never identifies the actors who make up the deep state ruling class. Those actors are the corporate military industrial complex, the unelected deep state bureaucrats, and the newly enriched technology information companies. Combined, those actors constitute the crony corporate capitalist class. Rush states, that from his individualistic perspective, the collectivist notion of white privilege, and its near cousin, white supremacy, does not exist, as it is applied by Black activists to all white people, collectively.                     RUSH: “No, wait a minute, I don’t buy into the notion of white privilege.           ‘Cause I hate it, we’re all Americans here and I don’t like the fact that           you’re (using the term white privilege)”   The two are talking past each other, and their discussion never connects on a common understanding of racism, or the mission of the Nation.   Rush misses CTG’s ideological point entirely. Without the notion of white privilege, CTG cannot make his extended argument that the capitalist system is systemically racist. And, without the ideology of racism, CTG cannot get to his main goal of eradicating the individualism of capitalism.            CTG: “Here’s the thing. I think that we gotta stop acting like white           supremacy isn’t done by design, the whole function of systemic racism is to       marginalize black people… So, once again, we need people that are willing         to dismantle the mechanism of white supremacy, period. This is America’s    fault, and the War on Drugs, mass incarceration, segregation, slavery, all   of those things are and have been the proverbial knee on the back of black       folks’ neck. And ’til somebody’s willing to dismantle the mechanism of        white supremacy, nothin’ is gonna change.” CTG misses Rush’s ideological point entirely. CTG assumes that the current crony capitalist system is the only form of capitalism. Rush is arguing for a free market entrepreneurial economy, but Rush fails to make the distinction between crony capitalism and entrepreneurial capitalism.  Two days after his conversation with CTG, Rush had an opportunity to reflect on the significance of his call with one of his callers, named Sherry. Rush reverts to his earlier, individualistic interpretation of white supremacy.            Rush: “White supremacy to me means somebody, a white person who thinks           that they’re better, that they’re superior, that the white race is superior based       on DNA, based on science.I think, Sherry, that white supremacy is another       name for hate. And it’s an umbrella under which a number of guilty traits     that are alleged to part of being white. It’s a way of laying the     groundwork           for getting rid of the Constitution and transforming the country,          starting over           into something it was never intended to be. That’s really what        the ultimate purpose of all of these terms is, I believe.”   Rush is correct in his assessment of the end goal of the socialist Black activists, like CTG, is to use the hatred of racism as a weapon to eradicate the Constitution and replace it with a socialist dictatorship.   CTG is correct in his analysis that Madison’s Constitution stacked the deck in favor of the natural aristocracy. CTG is incorrect to argue that the main economic issue to be solved in the United States is racism.   The bigger war to be fought by the Black activists is over the disappearing Black middle class, and fighting against the global corporate, and deep state elites, who use Madison’s rules to distort the flow of economic benefits to themselves.   The bigger issue for CTG to solve, is what type of economic system generates fair economic outcomes for Black people, while preserving individual freedom.   The statement by CTG that the economic system only works for white supremacists, like Rush, needs to be revised slightly. The U. S. economic system only works for Black people when the benefits of economic growth and prosperity are fairly distributed to them, as reward for their work.   The solution to racism is the same as it has always been, since Jefferson’s Declaration: a fair economic system where all individuals are treated as equals, and obtain their just rewards.   Or, to paraphrase the political slogan of agrarian populists, in the 1880s, who confronted the same set of unfair policies as Blacks do today: Equal Rights For All. Special Privileges for None. (Equal Rights For All. Special Privileges for None. Re-examining the Agrarian Arguments Against a Centralized American Government, Laurie Thomas Vass, GabbyPress. 2017.   The solution to racism is more democracy, and more economic freedom, at the most local level of government, not more globalist, centralized tyranny, under Madison’s flawed document.   Oddly, CTG is great at pointing out the flaws in the existing political system, but woefully deficient in offering a compelling economic alternative to crony capitalism for the Black middle class to achieve individual freedom and success.   In the Black social construction of reality, CTG adopts a Pollyanna economic myth that the existing crony capitalist economic structure can be modified to function, like Chinese Communist state capitalism, and that racism will disappear when the agents of government take wealth from the rich and give to the poor.   And, to help CTG imagine that fair economic system, it is not a communist dictatorship of the proletariat. We cite the historical example of Durham’s Black Wall Street, in the 1920s, as the goal of Black economic freedom to achieve financial success.   The most fair economic system that generates fairness and freedom is called competitive free market entrepreneurialism. (The American Millennial Attraction to Socialism. Laurie Thomas Vass. GabbyPress. 2020).   We conclude that the competitive free market entrepreneurial economy cannot be obtained under the existing Constitution, because the ideology of racism, as a tool of Democrat socialists, prohibits authentic discussion between people like Rush Limbaugh and CTG about a better economic system.   This podcast is the introduction of a much longer article, available at the clpnewsnetwork.com   The other sections of the longer article include:   Section 1. The Origins of Modern Racism in the United States.   Section 2. Black Economic Dysphoria Under Global Corporate Capitalism and the Covid Lockdowns.   Section 3. Globalism and the Killing of George Floyd. Conclusion: Re-connecting a New Constitution to the Principles of Liberty in the Declaration. The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire historical text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.  I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.  

Each week, the Citizens Liberty Party News Network prepares the text and audio of a podcast that argues why the transition to a new nation is unavoidable. We believe that the ideological differences between socialists and conservatives are irreconcilable and that conservatives must prepare for what comes after the National civil dissolution. We advocate the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, based upon a democratic republic of states. The most recent text and audio is available for free, for one week. The entire archive of all podcasts is available for a subscription of $30 per year. The website is owned and managed by a North Carolina constitutional economist, Laurie Thomas Vass. You can learn more about her at her publishing website, gabby press.com

Introduction. Our podcast today is the introduction to a much longer article titled, Counting the Constitution as a COVID Death. Our podcast uses the CDC distinction made in counting Covid deaths, as it applies to the death of the U. S. Constitution. The Constitution did not die because of Covid, it died with Covid. The Constitution was already sick, with underlying medical conditions, and resided in a nursing home for old republics. The Constitution had a weakened immune system, which reduced its ability to withstand an attack from a virulent virus called socialism. We argue that the Nation is evenly divided between Democrat socialists, who want more socialism, and conservatives, who want nothing to do with socialism. The broad framework of the differences are individualism versus collectivism, and globalism versus national sovereignty. Victor Davis Hanson writes,           “Progressives believe the story of America has most often been one of           discrimination, original sin, and a need for constant repentance and           reparations for a flawed past… Red- and blue-state America was already           divided before the covid epidemic hit. Globalization had enriched the           East    Coast and West Coast corridors but hollowed out much in between.” Conservatives reject entirely this starting socialist premise about slavery, but endorse Hanson’s interpretation about globalization as one of the irreconcilable differences with socialists.. We do not argue about the credibility or legitimacy of the socialist Covid panic arguments. The socialists are using the Covid public relations panic to promote their desire to implement socialism, and their arguments reveal the stark contrast in ideology with conservatives. We use the issues raised by the Covid panic to argue that the ideological differences are irreconcilable, and that there is no common language or cultural values that can bridge the differences. We argue that the current Constitution, of 1787, is incapable of resolving the ideological split because the Constitution is founded on balancing the financial interests between social classes, not on resolving ideological differences between collectivism and individualism. Madison drafted the Constitution under the assumption that the citizens, both rich and poor, would always value national sovereignty over foreign sovereignty. The death knell of the Constitution sounded when both political parties embraced globalism over national sovereignty. Madison assumed, as did John Adams, that a national core moral value of individual liberty could be taken for granted, and that the main issue to solve in his constitutional rules was the class conflict between the natural aristocracy and common citizens. Madison feared the collective voting power of the common citizens, and drafted his rules to avoid the outcome of a tyrannical majority of common citizens from oppressing the virtuous minority of wealthy citizens. As a result of Madison’s fear of common citizens, the citizens have no constitutional mechanism to overcome the tyranny of the Covid lockdown of socialist governors. As a result of his focus on checking and balancing financial interests, Madison left out entirely the mechanism for citizens to defend their own liberty, if the minority of wealthy citizens ever gained monopoly power in the government. His Constitution ended in a centralized tyrannical minority using the Covid panic to oppress the common citizen majority. The only peaceful way out of this conflict is to divide the nation into two new nations. Madison disconnected his Preamble from the principles of liberty in Jefferson’s Preamble in the Declaration, and it is a myth in recounting the history of America to combine and conflate the ideology of the two documents. “We hold these truths as self evident,” is not the moral equivalent of “in order to create a more perfect union.” Adams explained that Madison’s Constitution would only work if the citizens always held the core public purpose of liberty for the new nation. Adams wrote,                 “Public spiritedness is the only Foundation of the Republic…There must           be a positive Passion for the public good...established in the Minds of the           People, or there can be no Republican Government, nor any real           liberty...Men must be ready, they must pride themselves, and be happy           to sacrifice their private Pleasure, Passions and Interest.”   As Adams prepared to leave the Office of President, in 1801, he realized that Madison’s Constitution was flawed. He wrote that nothing in the system seemed to be representing what Adams thought was the broader public purpose of liberty.                     “The two political parties that had come into existence had defined financial             ends. We have no   Americans in America. The Federalists have been   no           more Americans than the anties...Jefferson    had a party. Hamilton           had a party, but the commonwealth  had none. The two parties would  settle wealth and power upon a minority. It will be accomplished by a  national           debt, paper corporations, and offices, civil and military. These will           condense king, lords and commons, a monied faction and an armed           faction in one interest.”   Adams predicted that the outcome of Madison’s constitutional rules would be to divide the nation into two groups, creditors and debtors. Adams was correct that Madison’s rules would divide the nation into two groups, but he could not have foreseen that the division would be between globalist socialists and national sovereignty conservatives. As was the case in 1801, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats, today, defend the public purpose of liberty. They are collaborators in the deep state allegiance to globalism. Part of our argument about the death of the Constitution is related to the absence of shared cultural values between globalist socialists and national sovereignty conservatives. There are two distinct views of the mission of the Nation, and nothing binds those two irreconcilable views together, as one Nation, under God. The immediate danger to liberty of the Covid public relations panic is that sizable majorities of both Democrats and Republicans favor the socialist solution of confining people to their homes, detaining sick people in government facilities, banning U.S. citizens from entering the country, government takeovers of businesses, conscription of health care workers, suspension of religious services, and even criminalizing the spread of "misinformation" about the virus. In citizen surveys about Covid, the researchers at Chilton et al. stated,           "Even when we explicitly told half of our sample that the policies may           violate the Constitution, the majority of registered voters supported all eight restrictions, including the speech restrictions. The two nations within a Nation must divorce because a majority of citizens no longer support the Bill of Rights. The Spirit of Liberty, under which the Nation was conceived, in 1775, must be resurrected in a new nation, which has better safeguards to protect liberty, and better guardians to protect liberty, than the globalist cabal that despises individual freedom. We conclude that the new Nation of the Democratic Republic of America can correct Madison’s fear of the common citizens by converting his representative republic into a democratic republic that provides more power to citizens to protect their liberties and freedoms. This podcast is the introduction to a much longer article, that is available for free, for one week at clpnewsnetwork.com. The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. The Constitutional Authority of the Emergency Declarations to Lock Down Citizens. Section 2. Covid Death Counts and Mail-in Ballots. Section 3. Covid Re-open Protests and the Elimination of Gun Rights. Section 4. Covid Constitutional Death in the Era of Obamagate. The entire historical archive of all Citizen Liberty Party News Network articles are available of an annual fee of $30. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.

Introduction. Our podcast today is titled The U. S. Covid Economic Recovery Plan, and begins with an alternative to the conventional political view that the U. S. economy will “bounce back” to pre-lockdown levels. We tend to abstract from the conventional economic wisdom that “bouncing back” to the economy that existed prior to March 17, 2020 is a great idea. The economic structure in America was already deeply flawed and damaged from 20 years of economic integration with the rest of the world and particularly China. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, U.S. National COVID Economic Collapse and the Collapse of the U.S. Dollar. (April 14, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3575761). The rate of private capital investment had already begun to decline in the last two quarters of 2019, primarily due to the structural weaknesses in the economy that limited capital investment opportunities in small, high tech ventures. Nondurable goods manufacturing decreased 3.1 percent in the 4th quarter, primarily reflecting a decrease in food and beverage and tobacco products manufacturing. Durable goods manufacturing decreased 2.4 percent, which was more than accounted for by a decrease in motor vehicles, bodies and trailers, and parts manufacturing. The last two quarters of 2019 economic performance would not represent the kind of economy that would be desirable to “bounce back” to, and while we do not dwell on the logic or reality of the arguments supporting the “bounce back” view, we disclose our ideological predisposition that the entire notion of “bouncing back” is wildly naïve and Pollyanna optimistic.   We argue that the 70% of the U. S. economic structure that was locked down resembles the shambles of the German economy after May 8, 1945. Part of the German economy that was connected to large global corporations was still functioning, but the domestic economic structure in Germany had been reduced to rubble. The full extent of the U. S. economic damage has not been experienced yet, because the economic damage to the commercial rental market and the mortgage loan market have not yet been reflected in the data on the number of citizens who no longer have an income to pay rent or mortgages. We argue that the domestic spending part of the U. S. GDP has been reduced to rubble by the covid lockdowns, but that 30% of the corporate crony capitalist economy that is connected to the global economy is still functioning. Something like the Marshall Plan is required for the U. S. economy, to repair the economic damage caused by the lockdowns. The goal of the covid economic recovery plan is to build a free enterprise, new venture creation, entrepreneurial economy in each metro region that operates independent of the global crony corporate capitalist system. One mission of the Marshall Plan was to prevent the spread of Communism in Europe. We argue that the contemporary U. S. covid recovery plan must also prevent the spread of Chinese communism, which entails a policy response to limiting the damage caused by the promotion of the China trade deals by crony corporate capitalism, such as the members of the Business Roundtable and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce. The political power of global corporate crony capitalism is responsible for implementing the trade deals with China, which weakened the industrial diversity of the U. S. domestic economy, leading to a bifurcation between a global corporate part, and a domestic consumer spending services sector part. As a result of the bifurcation, the domestic services sector accounted for 70% of all GDP, and 80% of total civilian employment. The economic effect of the lock down was worsened because of the lack of economic diversification in the U. S. economic structure. The economic recovery plan aims to restore a balance in the GDP between domestic investment in manufacturing and consumer domestic spending. Private domestic annual  investment in manufacturing should be increased from around 12% of GDP to about 25%, as a result of this plan. Total private employment in the services sector should drop from around 80% to around 60%, or to about 50 million workers. Total manufacturing employment in both direct production and indirect supply chains should increase from around 12 million workers to around 20 million workers, or to around 16% of total private employment. We argue that the U. S. covid economic recovery plan has the following policy goals: Target private sector capital investment in the 280 metro regions with a population over 150,000, the minimum size for self-renewing, self-generating entrepreneurial economic growth. Target private sector capital investment to new product technology commercialization and new venture creation, within those 280 regions. Integrate the current Trump economic opportunity zones policy into an advanced technology cluster strategy in each metro region, so that technology firms that like to located close to each other can trade with each other and share tacit knowledge. Integrate the existing Trump advanced skill training apprenticeship program into the advanced technology cluster strategy so that future new ventures, in each metro region, have a consistent supply of highly trained technology workers. Provide each region’s private commercial real estate consulting firms with new econometric models developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis to order to target capital investment to the development of regional industrial value chains and inter-industry supply chains that service the new technology clusters. Modify the existing SEC crowdfunding rules for raising private capital by broadening the scope of the existing Reg D Rule 506, and creating new forms of regional closed end funds that target capital to the region’s new and existing firms in the emerging technology clusters. Implement an explicit system of regional tacit technology knowledge creation and diffusion using blockchain technology to share regional technological knowledge among investors and entrepreneurs. The great economic benefit of the U. S. covid economic recovery plan is that it is private-sector driven, allowing private financial and business interests in each region to select the policy approach best suited to that region. By fixing the regional economies in 280 metro regions, the nation’s economic weakness of over-dependence on consumer spending, and inadequate business investment would be fixed. In addition, the rate of capital investment in small, high tech firms would increase, leading to a recovery in America’s technological superiority, that would not be easily stolen by the Chinese Communists. In other words, we argue that this plan does not require much Federal government oversight, regulations, or increased federal taxes to implement. The Federal government’s role is to collect the economic data, and organize the data into regional econometric models that can be used by citizens interested in promoting regional economic growth in each metro region. This introduction is a part of a much longer podcast, available for free, for one week, at www.clpnewsnetwork.com. The other sections of the longer podcast include: Section 1. An Economic Policy Dispute With the Neo-classical Productivity School. Section 2. Re-Envisioning Regional Economies as the Blockchain Knowledge Creation Engines of Economic Growth. Section 3. Using BEA Models to Target Regional Capital Investment to High Growth Technology Clusters. Section 4. Commercial Real Estate Regional Industrial Technology Parks and the Regional Geographic Scope of the Economic Recovery Plan. Section 5. Regional Capital Market Infrastructure. The entire historical archive of all CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted CLP podcast for May 20, 2020, and is titled, The U. S. Covid Economic Recovery Plan.

The American Millennial Attraction to Socialism   Millennials are attracted to socialism because they believe that the socialist economic systems are more fair than their concept of American capitalism, which is the crony corporate capitalist version of capitalism. Our book extends the analysis of the Annual Report on US Attitudes Toward Socialism to explain why so many young Americans are attracted to socialism. We present the four major economic models in the world in order to help millennials better understand their possible choices about the best economic system, judged from their own perspective of fairness and social justice. We explain that innovation economics is the most fair system, and that if millennials understood better their possible choices about the best economic system, judged from their own perspective of fairness and social justice, they would switch their allegiance from socialism to entrepreneurial economics. $21.99. Available at Ingram/Aerio https://bit.ly/2zwdyik About the author. Laurie Thomas Vass is a regional economist and a constitutional economist. Her political ideology is natural rights conservative. She is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with an undergraduate degree in Political Science and a Masters degree in Regional Planning. She is the owner of GabbyPress, and the author of 10 books and over 118 scholarly articles on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). Her books and articles are intended to provide the logical and philosophical justification for a Democratic Republic, in contrast to Madison's representative republic. www.gabbypress.com  

Episode 48. May 4, 2020 CLP Topic: The Destruction of America Obama's Motive For Framing General Flynn. Introduction. We begin our podcast today by honoring the kids who were killed at Kent State, 50 years ago, by agents of the government for protesting a hopelessly immoral war and the corrupt Nixon kelptocracy. Fifty years ago, Nixon's kleptocracy was composed primarily of the single force of the military-industrial complex that profited from the death of 58,000 more kids, in Viet Nam, than the four who were killed in Ohio. Our podcast makes a historical analogy that the ruling class kleptocracy that killed the kids at Kent State has expanded and is a more dangerous ruling class elite today, united by their moral arrogance that globalism is a superior social institution than the sovereignty of the representative republic. The three components of the expanded kleptocracy, today, are the crony corporate capitalist members of the Business Roundtable, who stuck citizens with the China trade deals, the globalist socialist Democrat Party of Obama, who attempted to overthrow the Trump Presidency, and the agents of the deep state who attempted to financially assassinate General Flynn in order to destroy President Trump. Obama's motive to destroy Flynn is a part of Obama's promotion of the ruling class global kleptocracy. The American kleptocracy is characterized by a sophisticated global network whose members include world leaders and powerful business people.  The American kleptocrats use their position as the world's reserve currency to send money around the world and launder it through the global network of central bankers.  In a kleptocracy, the elites authorize the agents of government to promote corruption, such as framing General Flynn, and we argue that the FBI acted upon the orders from Obama to continue the Russia hoax, as a part of Obama's strategy of overthrowing the American government. The motivation to destroy and kill to promote corruption is the same in each of the three components of the new and expanded ruling class. We argue that the conservative media's exclusive focus on the injustice to General Flynn, perpetrated by the CIA and FBI, obscures the deeper corruption of Obama and the entire national institutional kleptocracy. We conclude that the historical lesson of Kent State is that the kleptocracy has gotten worse, and the underlying use of hate to stigmatize political enemies is more sophisticated today because the socialist media has become an ally to promote Obama's globalism. People who love liberty must come to grips with the new reality that the ruling class has destroyed the Nation, and that there is nothing of value left remaining in the smoldering ruins of the Constitution. The Constitution of the former United States has been replaced by a corrupt, centralized tyranny that is entirely disconnected from the consent of the governed, and operates outside of, and beyond, the justice system. We conclude that people who love liberty must prepare for what comes next, which is a civil dissolution of the nation into two new nations, a Socialist States of America, and the Democratic Republic of America. This is the introduction of a much longer podcast titled Obama's Motive For Framing General Flynn. This introduction is available at podbean. The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. Using FISA to Frame General Flynn Was Simply a Tool of the Deep State Agents. Section 2. Using Hate as A Political Weapon to Promote Globalism. Section 3. Fingering Obama as A Person of Interest in the Crossfire Hurricane Coup. Section 4. Conclusion: After the Republic. The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free, for one week, at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

Episode 47 April 24, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Democrat Police State Socialism. Shutting Up The Democrat Socialists Shut Down Nazis. Introduction. Our podcast today is titled, Shutting Up the Democrat Socialists Shut Down Nazis. We begin with a recent quote from a shut down Nazi named Susanne Donahue Gray, telling a small business to shut down: Susannne Patricia Donahue-Gray, on LinkedIn “I am sorry but I have to tell you. You guys need to close. You are not an essential business and you are passing germs with the virus. Do you want us all to die? Close the                fuck down, Mother Fuckers.!!!" Our podcast takes issue with the premise of Glenn Beck's recent book, Arguing With Socialists. Beck begins his book with his premise that “all Americans agree on goals.” Beck writes, “All Americans want to send their children to high-quality schools. We all want a lower-cost health care system that works. We all want an increased standard of living and better job opportunities. And we all want to live in peaceful, stable communities. don't forget that in most cases, Americans agree on the problems we face, it's the proposed solutions to the problems that divide us. We all agree that America has a long way to go before it reaches its full potential. On that point, we all stand firmly on common ground.” We disagree with the premise that socialists agree with conservatives about the mission of the Nation. The attitude of Shut Down Nazis is captured by the quote above, “Close the Fuck Down, Mother Fuckers.” Instead, we believe that the ideological differences between shut down socialists and conservatives are irreconcilable and that conservatives must prepare for what comes after the conservatives realize that arguing with socialists is useless. We use the case of the Democrat shut down rhetoric to make our case about the futility of arguing with the socialists. The ultimate outcome of arguing with socialists can be seen in what happened to both the Methodist and Presbyterian churches. Both denominations let socialists begin preaching the social gospel, and not  the gospel of Jesus. After 20 years of arguing with the socialists about the meaning of Jesus, both denominations finally concluded that nothing changes the behavior of socialists because the socialists are intransigent and intolerant of any opinion, other than their own. In other words, the shut down Nazis are totalitarians. They are the fifth column of the political forces in America that are intent on imposing global socialism on conservatives.  One of the worst parts about any dialogue with socialists is that they are smarmy arrogant people and have a unshakable moral arrogance that they are always right. This arrogance makes them act out in rage when they do not get their way. Both churches split into two parts, a traditional part that follows the gospel of Jesus, and the socialist part that preaches the social gospel of global socialism. We argue that the divorce in both churches provides a model for the divorce between the socialist shut down Nazis and natural rights conservatives. Beck's argument is weak because Beck offers no political resolution to the irreconcilable differences between socialists and natural rights patriots, other than continuing to argue with them.. Beck fails to acknowledge that Madison's constitution has a fundamental logical flaw that leads to endless do-loops about the mission of the nation. Some days, Madison's more perfect union means that Black slaves could not be considered citizens and that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territories of the United States. Some days, a more perfect union means that racial segregation, and the ensuing 70 years of racial apartheid, was constitutional, as long as the segregated facilities for Blacks were equal in quality to those of Whites.  Determining what is “More perfect” depends on who sits on the Supreme Court. Michael Schulson, in his article, “The Peril of State Power Amid COVID-19 Pandemic,” points out the Supreme Court can as easily use the government police power to both compel obedience to a vaccine, as to compel involuntary sterilization of Black people. Schulson cites the case of Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which addressed the constitutional issue of how democratic societies respond to the profound threat of highly virulent pathogens, like Covid, while staying democratic. In that case, Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote for the majority.           "On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to     its members. There are manifold restraints to which every person is           necessarily subject for the common good.” This would be the argument today of the shut down Nazis. Several years later, the Supreme Court cited their decision in Jacobson as precedent for their decision in Buck v. Bell, in 1927, that upheld a Virginia eugenics law permitting the forced sterilization of Black people thought to have intellectual disabilities. Writing for the majority, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes cited Jacobson in stating,           "Society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing           their kind (uppity Blacks)…The principle that sustains compulsory           vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the fallopian tubes." In North Carolina, the decision in Buck granted the state Democrats the power to sterilize 50,000 blacks, against their will. The forced sterilization in North Carolina ended in the 1970s. The term used by white Democrats in North Carolina to describe insane blacks, scheduled for sterilization, was uppity. This is the same logic used today by the Democrat shut down Nazis, that the re-open protestors are insane and selfish because they want to infect other people. In Jacobsson, Buck and Covid Nazis today, their logic is that Constitutional rights can be overridden by emergency orders in the interest of public safety. Which brings us back to the argument that Constitutional rights mean whatever the Court say they mean. As Kenneth Arrow's Impossibility Theorem explains, Madison's Preamble did not connect the mission of the Constitution to the principles of government declared in the Declaration of Independence. The recursive proposition in Madison's logical flaw is that a “more perfect union” can mean anything, at any time, depending on what the majority of the Supreme Court decides that more “perfect union” means at that time. The danger to liberty that results from Madison's logical flaw means that socialists do not ever have to agree with conservatives about the mission of the nation. The socialist interpretation of a more perfect union is as equally valid as the natural rights interpretation. Sterilizing uppity Blacks is as equally valid as the lock down rules. In the absence of a national goal in the Preamble, it is impossible to resolve the conflicts under Madison's representative republic. (Who Is It In America That Is Responsible For Implementing the Trade Agreements With China?) Voters have no method of choosing nationalism over globalism under Madison's two party, first-past-the-post political system. The nation will continue to recursively fluctuate in a system that leads to chaos. All the socialist have to do is promote mail-in ballots, and win total control over the lives of conservatives, as the two globalist health experts did in promoting the Covid shut down.  “Do you want all of us to die?” asks Donahue-Gray, a shut down Nazi, intent on imposing her views on conservatives. “Then, stay the fuck at home.” Or, in response to William Bennett and Seth Leibsohn's article “Coronavirus Lessons: Fact and Reason vs. Paranoia and Fear,” another shut down Nazi claims that the “The fools who wrote this should be tried for attempted homicide by disinformation.” The statements by shut down Nazis about Covid underscores the fundamental differences about the mission of the nation and belies Beck's idea that arguing with the shut down Nazis will change their behavior. We argue that conservatives are in a constitutional crisis with shut down Nazis over individual freedom, and that Madison's flawed representative republic does not provide conservatives with a method to modify or abolish the contract. We begin our argument with the observation that in the last week of March 2020, there were two possible government responses to Covid. If the agents in government viewed citizens in their capacity as individual rational beings, the correct response of the CDC and Surgeon General would have been to issue warnings to citizens to wash their hands and avoid crowded areas. If the officials in government viewed citizens in a collectivist group identity perspective, they would issue orders to lock the citizens down, because the central tenet of global collectivism is that the “experts” know better than the citizens themselves how to pursue the public purpose. The lock down Nazis won a significant victory in their silent coup to convert the nation from an individualistic society to a communal collectivist society, without ever firing a shot. The lock down Nazis promote the public relations panic about Covid death rates, and believe themselves morally superior to tell other citizens not to disobey agents of government. (“Close the Fuck Down. Mother Fuckers.”) There is overlap between the fifth column of lock down Nazis and the Democrat voters that favors mail-in ballots, and oppose voter ID. The correct title of this group is anti-democratic totalitarians. In totalitarian societies, there is only one official version of the truth, and all other opinions must be eradicated. The lock down Nazis, also known as Karen, are the foot soldiers in imposing the official globalist version of the truth. When Zuckerberg, and FaceBook, shut down Reopen protest groups because of “misinformation,” he was enacting 1984 doublespeak. It was not “misinformation” that Zuck disliked, it was content that did not support his totalitarian views of globalism. The lock down Nazis are everywhere, including my tiny home community of Sunset Beach, N. C., where they have been successful in closing access and parking to the beach, and unleashing the police to enforce the emergency rules. Jacqueline Trovato is the lead shut down Nazi and has her own FaceBook page with 370 members. In response to the Reopen NC protest in Raleigh, she wrote,           “Can you understand now why we don't want people from Raleigh           here? This is so disturbing. The good people who are staying home           and safe in Raleigh are going to be infected now when they go the           stores. Activities like this will only prolong the suffering. The protest   is allowed as long as protestors follow social distancing rule. They           aren't. Her husband, Jim Thomas, an attorney, added,           “They do not have the right to protest in violation of distancing rules!           When did everyone start ignoring the law???” Jim's logic is easy to understand, an executive order, for him, has the same force as a law passed by the General Assembly, or a provision of the Constitution.   Except that North Carolina and Sunset Beach are governed by a system of separation of power and checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches, not a police state regime. The Governor of North Carolina used the Covid extended duration of time to seize power, that is different than the shorter duration of a hurricane or civil riot. The Governor's order is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the Governor, who both makes the law, as he goes along in an extended period of time, and enforces the law that he makes. Sunset Beach, N. C. has a total population of 4000 citizens and 19 police officers, for a ratio of one officer per 210 citizens. The national average ratio for towns less than 25,000, is 1 officer per 600 citizens. In collaboration with the Governor's unconstitutional seizure of power, the overbearing police state presence in Sunset Beach bolsters the shut down Nazis in their desire to lock down the citizens. Our podcast uses the arguments of the lock down Nazis to provide three perspectives of American citizens in the Covid battle, all of which support our conclusion that conservatives must divorce the socialists. The first perspective of citizens is the global leftist perspective of conservatives, which is based upon group identity politics and the pursuit of social justice. In their minds, the re-open patriots are terrorists for showing up at protests with guns. We argue that unless conservatives understand how lefties view them that the full realization of how dangerous they are will not be gained. Our second perspective is how the left's perspective of conservatives affects the self-perspective of natural rights conservatives. Conservatives have been co-opted by the language and tactics of socialists. We argue that unless, and until, the conservative movement breaks free of the leftist mindset that they will become useful idiots in the coming socialist slavery. Finally, we argue that the correct perspective for viewing the Nation's mission begins with a restoration of the principles of Locke and Jefferson about the function of government in a natural rights republic. We conclude that the advice given to conservatives in our book A Civil Dissolution: Solving America's Intractable Problem of Socialism provides a better way to deal with the lock down Nazis than the banal advice of Beck about continuing to arguing with them. Madison's Constitution is not doing its job, and the natural rights of citizens are being destroyed by the consolidated, centralized, tyrannical power of political elites in Washington, aided and abetted by the lock down Nazis. On every single principle of a natural rights republic, the socialists have an alien, subversive view of America, based upon communal, socialist values. We explain that socialists do not have a moral allegiance to the constitutional rule of law, and that they have no concept of God-given natural individual rights, because they have no concept of God. We conclude that a civil dissolution of the nation into socialist slave states and liberty free states is the best possible strategy to avoid future bloodshed. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. The short version of this podcast is available, for free, at our page at Podbean. The other sections in the longer article are: Section 1. The Perspective of the Lock Down Nazis about Conservatives. Section 2. The Perspective of Conservatives About Themselves In the Covid Lockdown Debate. Section 3. How the American Constitution Sets the Terms and Conditions About How Citizens Make Collective Decisions. Conclusion: The Two American Political Factions Hate Each Other. The full text of this article is available, for free, for one week at our CLP News Network website. The entire historical archive of all our podcasts is available at our website for an annual subscription of $30.

Episode 45 April 13, 2020. CLP Topic Category: Economic Collapse.  U. S. National Covid Economic Collapse and the Collapse of the U. S. Dollar. Our podcast today is titled, U. S. National Covid Economic Collapse and the Collapse of the U. S. Dollar. This podcast audio and text is just the introduction to a much longer article, available at the clpnewsnetwork.com.  The other sections of the longer article are:  Section 1. The Origins of the Economic Collapse. Section 2. The Collapse of the National GDP. Section 3. The Effect of the GDP Collapse on the U. S. Dollar as International Reserve Currency. Section 4. The Collapse of the U. S. Dollar. Section 5. Trump's Economic Goals for Economic Growth.  The full audio and text of this podcast is available for free, for one week. The entire historical archive of all CLP podcasts is available for an annual subscription of $30. Introduction: How The Covid Political Public Relations Panic Damaged the U. S. Economy. Our podcast extends the analysis of Angelo Codevilla about the economic effect of Trump's initial March 15, 2020,  “15 days to stop the spread,” decision  to shut the U. S. economy down, and his subsequent decision to shut the nation's economy down for an additional 30 days, on March 30, 2020. In his article, “Is the President Forgetting Politics 101?” Codevilla combines a political analysis with an economic analysis in order to describe President Trump's decision to shut the U. S. economy down. Codevilla's analysis begins with the identification of an American “ruling class” that is at war with President Trump's effort to defend the sovereign national economic interest.  The ruling class wants globalism, not Trump's economic nationalism.  Codevilla writes,  “The ruling class savors the grip on us that it has achieved during the past three weeks—above all the presumption that we must quietly accept non-legal decrees from on high. It will not give up that grip without a fight. President Trump has placed himself on a path that leads to political suicide. He did this by surrendering to the ruling class—Drs. Anthony Fauci, Deborah Birx, et al, not to mention House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, his judgment on whether and for how long, the country should be shut down.”  We extend Codevilla's analysis of the ruling class to include their motivation to damage Trump, politically. Trump had been having campaign rallies where he touted the stock market and economic growth as benefitting working class Americans. It was imperative for the political forces who hate Trump to take those two issues away from him. TABLE B-56. Common stock prices and yields, 2000-2019  The Dow Jones increased from 24,719, in 2017, to 28,538, at the end of 2019. The GDP was increasing at an average annual growth rate of 3%.  TABLE 8-9. Real gross domestic product by industry, value added, and percent changes, 1997-2018  After the ruling class unleashed the fear panic, the Dow Jones dropped to a low around 18,000, and GDP is expected to decline about 35% by the end of 2020. The ruling class used the public relaltions panic of Covid to destroy Trump's two main political issues, and the damage to the economy, via shutting the economy down, was collateral damage to their main goal of damaging Trump. As Bill Gates also suggested, banning large public gatherings, such as Trump rallies, may also be a good idea to stop the spread and flatten the curve. Prior to the Covid panic, the ruling class had already damaged the economic structure of America with its political promotion of disastrous trade deals.  The trade deals caused the American economy to bifurcate into a component of big companies that benefit from global trade, and the rest of the economy that is not connected to global markets.  After the economy split into two parts, the labor market shifted from a diversified job structure to a job structure where 80% of all jobs were in the service sector.  The ruling class had soothingly murmured, in 1992, that the loss of U. S. manufacturing jobs would be replaced by high-paying, stable jobs in the service sector, commonly called the gig economy.  That was a lie, on the same order of magnitude as the lies of the Bill Gates-funded IHME model that Trump relied upon to shut the economy down.  The shift to a service sector economy left the labor market and economy much weaker to recover from an economic collapse because the service sector does not generate the same level of income and employment multipliers as manufacturing.  For example, in order to produce a dollar of output, each of the six service sectors requires about 3cents from the manufacturing sector. The economy, after the trade deals, was entirely dependent on consumer spending, much of which was spent on cheap Chinese imports.  Every dollar of consumer spending delivered to the finished goods, final demand market in services, like bars and retail shops, generates an additional 15 cents in indirect income in other sectors.  The consumer spending services part of the economy became disconnected from the manufacturing economy because manufacturing was now in China.  In order to produce a dollar of output, the manufacturing sector requires 34 cents from its own supply chain and only about 9 cents from the 6 service sectors.  Every dollar of output delivered by manufacturing to the final demand markets creates about $2 worth of indirect income benefits, and an additional 50 cents in induced, or third round benefits.  Bureau of Economic Analysis Commodity-by Industry Direct Requirements, After Redefinitions (in producers' prices)  The transition to the services sector, as a result of trade with China, weakened the U.S. economy because services are not well integrated into the rest of the economy, and have very few income multiplier linkages with manufacturing.  The national economy is weak because 70% of all GDP is in the services sector, and about 80% of all jobs are in the services sector.  Even if the economy is opened back up, the economic structure is already too weak to transmit employment and income multipliers throughout the gig economy.  Large global corporations, and the ruling class, will not suffer to the same extent as the gig economy because the global corporations still have their global interindustry supply chains to transmit economic growth to that part of the economy.  In other words, as a result of the bifurcation, about 100% of all future  GDP will be related to the 30% of the economy that is connected to the global market.  The U. S. economy, and the social structure, will look just like the European economy and social structure, with large corporations conducting business as usual, and the rest of society making a living cutting each other's hair and painting each other's toenails.  The reason that Kudlow and Navarro are wrong about the U. S. economy “bouncing back,” whenever Trump gets around to opening the economy back up is that the economic structure of the American economy was already damaged by the trade deals, and the gig service sector does not have interindustry multiplier linkages with the rest of the economy.  Just like Chicago's economy, in the 1980s, the U. S. economy has been “hollowed out” by the trade deals. Trump's Covid economic stimulus, that would have worked in America, prior to 1992, is wasted because the employment and income multipliers are gone.  We argue that this will not be a hockey stick, V-shaped, economic  recovery. The income pathways to distribute income across all social classes no longer exist.  This argument about the economic importance of supply chains and multipliers is similar to the argument about the economic weakness caused by the global corporations moving the biotech and pharma interindustry supply chains to China.  The economic sovereignty of the nation is damaged by having the medical supply chains in China, and the crony capitalists who are responsible for moving the supply chains to China are the same forces that are undermining Trump's Presidency.  It will take years to rebuild the national economic interindustry linkages, even if Trump is successful in compelling the companies to move manufacturing production back to the U. S.  The structural weakness of the service sector in generating economic growth is made even more damaging because the service sector does not generate technological innovation.  Almost 75% of all future economic growth is caused by technological innovation, not productivity improvements.  And, that technological economic growth is caused by private business capital investments in new technology ventures, not increased government spending.  Trump's massive new government spending stimulates fleeting, transitory, increases in consumer consumption, but does not increase private sector investment in technology innovation.  The ruling class has been successful in consolidating technology innovation in a  big business-university closed loop of research, where the benefits of innovation are tightly controlled by the global companies.  In the same way that the Covid stimulus is wasted because the economic structure has been damaged, the large corporations direct the benefits of innovation to themselves, and not to the broader domestic economy.  In other words, the global corporations, and the ruling class, benefit from this closed innovation platform, while the rest of the American society suffers.  This is one explanation of why Gates and Fauci want a university-corporate research based vaccine to deal with Covid, and are not interested in promoting the existing malaria drug to treat the disease. Gates and Fauci are globalists, intent on protecting globalism, not Trump's national economic sovereignty. That unelected big business power over technology innovation is not going to bounce back, when Trump finally decides to open up the economy.  As both Codevilla, and Rush Limbaugh have noted, the only person that can peel away Trump voters from Trump, is Trump.  Trump is on the verge of going from being a great President to being the world's greatest magician, who made the greatest economy, in history, disappear in 60 days.  I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for April 13, 2020.

Episode 46. April 5, 2020.  CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences.  Crossing the American Rubicon to Divorce the Democrat Socialists.  Our podcast today is titled, Crossing the American Rubicon to Divorce the Democrat Socialists. This podcast audio and text is just the introduction to a much longer article, available at clpnewsnetwork.com.  The other sections of the longer article are: Section 1. Irreconcilable Differences With The Democrat Socialists Section 2. What Comes After the Collapse of Madison's Representative  Republic? Section 3. Crossing the American Rubicon Restore the Natural Rights Republic.  The full audio and text of this podcast is available for free, for one week. The entire historical archive of all CLP podcasts is available for an annual subscription of $30.  Introduction. The End of Madison's Representative Republic.  Our podcast extends the recent comment by Jesse Kelly, Host of ‘I'm Right' on the television channel, The First.  Kelly tweets,  “We need a national divorce. I have no common bond with these people. There is nothing keeping us together. Let's get through this pandemic and start working out the details.”  We argue that the current ideological differences between Democrat socialists and natural rights conservatives are irreconcilable and irresolvable.  We cite the historical case of the Roman Republic that collapsed when citizens lost trust and allegiance to the Roman rule of law.  We argue that the ideological differences involve fundamental disagreements over the mission of the nation, and we use the original principles of the nation to argue that a representative republic can only endure if it is built upon shared cultural values that bind the citizens into a common mission.  We use the analogy of a failed marriage to argue that there is no longer any love between socialists and conservatives, and that the best course of action is to admit that Madison's representative republic is over.  Coming to grips with the fact that the national marriage is over means crossing the American Rubicon, to create a new constitution for a new nation, built upon the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation.  And, like the end of a marriage, crossing the divorce Rubicon means bidding our former spouse good luck, goodbye, and God speed.  The Roman Republic was based upon allegiance of citizens to obey the unwritten rule of law. The allegiance to the rule of law was voluntary. The allegiance was sustained because Roman citizens shared a widespread cultural value of personal honor that compelled voluntary allegiance to obey the rule of law. The fall of the Roman Republic was caused by a widespread moral decay of the traditional Roman social and moral codes of behavior, both in the elites and the common citizens. The traditional values that Roman citizens shared were virtue, individual dignity, self-discipline, and sense of duty. Cicero explained the fall of the Roman Republic as the collapse of morality by saying, “Everybody demands as much political power as he has force behind him. Reason, moderation, law, tradition, and duty count for nothing.” In other words, the Roman Republic was based upon respect for the unwritten rule of law that compelled voluntary obedience to the written law. When the respect for the unwritten rule of law eroded, the Roman Republic ended. When Caesar reached the Rubicon, from his conquest of Gaul, he was aware that respect for rule of law was ending because he had become a victim of the corruption of the Roman Senate. Before he crossed the Rubicon, he invited a number of Roman historians and philosophers to come to the river and describe the situation in Rome. They described the rampant corruption of the Senators, who were using the government to enrich themselves. After his discussions with the historians, he reached his own psychological Rubicon that the Roman Republic was over. Part of his motivation to cross the Rubicon was to end the corrupt Roman Republic.  In crossing the Rubicon, Caesar precipitated a 6 year civil war with Pompey, the leader of the corrupt regime in the Roman Senate.  Like Caesar, American natural rights conservatives must cross their own psychological Rubicon that the national marriage with Democrat socialists is over. The conservative's ideological divisions with socialists are irrevocable and irreconcilable. Like the Roman Senate, the national government has been captured by a centralized, global, elite tyranny that uses the agencies of government to enrich themselves. Like the Roman Senators, the corporate and socialist ruling class elites in Washington have a profound disrespect for the rule of law, and a profound hatred of non-socialists. Madison's Constitution is no help to citizens in eliminating the tyranny, because Madison's institutional rules of the Constitution did not contemplate a disunion between citizens in the principles and mission of the nation. Madison's rules were designed to check and balance commercial financial social classes, not ideological differences over freedom and liberty.  The ideology of socialism does not fit into Madison's Constitution because it is a unified philosophical view of the world. As the socialists use the term in their propaganda, the ideology is aimed at achieving a future state of “social justice,” not protecting and preserving liberty, today. Attempting to “fix” Madison's Constitution with amendments does nothing to change the behavior of Democrats, or restore their respect for the rule of law.  Polybius wrote,  “Once people had grown accustomed to eating off others' tables and expected their daily needs to be met, then, they found someone to champion their cause... they instituted government by force.”  The socialists, as predicted by Polybius, expect the government to meet their daily needs, and they are committed to taking over the government by force to eradicate a society based upon individualism.  The Democrat socialists masquerade as American citizens because they need the basic liberties of the nation, in order to destroy the liberty of the conservatives.  Natural rights conservatives must adjust their mental image of Democrats in order to accommodate the new, changed political reality that Democrats hate America, hate conservatives, and are dedicated to taking away fundamental civil liberties.  Conservatives must bring themselves to the conclusion that there are only two options open for dealing with the socialists.  Either the nation can embark on a civil dissolution, where both factions form their own nation, or the citizens can embark on a civil war, where the victor imposes order on the losers.  I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for April 10, 2020.

  Episode 37. December 6, 2019. CLP topic category: Democrat Police State Socialism. Introduction. Our podcast today re-examines the destruction, in August of 2018, of the UNC Confederate monument, known as Silent Sam, Our podcast places the criminal act of destroying the monument into the larger historical context of the Democrat's effective use of violence to obtain their goal of a one-party political regime. Our podcast argues that there is an unbroken historical continuity, from 1898 to 2019, in the violence of the Democrat Party, using the cover of “white supremacy” as the justification of the violence to obtain political goals. The argument made in this podcast is that there never was a “New South.” As both W. J. Cash and C. Wright Mills correctly describe, the history of North Carolina is an unbroken continuity of the lawyers, bankers and merchant power elites in the Democrat Party using violence to obtain political goals In the era of Julian Carr, the Democrats used the war cry “Negro Rule,” to erect the racial apartheid system that lasted 80 years. The violence of the Democrats created a one-party, totalitarian white supremacist society, In the modern era, the Democrat Party uses the war cry, “white supremacy,” to justify their acts of violence to eliminate opposition. In their telling of history, the Republicans are a racist party, and Trump is a white supremacist. In other words, the term “white supremacist,” is a useful political term, that has no legitimate meaning, other than as a propaganda tool for the Democrats to legitimize their violence. Our podcast argues that the destruction of Silent Sam was a carefully coordinated attack, led by Carol Folt, a Democrat, whose text messages on August 20, 2018, show her collaboration with antifa and the police to “stand down,” four minutes before the statute came down. The main conclusion of the podcast is that violence works as an effective tactic for Democrats, and that the destruction of Silent Sam was a huge political success for the Democrats. But, the victory over Silent Sam will never be enough for Democrats. The Democrat's goal is to use violence to create a totalitarian society, where only politically correct socialist ideas are allowed, under the penalty of death. We believe that the differences between Democrats and conservatives are irreconcilable and unresolvable, under the current Constitution. On every single principle of a natural rights republic, the Democrats socialists have an alien, subversive, view of America. Today, nothing binds the two factions together in a common national mission. The socialists will never voluntarily obey the unwritten American rule of law because they will never share the cultural belief that all persons, institutions, and entities are subject to the equal application of the law. The only peaceful, non-violent solution to the nation's conflict is to dissolve the nation. We advocate the creation of a new constitution, based upon on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic. Our constitutional principles of government are on our Democratic Republic of America website. You can follow our daily commentary on twitter, at @ltvtoo. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website. You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com You can learn more about the federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com    

Episode 38 December 13, 2019 CLP topic. Vichy Republican Collaborators America After Trump? Introduction. Our podcast today extends Angelo Codevilla's recent analysis about the future of America, after the 2020 election. We use Codevilla's analysis to examine the future of America from the perspective of what happens to the establishment Republican Party, what happens to the Trump conservative movement, and what happens to America, as a nation. Codevilla asks, “The instant after the 2020 elections… the real question is: What will become of us? What can we, what must we, do for ourselves?...Not even winning a bloody civil war against the ruling class could accomplish such a thing as returning the nation to its founding principles.” Codevilla argues that restoring the country to its founding vision is “out of the question.” He says, “Constitutional conservatism on behalf of a country, a large part of which rejects common citizenship, is impossible.” Codevilla cites the work of F. H. Buckley, in his book, American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup, to argue that the framework of state sovereignty federalism, in the Articles of Confederation, offered a better pathway for protecting the natural rights of citizens than Madison's centralized representative republic. Our podcast argues that Codevilla's analysis of the impossibility of returning to the founding principles is correct. He argues that the deep state, which Codevilla calls, the “ruling elite class,” are too far entrenched in the existing government to ever return to a government based upon the consent of the governed. The establishment Republicans, represented by Karl Rove, are the administrative organization of the deep state, and the State Department bureaucrats who showed up in the impeachment hearings to testify against Trump, are directed by the global ruling class leaders of the deep state. To paraphrase V. O. Key, in Southern Politics in State and Nation, the agents of the deep state do the bidding of the global elite, without prompting, because they both share a deep ideological commitment to advancing global socialism. According to the Democrat's interpretation of impeachment, Trump abused his power by not obeying the agents of the deep state. In her recent book about Trump, Nikki Haley identifies Tillerson and Kelly as members of the deep state governing apparatus. She explains that Tillerson and Kelly attempted to recruit her in the attempted deep state coup against Trump. Rush Limbaugh sees Haley as the possible leader of the Trump conservative movement, after 2024. He thinks that the Republican Party is actually the Trump conservative movement, and that Haley has been converted as a Trump protégé. Limbaugh writes, “Now, I actually believe that the Republican Party doesn't know it yet, but it is Trump's party.” Limbaugh believes that Haley is not willing to have the Republican institutional establishment returned to Karl Rove after the 2020 election. In his article, “Nikki Haley fires the first shot in the GOP's post-Trump war,” J.T. Young, states that, “Haley has signaled that she will not side with those desiring to return the party to its establishment. Establishment Republicans believe Trump to be just a momentary break in their political and policy continuum. After Trump, they will both purge the Trump interlopers and regularly beat a vulnerable Democratic Party now hostage to its left wing.” Neither the establishment Republican Party of Karl Rove, nor Nikki Haley, as the leader of the Trump conservative movement, can overcome the irreconcilable differences between the socialist Democrats and natural rights conservatives. Karl Rove's American Crossroads and American Action Network are the defacto Republican establishment political front groups that use the Republican organizational apparatus to promote the interests of America's wealthiest families and global corporations. Rove, and his groups, are best seen as  Republican Vichy Collaborators, with the socialists, to implement a new world order. Rove is a political operative of the deep state, and takes his orders from the global ruling class. Trump's conservative political movement does not have a coherent political ideology of individualism, and Haley's recent book about Trump does not address Codevilla's argument about the entrenched power of the ruling elite class. Unlike the establishment Republicans of Rove, the socialist Democrats have a coherent anti-American ideology, based upon grievance and victimization. After 2020, the Democrats will continue to advocate the transformation of America into a global socialist nation, ruled by the deep state elites.   The socialists are driven by their ideology that socialism is better than individualism, and they will never stop undermining America until they implement a totalitarian socialist regime. There is no other side to the war over the future of America because Rove's establishment Republicans do not have an ideology of individual freedom. This podcast concludes that Codevilla and Young are correct in their assessment that America is over. The obvious competitor ideology to socialism, after 2020, is to return to the revolutionary Spirit of '76, and the restoration of the American Democratic Impulse. The only peaceful, non-violent strategy for solving the irreconcilable differences is a civil dissolution of the nation, based upon a vote in each legislature to either join the new Democratic Republic of America, or cast their lot with the new Socialists States of America.

Re-connecting the New Constitution to the Declaration of Independence. CLP News Network Episode for June 6, 2018.  Laurie Thomas Vass The Citizens Liberty Party News Network clpnewsnetwork.com Note to viewers. We believe that the ideological differences between socialists and conservatives are irreconcilable and that conservatives must prepare for what comes after the National civil dissolution. We advocate the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, based upon a democratic republic of states. This is the introduction of a much longer podcast, available at podbean. The other sections of the podcast include: Section 1. Thomas Burke. Author of the Articles of Confederation.  Section 2. Madison's Flawed Preamble. Section 3. Strict Construction of the 3 Preambles. Section 4. Interpreting the Purpose of Government Derived from the 3 Preambles. Section 5. The Guiding Principles of the New National Government . The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30. Introduction. In the natural rights individualist society, the role of government is to reduce the chance situations that other individuals, or the deep state agents, will deploy the police power of the state to override the individual citizen's freedoms of choice in pursuing their sovereign life mission.   The government serves this function by administering the rule of law provided by the constitutional framework of collective decision-making, whose goal is to secure just outcomes to the laws that individuals give to themselves. “No one is born into moral subjugation to political power,” stated Jefferson. Jefferson wrote that when citizens leave the state of nature to create their government, “all men are created equal… in nature all humans are equal…not subject to the rightful authority of any other human being…in a state of nature no rightful authority exists in nature. No man is subjected to the will or authority of any other man,” he wrote, over and over again, from 1776, to the very last letter he wrote in 1826. Jefferson believed that individuals are rights-possessors, with equal inalienable rights to pursue their own happiness, manage their private lives, and be free of government coercion in their person and their property. Jefferson's natural rights principles were: Equality among citizens to participate in government. Privacy of citizens from the invasions of agents of government. The right to vote in free and fair elections. The protection of the natural and property rights of individuals as the supreme goal of government. Equal access to the courts and equality before the law. Jefferson wrote the Declaration as a compact between citizens in each state to establish a rightful centralized political power, dedicated to protecting the natural rights of citizens that are left incompletely protected within each state government. The adoption of the Declaration, in 1776, and the subsequent adoption Articles, in 1781, moved the citizens of the United States toward a constitutional egalitarian individualism, with an appeal to natural rights.   Jefferson's constitutional arrangement, as expressed in the Articles, was based upon the common moral values in the Declaration. Madison's constitution was not. Conclusion of Introduction. We believe that the differences between Democrats and conservatives are irreconcilable and unresolvable, under the current Constitution. On every single principle of a natural rights republic, the Democrats socialists have an alien, subversive, view of America. Today, nothing binds the two factions together in a common national mission. The socialists will never voluntarily obey the unwritten American rule of law because they will never share the cultural belief that all persons, institutions, and entities are subject to the equal application of the law. The only peaceful, non-violent solution to the nation's conflict is to dissolve the nation. We advocate the creation of a new constitution, based upon on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic. Our constitutional principles of government are on our Democratic Republic of America website. You can follow our daily commentary on twitter, at @ltvtoo. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website. You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com You can learn more about the federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com

Episode 43. March 27, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Vichy Republican Collaborators Who Is It In America That Is Responsible For Implementing the Trade Agreements With China? Note to visitors: Our podcast today is the Introduction to a much longer document that explains who it is in America that was responsible for implementing the trade deals with China. The other sections of the longer podcast are: The American Roots of Globalism The Link Between Globalism and American Crony Capitalism Civil Dissolution or Civil War? Irreconcilable Differences You can access this podcast, for free, for one week, at our website. You can subscribe to our entire archive of podcasts and text at our website for $30 per year.   Introduction: Our podcast today examines the argument made by Mike Slater, on the tv program, The First, that China is an enemy of the United States. Slater explains that the most recent Wu Virus is only the latest of three epidemics, in 20 years, unleashed on the world by the militaristic, repressive Communist regime in Beijing. The most charitable interpretation of this behavior by the Communists is that they are wildly incompetent to control the outbreaks of deadly diseases. The more accurate interpretation of the behavior, explained by Slater, is that they are an enemy of the U. S., intent on destroying the fabric of American society. Our podcast today adopts the second interpretation in order to examine what political and financial forces in America were responsible for forming the close ties between the two countries. We agree with the analysis of Curtis Ellis, in his article, China's Post-Virus Plan to Destroy America's Economy, where he states that, “The “respected voices” calling for America to lift the tariffs on China are simply swallowing Beijing's sophisticated propaganda. China means to use this crisis to destroy us…Moreover, Beijing sees an opportunity in the pandemic to reverse President Trump's call to move manufacturing out of China. China's State Administration of Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND), stated: “China will get more opportunities, including in the reduction of pressure for the international industrial chain to transfer away from China . . . The global epidemic has provided opportunities for improving China's international position and countering anti-globalization.” We argue that, in the late 1980s, the 1500 member companies of the Business Roundtable were effective in perpetrating a fraud that China was just like any other country in terms of global trade. We argue that those same corporate actors continue, today, to coordinate their political strategy with special interest lobbying groups and crony capitalist elected representatives, who obtain personal financial benefits from passing legislation that have continued the re-authorization of the deals with China. The lobbyists for the Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, wrote the draft legislation, in 1999, in order for the corporations to obtain huge profits from moving production to China, and then selling those cheap goods back to the American market. The main political representatives who voted initially to implement the deals, and then voted to re-authorize the deals, are a coalition of Democrats and Republicans, who obtained vast financial benefits from “tribute” paid by the corporations. The large corporations obtained an 80% cost saving in production of goods in China, and while a small portion of the savings showed up in cheaper goods, the vast majority went to the bottom line profits of the large corporations. Most of the profits earned from overseas production were never taxed in the U. S., and were never repatriated, in the form of capital investments, back into the U. S. domestic economy The U. S. corporate profits were reinvested in China, which empowered the successful Chinese economy, and allowed their national champion industries to become wildly profitable. Elected representatives at the state and Federal level worked together to advocate the public benefits of trade with China. For example, In North Carolina, Governor Hunt hosted an annual event, called the Emerging Issues Forum, to promote global trade. Governor Hunt created the Forum in October 1985 to provide a catalyst for the discussion and action needed to move the United States forward in the world economy. His political mantra was that North Carolina workers must be “competitive” with global workers. The second conference, in February 1987, drew 1,500 people to the McKimmon Center on the NC State University campus and featured speakers that included Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman, Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, Steve Forbes, Robert Rubin, Jay Rockefeller, Amory Lovins, Al Gore, and Paul Volcker. While President Trump has correctly ranted incessantly about the unfair trade deals, he never identifies the political or corporate actors, listed above, who are responsible for allowing the trade deals to be enacted. Citizens need to know who it was in America that engaged in a form of national economic sedition of collaborating with an enemy. The Wu Virus is helping the citizens understand the extent of the danger caused by trade with China, but the virus has not clarified who is responsible for the economic damage. Our podcast goes further to explain who these agents are that promoted the trade fraud with China. We argue that the economic chaos inflicted by the Wu Virus is only the most immediate consequence of trade with China. Less well known is the negative effect on U. S. labor markets that became overly dependent on service jobs. In 2000, prior to the trade deals with China,, about  17,000 American workers were employed the production of goods, primarily in manufacturing firms. In 2000, about 75,000 workers were employed in the service industries. In 2018, only 12,688 workers were employed in manufacturing and 129,000 workers, or 80% of the U. S. labor force, was employed in services. The services economy is commonly called the “gig” economy, that features low paying, unstable jobs, that offer no health benefits. In Governor Hunt's propaganda of the benefits of trade with China, required North Carolina workers to be “competitive” with China meant transferring North Carolina jobs from manufacturing to the gig economy. North Carolina's formerly diversified economy employed about 800,000 workers in manufacturing, before the trade deals. After the trade deals with China, out of a total state workforce of 5 million, about 400,000 workers were employed in manufacturing, and over 1 million were employed in the service sectors. The service industry is made up of restaurant workers and retail shops, and is the most vulnerable to mass layoffs from the Chinese disruption to the S. economy.   After the trade deals were implemented, the U. S. labor market and economy lacked diversification, and its occupational job structure looked just like the third world economies in Latin America and Africa. The relocation of medical supply chains by large global corporations also exposed another hidden consequence of trade with China. When the entire inter-industry manufacturing supply chains moved to China, local towns that relied on manufacturing jobs were devastated. Those local economies became overly dependent on service jobs, and on increased government welfare payments. More importantly, by moving the supply chains off shore, America's single most important competitive initial factor endowment of technological innovation was lost. Technological innovation, prior to the trade deals, used to occur in the metro regional manufacturing supply chains in 350 metro regions, as a result of tacit knowledge creation and diffusion among the small manufacturing firms. After the trade deals, the citizens discovered that innovation and product commercialization does not occur in the gig economy. Innovation occurs in the industrial supply chains, now located in China. We argue that the members of the Business Roundtable, and the establishment Republican Party knew, in advance, the economic damage that would be caused by moving the supply chains to China, but calculated that the benefits of their increased profits outweighed the social costs imposed upon American citizens. Part of their propaganda, at the time, was that there would be high paying, stable jobs in services that replaced the high paid manufacturing jobs. This was a lie, and the elites knew it was a lie, at the time that they used it to change the laws on trade with China. The dysfunctional American political system is accurately described by Angelo Codevilla, as the Ruling Class, who make decisions that are not connected to the will of the citizens. Secret decisions by the Ruling Class are the primary cause for the trade agreements with China. The American citizens were never informed about the globalist intent of the elites, or the permanent economic damage caused by the deals, until it was too late. We conclude that the problem of a dysfunctional crony capitalist system and the centralized Ruling Class elite tyranny in Washington cannot be fixed, under the existing Constitution. The ideology of globalism, in both the socialist Democrat and crony corporate Republican Party is too entrenched, and the unelected power of the deep state agents are too deeply embedded in the government apparatus to be dislodged by common citizens, through periodic elections. We conclude that nothing binds the globalist factions together in a common national mission with Trump's national sovereignty ideology. The global Democrat socialists will never voluntarily obey the unwritten American rule of law because they will never share the cultural belief that all persons, institutions, and entities are subject to the equal application of the law. The crony global corporate elites will never, willingly, give up their trans-national global trading privileges to share power with common citizens, in the current framework of the representative republic. The establishment Republicans, like Senator Burr, of North Carolina, derive too many financial benefits from collaborating with the Democrats and global corporations, to change the status quo of power, or the distribution of tribute. The solution for citizens is to follow the advice of Jefferson, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to the ends for which it was created, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government. The best, non-violent, idea for dealing with the irreconcilable ideological differences is a civil dissolution of the nation and the implementation of a new government, based upon the framework of state sovereignty, under the provisions of Article I, Section 10, Clause 3, the state compact clause. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for March 27, 2020. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Vichy Republican Collaborators and is titled, Who Is It In America That Is Responsible For the Trade Agreements With China? The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.  

Episode 44. March 22, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Vichy Republican Collaborators  Burr's Betrayals  Introduction, Our podcast today places the actions of NC Senator Richard Burr's insider trading of his $1.5 million stock portfolio into the larger context of  his 18 year tenure as a Washington crony capitalist.  We argue that Burr is not simply a RINO. Burr is a crony capitalist, who has successfully gamed the system for his own benefit by collaborating with Democrats and lobbyists.  For example, at the request of Democrat Senator Warner, Burr subpoenaed Trump Jr., a second time, for more questioning, in the Democrat's attempt to keep the Russian collusion hoax investigation going.  Burr's Senate committee interviewed Trump, Jr., for over 20 hours during the 2 years of Mueller's coup, trying to assist Mueller in coming up with evidence to impeach Trump.  After the Mueller coup ended, Burr issued the second subpoena to Trump, Jr  At the time of the second Trump Jr., subpoena, Burr said that he had no credible evidence that Biden had colluded with Ukraine, and that he would not use his Senate committee to investigate Biden.  Burr's collaboration with Democrats has been financially lucrative for Burr. He arrived in Washington with the net worth of a pauper, and he will leave his 18 year public service as a prince, with a net worth over $5 million.  Trading his stocks during a national pandemic, on insider, non-public material information, is simply one technique Burr employs to build his net worth.  I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for March 22, 2020. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Vichy Republican Collaborators and is titled Burr's Betrayals. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Our podcast today is the introduction of a new book by GabbyPress, titled The American Millennial Attraction to Socialism. The book is available for purchase at Gabbypress.com for $21.99.  I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for March 13, 2020.  Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category The Democratic Republic of America.   The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.   Introduction.   Our book extends the analysis of the Annual Report on US Attitudes Toward Socialism to explain why so many young Americans are attracted to socialism.   We describe a much more fair and just economic system than socialism for the millennials to support.   Our book compares the four major economic models in the world in order to help millennials better understand their possible choices about the best economic system, judged from their own perspective of fairness and social justice.   The chapters in our address the topics of: The American Millennial Attraction to Socialism. The Chinese Communist Crony Economy. The Crony Corporate Capitalist Economy. The European Crony Socialist Economy. The American Free Enterprise Entrepreneurial Economy. Envisioning A New American Knowledge Creation Innovation Economy. Buchanan's Fair Constitutional Rules as the Foundation of the Entrepreneurial Economy.   We argue that Chinese communism, European socialism, and American crony capitalism, are all variants of crony capitalism that attempt to use government to distribute financial benefits to politically connected agents.   The key common characteristic of the three crony collectivist economies is profit exploitation by the elites over the production value produced by the non-elites.   Cronyism exploitation replaces the Marxist concept of capitalist exploitation of the workers with crony exploitation of non-elites.   The set of cronies who benefit from cronyism attempt to use the political system to maximize a group collectivist concept, which is commonly described as a social welfare function.   In their case, their selfish social welfare function acts as a substitute for individualist national welfare function.   In the 3 collectivist economies, the entire society is seen as a synthetic entity, whose national welfare is measured by aggregate social indicators like GDP, fairness and income equality.   The propaganda of the collectivist society is that the elites know better than common citizens what promotes social welfare, and must, therefore, have the unchecked political power to exploit the production value of the non-elites in order to obtain the tax revenue to achieve better social welfare outcomes in fairness and income equality.   In contrast to group social welfare, we argue that only one economic system attempts to maximize individual welfare, which we call the American Free Enterprise Entrepreneurial Economy.   In the individualist innovation economy, social welfare is judged by aggregating all individual welfare functions into a national social welfare function.   Individuals are free to maximize their own welfare, and have property rights to enjoy the profits that they create through their own individual initiative.   We argue that young Americans do not know the difference between group social welfare functions and individualist welfare functions, and do not know how to evaluate the fair outcomes between a collectivist economy and an individualist economy.   In the collectivist societies, the concept of fairness is judged by political elites who determine fair outcomes, after income has been earned.   In the individualist societies, fairness constitutes the ability of the individual to appropriate the income that they produce.   Millennials are attracted to socialism because they believe that the socialist economic systems are more fair than their concept of American capitalism, which is the crony corporate capitalist version of capitalism.   Most young people in America do not know the difference between Milton Friedman and Lord Keynes, and end up in the economic muddle of Milton Keynes, embracing a fairy tale socialism that is antithetical to their desired state of fairness and social justice.   We explain that innovation economics is the most fair system, and that if millennials understood how the free enterprise entrepreneurial economy worked, that they would switch their allegiance from socialism to innovation economics.   We conclude that the progress towards a fair American entrepreneurial economy can be improved by visualizing the entire economy as a knowledge creation enterprise, modeled upon the logic of a regional metro block chain, whose end goal is the commercialization of radical new technology, and the creation of new future markets.   I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network. You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website. You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com You can learn more about the federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com  

Episode 41. February 1, 2020.   CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences An American Conservative Revolution In the Midst of A Socialist Civil War Introduction: The Difference Between the American Socialist Civil War and the Second American Revolution. David Armitage's book, War, Civil War, or Revolution, (2017), provides a useful method to understand the current constitutional crisis in America. According to Armitage, a civil war emphasizes the essential unity of the combatants, after the war ends, while a revolution involves a civil dissolution of the existing order. Applying Armitage's definition, the American socialists are engaged in a civil war with conservative patriots, because socialists want both sides to “remain members of the same political community,” after the end of the socialist civil war. The socialist logic for continuing the existing constitutional arrangement is easy to understand: the socialists need the middle class and wealthy to continue to contribute their taxes and wealth to the socialist elites, because the socialist regime cannot function without exploitation of the wealthy. Armitage explains that revolution involves the overthrow of the existing constitutional arrangement, and replacing the old regime with a new regime. In other words, in a revolution, the people tearing each other apart do not share a common culture and political community. In fact, as Professor Thompson reminds us, “the two sides hate each other,” and share no common or cultural values. In contrast to the unity of the combatants at the end of a civil war, the two sides in a revolution have no on-going relationship with each other because one of the sides does not exist, anymore. This is the stage of conflict in America today between Democrat socialists and conservatives. The socialists despise non-socialists, and share no values with the founding principles of the nation. But, the socialists need their hated capitalist system to keep functioning, at the end of the civil war, because capitalism generates tax revenues. If they achieve victory of their socialist civil war, they will seek to rule non-socialists in a one-party, totalitarian government, under the guise of the current Constitution. The solution for conservative patriots is to recognize the irreconcilable values with Democrat socialists, and engage in a revolution to form a new nation that reclaims the principles of liberty. In the second American Revolution, conservatives seek an unconditional, permanent split with the socialists. In other words, the conservatives must win the second American revolution in order to divorce themselves from the socialist tyranny, after the civil war. From the socialist perspective, their hatred of conservatives is engendered by the Marxist ideology of class hatred between the capitalist class and the working class.  Professor Thompson, of Clemson, writes, “It is not an exaggeration to suggest that liberal and conservative Americans hate each other. There are now two Americas and the division is not between “haves” and “have nots” or between whites and blacks. The coastal, blue state, Ivy-educated ruling class has contempt for flyover, red state, trailer park deplorables and vice versa. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, a nation that hates itself cannot stand.” While Armitage's definitions are useful for understanding the difference between civil war and revolution, his definitions are not useful for explaining America's first revolution. In that revolution, a civil war was being fought at the same time that a revolution was being fought to form a new nation. There was a civil war inside of a revolution. When the British General Clinton changed his strategy from taking New York, in order to focus on taking the Southern states, he ordered several detachments of loyalists in South Carolina to carry the attack against the patriots. British regulars were not used to any great extent in the Carolina theater.  According to one historical account, “the Carolinas were subjected to furious partisan warfare. With minor use of British troops, the south became embroiled in a civil war marked by horrendous and indiscriminate violence… The patriots had to fight a civil war and fight one of the greatest armies of the world at the same time.” For a great period of time in South Carolina, the Tory loyalists were successful in vanquishing the patriots, and engaged in horrific torture and slaughter of patriot prisoners, who had surrendered. The success of the loyalists abruptly changed at King's Mountain, when the loyalists met a patriot army of 900 frontiersmen, commonly called the “Over the Mountain Boys.” From that defeat, General Cornwallis marched his regulars and Tories to Guilford County, N. C., where they engaged General Greene and the American regular army. The fighting at Guilford Courthouse was so brutal and intense that Cornwallis ordered his soldiers in the rear of the line to shoot the soldiers in the front, in the tail, to make them advance against the Patriots. The experience at Guilford was so devastating to the British troops that they refused to leave their quarters in Yorktown to engage the Americans again. Louis Gohmert's analysis of the current conflict in America could be improved if he adopted the “civil war within a revolution” model to explain the Democrat socialist behavior. Gohmert describes the socialist initiative to nullify the 2016 presidential election and impeach President Trump as a “Communist Revolution.” Gohmert states, “I think it is better to characterize it as [a] communist revolution. That's what they're about, and whether you want to call it progressivism, socialism, communism, that's what they're about, and we're already seeing … communism's hatred of religion, and specifically Christianity. It's a threat to what has always been an American way of life.” The more accurate analysis of the socialist behavior involves a progression of behavior from resistance to the transfer of power, to the open rebellion of a coup, then to the sedition of the bureaucrats in the deep state, and finally to civil war. Our podcast today will place these stages of the socialist tactics into the argument that reconciliation with the socialists is impossible. Nothing will ever change the ideology, or the behavior, of the Democrat socialists, who will continue to push for victory of the glorious socialist state, in order to subjugate non-socialists. To paraphrase President Trump, “No matter how many witnesses you give the Democrats, no matter how much information is given, like the quickly produced Transcripts, it will NEVER be enough for them. They will always scream UNFAIR. The Impeachment Hoax is just another political CON JOB!” Our podcast concludes that the only solution to the constitutional crisis is a conservative revolution to restore the original democratic republic of America contemplated by the Patriots in their creation and ratification of the Articles of Confederation. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for February 1, 2020. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Irreconcilable Differences and is titled, “An American Conservative Revolution In the Midst of A Socialist Civil War.” The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 40. January 18, 2020 CLP Topic Category: Democrat Party Socialism Obama's IRMAA Stealth Tax to Punish Retired Americans. Introduction. Our podcast today expands on Rush Limbaugh's allegation that Democrats seek to punish success. We provide an analysis of Obama's 2015 IRMAA stealth tax as an example to support Limbaugh's allegation. IRMAA stands for the Social Security income-related monthly adjustment to the social security retirement check of retired citizens. The effect of the tax is to reduce the monthly income retirement check, if the tax payer had a capital gain financial success in the previous 2 years. The stealth tax punishes retired citizens who take a one-time capital gain on real estate or stocks and bonds. The capital gain is reported by the IRS to the Social Security Administration, without the citizen's knowledge, or consent, and the gain bumps the citizen into a penalty bracket for earning too much income. The one-time capital gain event overrides the entire life-time of earnings, used to calculate a citizen's monthly Social Security retirement check. In 2018, there were approximately 10 million citizens caught by the IRMAA punishment trap. The IRMAA is equivalent to a 2.2% surtax on income. The revenue from IRMAA flows to the general government coffers, and is not used to offset the social security deficit. The Democrats use the tax code to punish citizens who do not conform to the socialist correct-think vision of “income fairness.” Limbaugh stated the income fairness allegation against the Democrats, “The entire Democrat Party is structured to punish success, or at least make voters think that they are going to punish success. Obama seeks  a path that punishes achievement, that punishes success, and he speaks negatively of the country.” Most observers probably think Limbaugh is talking about the Democrat's desire to punish rich or wealthy Americans, primarily because of the Democrat's class war ideology that the rich do not pay a fair share of their income in taxes. Typical of the Democrat's anti-rich mantra is the statement by Elizabeth Warren that serves to heighten class hatred between Americans. Warren deploys the socialist class envy ideology to convince voters that the American economic system is rigged against the average citizen, and that when she is elected, the Democrats will punish the wealthy citizens by taxing them. Warren stated, “People feel like the system is rigged against them. And here's the painful part. They're right. The system is rigged. Look around. Oil companies guzzle down billions in profits. Billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. And Wall Street CEOs, the same ones who wrecked our economy and destroyed millions of jobs, still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors and acting like we should thank them.” According to the Democrat mantra, only the Federal government is powerful and righteous enough to overcome the unfair outcomes generated for working-class citizens by the rigged economic system of capitalism. IRMAA contradicts the “tax-the-rich” mantra by describing how the Democrats inflict punishment on middle class citizens, not just the rich. The Democrats punish middle class citizens by taking away social security benefits when the socialists deem the behavior of achieving a capital gain success as unacceptable. Our podcast does not argue about the technical merits of IRMAA, or it's justification as a method of raising revenue from retired citizens to offset the Social Security unfunded liability. Rather, we explain the socialist logic that supports why socialists seek to punish success. The logic of the Democrat socialist ideology of using the power of government to enforce fairness is captured by Obama's statement, in 2010. Obama stated, “I do think at a certain point you've made enough money” We explain that IRMAA is a representation that a one-time capital gain is not fair because the gain means the citizen has made too much money. We conclude that nothing will ever change the behavior of Democrats because they deeply believe that they are the sole, ultimate judges of what constitutes fairness. Victor Davis Hansen explains that the Democrat strategy is to eliminate political opposition in order to gain a one-party political monopoly, like the one that existed in North Carolina and Louisiana, in the 20th century. If the Democrats succeed in gaining the one-party monopoly, they will permanently punish citizens, through secret, stealth taxes, like IRMAA. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for January 18, 2020. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Police State Socialism, and is titled, Obama's IRMAA Stealth Tax to Punish Retired Americans. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

Episode 39 January 3, 2020 CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences. Polarization and the Inevitable Disunion of America. Introduction. Our podcast today expands on Zack Beauchamp's article, “The Constitution Was Not Built For This,” to explain that the ideological polarization in America will lead to a civil disunion. We argue that Beauchamp, a socialist writer for Vox, is correct that Madison's Constitution of 1787, was not built to resolve the growing polarization between socialists and natural rights conservatives over the nation's mission and purpose. We argue that socialists promote class conflict and racial polarization as a strategy to overthrow the government in order to replace the current government with socialism, Typical of the left wing hope for polarization is the article by Sam Tanenhaus, The Promise of Polarization, where he argues that “Ideological division was once seen as the solution to America's political gridlock.” In leftist language, “gridlock” is when socialists cannot convince Republicans to collaborate with Democrats. Beauchamp writes, “Republicans' in the House who did not vote against Trump's impeachment reveals a broken system — and a democracy at real risk of failure. … the GOP's willingness to back the president to the hilt, in spite of clear and obvious evidence of abuses of power, speaks to an urgent threat to American democracy: Our constitutional system is ill-equipped to withstand extreme polarization.” Beauchamp makes the same observation as Bill Maher that the result of polarization is that the two sides see each other as ultimate enemies, not a citizen-compatriots. Beauchamp writes, “Under conditions of extreme polarization, the two camps start to see the other side as not merely a political opponent, but an existential threat to the American way of life.” For Beauchamp, the impeachment is simply a necessary first step in removing the voting rights of 63 million conservatives, in order to make progress to a hoped-for one-party socialist tyranny. His argument is that Republicans in the House, who did not support the left's drive for impeachment, are intolerant and are contributing to polarization. In our first section, we argue that Madison's Constitution was designed to ameliorate commercial and financial conflicts between the natural aristocracy and common citizens. Madison assumed that all citizens understood that the purpose of the Revolution was liberty, and did not design the rules to resolve the first principles of the national purpose. In our second section, we explain why Madison's Constitution is inadequate in solving ideological polarization. We argue that Madison's Constitution is a failure that cannot be fixed in order to ameliorate the divisions in America. Victoria Nourse, a left-wing law professor at Georgetown University, explained her concept of a crisis, as opposed to a constitutional failure, “A constitutional crisis is a fight among branches of government in which neither side backs down, and there is no clear resolution within the constitutional system.” She is right that Madison's Constitution offers no solution to polarization, but mischaracterizes the impasse as a constitutional “crisis.” Madison's rules assume a national consensus among citizens that does not exist, and is a failure, not a crisis. The socialists have a coherent strategy of using polarization to divide American citizens in order to implement a socialist state. In our third section, we extend the comments of Beauchamp to include a representative range of left wing opinion to demonstrate that the desired outcome of polarization is the implementation of a one-party socialist state. We conclude our podcast with the observation that natural rights conservatives must begin to see the Democrat socialists as an existential threat to individual liberty. The only non-violent solution to polarization is for conservatives to create a new democratic republic, with a new constitution, that establishes individual liberty as the end goal of the nation. I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for January 3, 2020. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Irreconcilable Differences and is titled, “Polarization and the Inevitable Disunion of America.” The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.