Home Blog Page 3302

Hundreds of thousands of covid vaccine injuries Backlogged and not yet entered into VAERS

On the latest episode of “Doctors and Scientists,” Dr. Brian Hooker Ph.D., P.E., was interviewed Dr. Jessica Rose, Ph.D. to discuss the failures of the vaccine injury surveillance system that was set up by the CDC and FDA over thirty years ago. Dr. Rose is an expert in bio-mathematics and molecular research.

In January of 2021, she utilized her skills as a computational biologist and began analyzing data in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Each week, she downloaded publicly-available data sets from VAERS, comparing inputs week-to-week. She discovered that vaccine injury reports went missing from one week to the next. Each week, the data is updated in the VAERS system. She found that some of the data is overwritten, vanished from the system. She also found that “hundreds of thousands” of covid vaccine injury reports were backlogged and did not appear in a timely manner to alert healthcare professionals to serious issues with the vaccine.

Hundreds of thousands of vaccine injury reports backlogged in VAERS

In the interview, Dr. Rose discussed the systemic flaws of the VAERS system, flaws that stop the passive reporting system from working in the public’s interest, as was originally intended. The pharmacovigilance system was set up in 1990 to detect issues with vaccines, to alert regulatory agencies and the public about serious adverse events and contraindications for specific vaccines. The data is managed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Healthcare professionals input the data into the system, and have a narrow thirty-minute window to complete the report. In 2021, healthcare workers have been overwhelmed with vaccine injury reports and have not had the time to enter them all into the system. Many medical concerns associated with the covid vaccine are overlooked, discarded or discounted as coincidental or normalized reactions to the vaccine.

The hundreds of thousands of adverse event reports that have been filed paint a grisly picture of medical malfeasance. These serious public health issues have yet to be addressed by any regulatory agency or judicial process. In the past, vaccines were pulled from the market if the VAERS system documented more than fifty deaths from a single vaccine. In 2021, there have been more than 20,000 deaths recorded in just ten months. Up to 97 percent of these issues are coming from the new mRNA covid vaccines, not the rest of the vaccine supply. Instead of pulling the deadly products from the market, the federal government has issued unlawful mandates, coercing individuals to take part in the depopulation experiment. This might be the biggest flaw with the system yet: The agencies that are supposed to oversee the data and alert the public to medical atrocities are the same entities trying to push a narrative forward – that vaccines are “safe and effective.” (Related: COVID vaccine experiment causes monstrous spike in vaccine injuries and deaths, serious adverse events under-reported by a factor of eight.)

Serious adverse events and fatalities are occurring at magnitudes greater than what is recorded in the VAERS system

After analyzing missing data in the VAERS system, Dr. Rose came to the conclusion that serious adverse events and fatalities following covid vaccination are much higher than what is recorded in the VAERS system. Some issues are under-reported by a factor of thirty-one, and other, more common side effects can be under-reported by a factor of one hundred. By September, Dr. Rose attended the FDA’s Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting, bringing attention to under-reporting problem in the VAERS system. Her research is titled, “Critical Appraisal of VAERS Pharmacovigilance: Is the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) a Functioning Pharmacovigilance System?” and was published in Science, Public Health Policy and Law.

Her paper concludes that “hundreds of thousands” of adverse events are backlogged and waiting to be entered into the system. “The most important thing I found in my determination is whether or not this tool — which can be a pharmacovigilance tool — is being used as such,” Dr. Rose said.

Biden’s Visit to the Vatican

The party of JFK now loves to talk politics with the pope.

In the days of John F. Kennedy, the Democrats emphasized their political distance from the pope. Kennedy promised Americans that he would never let the pope influence him on “matters of public policy.” How times have changed. Today’s Democrats boast of their political alliance with Pope Francis. They openly confer with him on matters of public policy, as evident in Joe Biden’s latest visit to the Vatican. After he met with the pope last Friday, Biden praised him for “fighting the climate crisis, as well as his advocacy to ensure the pandemic ends for everyone through vaccine sharing and an equitable global economic recovery.”

Kennedy rose to the top of his party by reassuring Democrats that his connection to the Church was religious, not political. Biden rose to the presidency by making it clear to Democrats that his connection to the Church is political, not religious. His pledge might as well have been: I will only listen to the pope on matters of public policy.

Judging by press accounts, it appears that Biden and the pope didn’t discuss much beyond their shared left-wing politics. The pope looked famously glum at his meeting with Donald Trump. But the pictures from his meeting with Biden show a very warm exchange between the two. CNN noted the unusual length of Biden’s meeting with the pope: “The world’s most powerful Catholics — President Joe Biden and Pope Francis — renewed their close relationship on Friday, holding a 90-minute meeting that was twice as long as the one the President held with Pope John Paul II in one of his first meetings with a pontiff.”

Biden also met with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, who is the secretary of state at the Vatican. According to the White House readout from that meeting, Biden and Parolin talked about “fighting the climate crisis — both through advocacy and encouraging the climate neutrality of hundreds of Christian organizations worldwide.” They also discussed “efforts to rally global support for vaccinating the developing world against COVID-19.” The White House readout then concludes incongruously that Biden and Parolin “committed to continue using their voices to advocate for personal and religious freedoms world-wide.”

According to the New York Times, Biden “told reporters on Friday that Pope Francis had called him a ‘good Catholic’ and said he should keep receiving communion, an unexpected development that appeared to put a papal finger on the scale in a debate raging in the United States’ Roman Catholic Church over whether the president and other Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should be denied the sacrament.”

The Times continued: “Mr. Biden said the issue of abortion had not come up during their meeting. ‘No, it didn’t,’ he said. ‘It came up — we just talked about the fact he was happy that I was a good Catholic and I should keep receiving communion.’”

“Asked to confirm Mr. Biden’s remarks, Matteo Bruni, the Vatican spokesman, said that the Holy See limited its comments to the news release about subjects discussed during the meeting and added, ‘It’s a private conversation,’” according to the Times.

The Vatican’s statement describing the meeting makes no mention of abortion :

During the course of the cordial discussions, the Parties focused on the joint commitment to the protection and care of the planet, the healthcare situation and the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as the theme of refugees and assistance to migrants. Reference was also made to the protection of human rights, including freedom of religion and conscience.The talks enabled an exchange of views on some matters regarding the current international situation, also in the context of the imminent G20 summit in Rome, and on the promotion of peace in the world through political negotiation.

So it appears that Biden emerges from this meeting with both his politics and his heretical spin on Catholicism blessed. Biden’s easy manipulation of the Church is a measure of how much has changed in politics and religion since JFK’s day. The question has shifted from the Church’s influence on politics to the influence of politics on the Church — from the first Catholic president who avoided the Vatican’s advice to the second one who happily exploits it.

George Neumayr, a senior editor at The American Spectator, is author most recently of The Biden Deception: Moderate, Opportunist, or the Democrats’ Crypto-Socialist?

4 Indispensable Conditions For A Truly Free And Fair Election

The only way to guarantee secret ballot is to restore the local in-person option everywhere, including states that have long abolished it, such as Oregon.

This Tuesday’s gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey should provide more insights into Democrats’ habit of election rigging on the state level. Many consider these off-year contests to be bellwethers for next year’s midterms. So it’s particularly laughable to see road signs for Virginia Democrat Terry McAuliffe that in effect declare Virginia’s chaotic new election laws to represent “free and fair elections.”

It’s also reasonable to ask what conditions are necessary for an election to be as free and fair as possible. Clearly, there’s nothing wrong with the idea of improving turnout and voter enthusiasm. But a voting system that is designed specifically to hide wrongdoing and corruption, to preclude the ability to find fraud, to prevent even routine measures to ensure the auditability and integrity of an election is not an election.

There are at least four indispensable conditions for truly free and fair elections. The process must first guarantee privacy. It must also eliminate the possibility of identity theft. It must minimize ballot handling by anyone other than the voter. And the process should be as decentralized and local as possible, allowing everyone to vote at a neighborhood precinct.

Let’s look at these in more detail.

1. Protect the Secret Ballot

Every voter should be able to cast a ballot in person, at a local precinct, and in the privacy of a real voting booth. As Dan Gelertner recently wrote, there is no solution to today’s electoral chaos short of a Constitutional Convention that restores our elections to their original format: voting in person on Election Day. I think we also need to recognize that secret ballot is directly tied to freedom of conscience. It’s therefore looking more and more like a constitutional right.

Universal mail-in voting abolishes any guarantee of a secret ballot. Going postal with voting is a surefire way to induce harassment and coercion in any politically polarized household where everyone has access to the mailbox. Yes, people should have the option of requesting an absentee ballot. But the only way to guarantee secret ballot is to restore the local in-person option everywhere, including states that have long abolished it, including Oregon.

It’s simply wrong to force all voters to cast their votes by mail or to drive out to some unattended “secure” ballot box on the street to deposit it. In addition, polling places in local precincts should have real voting booths that secure privacy, not tables strewn with flimsy cardboard optional shields.

2. Remove the Possibility of Identity Theft

The primary purpose of photo identification of a voter is to prevent identity theft. To claim that it’s about voter suppression is patently bogus. No fair electoral process would do away with a photo ID requirement.

If leftists who speak against Voter ID were really interested in preventing voter suppression, they would consider spending a teensy bit of pocket change of the trillions in their proposed budgets to provide a photo ID to everyone eligible to vote. The Georgia voter ID law, so criticized by the left, in fact provides a free photo voter ID to anyone who doesn’t have one. Problem solved.

3. As Little Ballot Touching As Possible

Minimize the ability of others to handle your ballot (and for ballot harvesters to invent ballots). Nobody should ever be put in the position of having his official ballot handled by roommates, neighbors, or family members who happen to be fetching the mail. Neither should anybody be required to have her official ballot handled by the postal service unless she specifically requests it.

Your official ballot should be treated as a hyper-sensitive document, not like junk mail delivered months before Election Day. The best way to minimize the time your official ballot can be handled by others is to vote on Election Day at an official, local precinct, where it is handled for just a matter of seconds or minutes before you cast it.

4. Local Control

In 2016 President Barack Obama declared that our elections could not be rigged because “they are so de-centralized.” Indeed, de-centralization is key to election integrity. But in the Covid-produced elections of 2020, massive early voting by mail-in ballots was a huge step towards centralization. Only about 30 percent of votes were cast in person.

State and local officials eliminated nearly 21,000 in-person polling places out of the 116,990 that were active in the 2016 elections. According to the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission, the continuing decline in polling places is due to alternatives such as large early voting centers and mail-in voting.

Conservatives add to this problem when they vote early by mail out of fear that they’ll be told they already voted by the time they get to the polls, as happened in the recent election in California. Oddly, Democrats don’t seem to complain when tens of thousands of local polling places simply evaporate, even though they routinely argue that election integrity is equal to voter suppression. Also, way too many local election boards are corrupt due to buyoffs by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerburg and the left-wing billionaire class posing as philanthropists.

No voting process is perfect, but the above four conditions are critical to renewing trust in a system that has proven deceitful. McAuliffe and company have zero interest in any of the above. They are stakeholders in a system that reeks of fraud.

AT&T reportedly offers critical race theory training program: ‘White people, you are the problem’

AT&T — the world’s largest telecommunications company — offers an employee training program that teaches premises such as “American racism is a uniquely white trait” and “white people, you are the problem,” according to a new report. AT&T has disputed some of the claims in the report, and dismissed it as “misleading.”

According to internal documents obtained by journalist Christopher F. Rufo, AT&T launched an initiative called “Listen Understand Act” last year that is “based on the core principles of critical race theory, including ‘intersectionality,’ ‘systemic racism,’ ‘white privilege,’ and ‘white fragility.'”

A senior AT&T employee, who spoke to Rufo on the condition of anonymity, said managers at the company now face annual assessments on diversity issues, and there is “mandatory participation” in “race reeducation exercises.” The source allegedly told Rufo that white employees are “expected to confess their complicity in ‘white privilege’ and ‘systemic racism,’ or they will be penalized in their performance reviews.”

The initiative encourages employees to read a Chicago Tribune article written by Dahleen Glanton that says, “White people, you are the problem. Regardless of how much you say you detest racism, you are the sole reason it has flourished for centuries.”

“American racism is a uniquely white trait,” the article states. “Black people cannot be racist toward you. Racism, by definition, is ‘prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.’ Black people cannot exude a sense of superiority that we have never experienced.”

Glanton claims that white people “enjoy the opportunities and privileges that white supremacy” provides them.

The program urges employees to participate in the “21-Day Racial Equity Habit Challenge” that instructs people to “do one action to further your understanding of power, privilege, supremacy, oppression, and equity.”

Eddie Moore, Jr, director of the Privilege Institute and the National White Privilege Conference, is credited with creating the “21-Day Racial Equity Habit Challenge.” Moore recommends reading articles such as: “The Case for Reparations,” The Weaponization of Whiteness in Schools,” and “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” The challenge suggests websites such as the Antiracism Center, the Transgender Training Institute, and National Center for Transgender Equality.

An AT&T spokesperson called the report “misleading,” and told the New York Post that City Journal’s report is “filled with misinformation and inaccuracies, including the ridiculous claim that we require employees to participate in ‘race reeducation’ exercises.'”

“This is blatantly untrue,” the rep said. “We simply provide employees with resources they can use on a voluntary basis to facilitate conversations that are important to them, our customers and the communities we serve. Whether an employee uses these resources or not is up to them, and does not affect their annual performance rating. We have a long and proud history of valuing diversity, equality, and inclusion, and will continue to do so.”

North Korea tells hungry citizens to ‘tighten belts’ until 2025

North Korea is telling citizens to tighten their belts through at least 2025, the year they will reopen the border with China which they closed last year to ward off the coronavirus, causing severe food shortages, sources in the country told RFA.

After the government informed citizens to expect more years of hardship, people complained that they might not be able to last through the coming winter–much less hold out through the middle of the decade.

“Two weeks ago, they told the neighborhood watch unit meeting that our food emergency would continue until 2025. Authorities emphasized that the possibility of reopening customs between North Korea and China before 2025 was very slim,” a resident of the northwestern border city of Sinuiju, across from China’s Dandong, told RFA’s Korean Service Oct. 21.

“The food situation right now is already clearly an emergency, and the people are struggling with shortages. When the authorities tell them that they need to conserve and consume less food until 2025… they can do nothing but feel great despair,” said the source who requested anonymity for security reasons.

Chronically short of food, the country of 25 million has seen starvation deaths in the wake of the closure of the Sino-Korean border and suspension of trade with China in January 2020 to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

The move devastated the North Korean economy, causing food prices to skyrocket without imports from China covering the gap between domestic food production and demand.

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization projected in a recent report that North Korea would be short about 860,000 tons of food this year, about two months’ consumption. The UN World Food Program estimates that about 40% of North Korea’s population is undernourished.

North Korea faulted factors beyond its control for its inability to achieve food self-sufficiency and other sustainable development goals in a recent Voluntary National Review for the United Nations.

“The continued sanctions and blockade on the DPRK, severe natural disasters that hit the country every year and the protracted world health crisis since 2020 are main obstacles to the Government’s efforts to achieve the sustainable development of the country and improve the people’s livelihood,” the report said.

Though UN and U.S. sanctions restrict the trade of certain goods that could generate cash and resources into Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile programs, the border closure restricts all trade, and it has made finding their next meal difficult for many North Koreans.

The people were looking forward to the border reopening and had been hoping it would happen soon, according to the Sinuiju resident.

“Distrust and resentment of the authorities is rampant among the residents because at the meeting they said we should reduce the amount of food we eat and tighten our belts more than ever,” the source said.

“Some of the residents are saying that the situation right now is so serious they don’t know if they can even survive the coming winter. They say that telling us to endure hardship until 2025 is the same as telling us to starve to death,” said the source.

When the same bleak food message was delivered to residents of Hoeyrong, the northeastern border city of 150,000 people, officials tried to spin it as the country’s successful management of the pandemic in a world ravaged by coronavirus, a resident told RFA.

“They said at the meeting that the coronavirus situation in other countries was so bad. The number of coronavirus-related deaths is rapidly increasing every day around the world,” said the second source, who requested anonymity to speak freely.

“But the residents do not trust the authorities’ explanation, saying, ‘No matter how difficult the situation is, where on Earth could there be people going through more difficulty than we are?’” the second source said.

The people criticize the government for doing nothing to solve the food crisis and worry that the border will remain closed even if they are dying of starvation, according to the second source.

“Criticism is coming out that the government’s emphasis on saving food might be because the Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un is not aware of how serious the food situation is,” the second source said.

“Residents are already struggling to get by and have already tightened their belts as much as possible. They resent the unrealistic demands of the authorities, asking how much tighter they could possibly tighten their belts,” said the second source.

The North Korean government has been pushing its mantra of self-reliance since the beginning of this year. One of leader Kim Jong Un’s key messages in the eighth congress of the ruling Korean Workers’ Party in January was for the country to decrease dependence on imports and solve its own problems.

In April, authorities told them to prepare for an economic situation worse than the Arduous March, the Korean name for the 1994-1998 famine that killed millions, as many as 10 percent of the country by some estimates.

In July, the Central Committee ordered citizens to start farming their own food in anticipation of a food shortage that could last three years.

Sources said that citizens were resentful because the government was shirking its responsibilities to the people, simply telling them that they were on their own to feed themselves without doing anything to solve the problem.

Hunter Biden’s New York art exhibit draws few visitors, many give fake names, even his own parents decide to skip it

Hunter Biden’s controversial art exhibit in New York has reportedly received only a handful of attendees, some of whom refused to even give their actual names.

Biden’s gallery at the Georges Berges Gallery in the SoHo neighborhood of New York has drawn some high profile guests, according to a Saturday New York Post report on the show’s attendance.

The gallery – guarded with security and only permitting those who have obtained an invitation in – drew in Bill Fine, president of Artnet, an online platform to market and sell art, as well as Gene Epstein, a former senior economist at the New York Stock Exchange. 

Biden’s paintings range in price between $75,000 and $500,000, massive price tags for a fresh-faced painter, one of many details that have raised potential ethics concerns with activists, especially in light of past allegations that Hunter Biden has profited off of his father’s office in business dealings – something both he and his father have denied. 

The White House has insisted there is no need for concern as they have been in contact with gallery owners and insisted buyers’ names be kept private from the administration, though critics have questioned the effectiveness of this plan. 

Georges Berges, the owner of the gallery displaying ‘The Journey Home – A Hunter Biden Solo Exhibition’, chalked up concerns about Biden’s sudden art career to “political irrationality.” 

“There are the blind, predetermined judgements, not just of Hunter, but of myself. If people objectively look at his work, it’s great work,” Berges said, insisting most that have seen the gallery are impressed by it. 

Two people that will not be attending the show are President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden, something Berges said is “unfortunate,” but part of “the times we live in.”

Multiple visitors who could not be identified by the Post refused to give their names or even offered up “fake monikers” instead. Potential visitors are reportedly vetted by a team of lawyers, and one needs to attempt to make an appointment with the gallery to get in to see the work.

Biden’s show runs through November 15, and then will move to a gallery in Berlin. His work was previously displayed at an exhibit in Los Angeles.

Virginia Dems Cited 300,000+ Mail-In Ballot ‘Delay’ Days Before Election Officials, Media Said Results May Not Be Known On Election Day

“Thousands of absentee ballots currently sit at postal facilities throughout the Commonwealth, unprocessed for weeks on end.”

Virginia Democrats had filed a lawsuit against USPS complaining about a “delay” of 300,000 mail-in votes just days before election officials and mainstream media outlets began priming the public for a scenario in which the results of the gubernatorial election may not be decided on Election Day due to mail-in ballots.

The Elias Law Group, a firm recently hired by the Terry McAuliffe campaign headed by Clinton-allied attorney Marc Elias, filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Democratic Party of Virginia on Friday October 22 against the United States Postal Service (USPS) citing a “delay” of over 300 thousand mail-in ballots in the gubernatorial race.

“With Election Day less than two weeks away and more than 300,000 Virginians likely to attempt to cast their votes by mail, the failure of the United States Postal Service…to timely process and deliver election-related mail is threatening to disenfranchise thousands of Virginia voters,” the lawsuit claimed.

“Thousands of absentee ballots currently sit at postal facilities throughout the Commonwealth, unprocessed for weeks on end.”

The USPS maintains they have a “robust and tested process for the proper handling and timely delivery of Election Mail.”

“Our Election Mail processes and procedures are fully operational in Virginia. We are not aware of any processing delays of any ballots within our facilities nor any ballot delivery delays, and we have fully communicated this information to election officials,” USPS public relations representative Martha Johnson told The Washington Times.

Just days after the lawsuit was filed, corporate media outlets and partisan election officials began priming Virginia voters for a post-Election Day debacle in which the winner of the race may be unknowable until the following Friday due to mail-in ballots.

In Virginia, as was the same for the 2020 Presidential Election, mail-in votes are for some reason allowed to be counted if they are postmarked by the end of Election Day and received three whole days after the election.

Last year, 300,000 votes for Joe Biden were counted in a series of five suspicious ballot drops in the dead of night after Election Day in Virginia, with one of those dumps accounting for a staggering 73% of all Biden votes in Fairfax County.

As a result of the 308,000-vote ballot dump, Biden appeared to have defeated President Donald Trump by a margin of 80% in Virginia’s most populous county, vastly and suspiciously outperforming failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

Attorneys General in 10 States Join Fight Against Biden Admin’s Vaccine Mandate

Ten attorneys general in states with Republican governorships filed a lawsuit against the White House’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors.

The lawsuit, dated Oct. 29, was filed by the attorneys general of Alaska, Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming. They described (pdf) the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for contractors as a “power grab.”

“If the federal government attempts to unconstitutionally exert its will and force federal contractors to mandate vaccinations, the workforce and businesses could be decimated, further exacerbating the supply chain and workforce crises,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said in a statement as the lawsuit was filed.

Schmitt, a Republican, further argued that the federal government “should not be mandating vaccinations, and that’s why we filed suit today,” saying the move is “illegal” and “unconstitutional.”

President Joe Biden on Sept. 9 announced sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandates for federal workers and contractors, giving them a Dec. 8 deadline. Federal workers and contractors under the mandate will not be able to submit weekly COVID-19 tests and instead have to get vaccinated or seek a religious or medical exemption.

In the same breath, the president said that he would direct the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to create a rule for employers with 100 or more employees to mandate vaccines or weekly COVID-19 testing for employees, affecting some 80 million private-sector workers. Healthcare staff who work at Medicaid- or Medicare-funded facilities also have to get the vaccine, with no option to submit to weekly testing instead.

While Biden has said that the vaccine mandates are needed to deal with the Delta variant surge, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data has shown that COVID-19 cases have persistently dropped across the United States in recent weeks. Meanwhile, some trade groups have issued warnings that Biden’s mandates on vaccines would trigger significant staffing and supply chain issues nationwide.

“The ramifications of the federal contractor vaccine mandate are significant,” Nebraska Attorney General Douglas Peterson said in a statement late last week. “It will impact countless employees, exacerbate existing workforce shortages, and create economic instability. Most importantly, it puts individual employees who happened to work for federal contractors out of a job if they simply make the personal choice not to be vaccinated.”

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, names Biden, COVID-19 task force chief Jeff Zients, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young, General Services Administration head Robin Carnahan, Office of Personnel and Management director Kiran Ahuja, and others as defendants. The attorneys general are seeking an injunction against the vaccine mandate.

It comes after legal challenges on the contractor vaccine mandate have come from other states, including Florida, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, and others.

COVID-19 is the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The Epoch Times has contacted the White House for comment.

Tithe Belongs to the Lord

Marxism versus Libertarianism: Two Types of Internationalism

There are two main philosophical and ideological schools of thought that include the problem of internationalism in their principles. The first is liberal internationalism, which developed within the framework of classical liberalism. The second is orthodox Marxism and its various derivatives that entertain the idea of proletarian internationalism. The concept of internationalism has different origins, meanings, and practical implementations in the two schools of thought.

Because the term “liberal” in a politico-philosophical sense was highjacked by the Left and changed its meaning in people’s perception, it is better to use the term “libertarian internationalism” for the purpose of this discussion.

As a component of political doctrine, libertarian internationalism is based on the concept of laissez-faire, which implies, among other things, free trade and free movement of capital. The main goal of libertarian internationalism is to ensure economic and individual freedom on a global scale that would lead to the prosperity of individual, family, community, and country, and ensure a peaceful world order. From an economic and philosophical point of view, libertarian internationalism is a logical continuation and generalization of the concept of division and cooperation of labor. Division and cooperation of labor are the result of the societal development process that obeys the objective economic laws.

Division of labor results from an interplay between the evolutional forces of natural selection and market forces, and has influenced the development of human society from prehistoric times to this day. It is clear that specialized labor achieves better productivity and quality of the end product or service. Specialization was a manifestation of natural selection based on specific individual skills. At the same time, specialization suggests that an individual voluntarily gives up the production of a commodity that he is less qualified to manufacture but whose consumption is still essential to him. He relies on acquiring these lacking goods and services in the market. Basically, he trusts that some others will supply him needed things that he does not produce anymore. That someone is supposed to know better than everybody else how to produce his specialty commodity or service and, in turn, relies on others to produce something else for him, and so on. In other words, a high degree of division of labor brought members of society together as one, relying on each other. However, it is not collectivism but a voluntary cooperation of individuals who respect each other’s property rights. Division of labor creates atomic, independent producers and consumers, and cooperation brings them together in production and in a marketplace. In other words, division of labor induces cooperation.

The whole of humanity has found this mode of operation more advanced and gradually intensified the division of labor and reciprocal and beneficial trade. It is not done by someone’s order; it simply reflects behavioral changes that humans experience under an influence of selective pressure and the unrestrained laws of the market economy. The domestic mode of production gradually drifts from “production for use” to “production for exchange.” The scale of exchange has steadily increased, crossing the boundaries of the individual household over time and eventually reaching a global level. The entrepreneurial class has taken on many risks to enter manufacturing, service delivery, and trade to meet consumer demand. Under developed capitalism, national borders are crossed not only by goods and services but also by capital.

Libertarian internationalism is constructive and peaceful in nature and is possible due to the entrepreneurial qualities of individuals and a universal consensus on respecting property rights. Thus, libertarian internationalism is essentially entrepreneurial internationalism. Conversely, the idea of globalization, in which the world political bureaucracy interferes with the economic issues of sovereign enterprises or entire countries, is alien to entrepreneurial internationalism. Libertarian internationalism is the ideal that the world community should strive for, but unfortunately, the continuing interference of politics in the economy and worldwide collectivist trends are alienating humanity from a natural and more just order.

Proletarian internationalism arose in the minds of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels as they developed their materialist conception of history. Marxism is a deterministic catastrophe theory applied to the evolution of human society. Using the Hegelian method of dialectics, the founders of Marxism divided capitalist society into two dichotomous classes: the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The unsolvable conflict between the two antagonistic classes, caused, according to Marx, by the unfair appropriation of surplus value by the capitalists, had to reach a boiling point, the result of which would be a social cataclysm. Marx appointed the proletariat as the driving force, agents of the socialist revolution, designed to sweep away the liberal democratic state and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat as a transitional stage on the path to building a classless society.

Marx considered his theory to be the pinnacle of scientific research in economics and sociology, in which he uncovered the objective laws of the development of society. The objective laws of the development of society, as well as the laws of nature, have to be universal and operate independently of someone else’s will. They cannot be disabled, canceled, or changed; they are a given that affects everything and everyone.

But it was precisely with objectivity that Marx had problems. First of all, the division of society into only two classes and the appointment of the proletariat as an agent of the revolution are unwarranted. Moreover, the workers themselves have not yet realized that they are the proletariat or the role that the founder of Marxism has assigned to them. Marx understood this perfectly and proposed theoretical and practical measures for the emancipation of the proletariat, awakening their class consciousness, and preparing for the political struggle against the bourgeoisie. However, in order to meet the criterion of objectivity, the class consciousness of the proletariat would have to develop naturally and spontaneously, without the influence of anyone’s will. Artificial and purposeful incitement to revolutionary sentiments and instigation to overthrow the existing system do not meet the criterion of objectivity and instead completely falsify it. Indeed, a scientific theory of the development of society is not needed to prepare for a coup.

Moreover, as objective laws must be universal, the same societal developments must occur in other countries. Marxism argued that the socialist revolution must have a universal character, that is, take place on a global scale, or at least in the most industrialized countries. Marx and Engels well understood that entrepreneurs were genuinely international, as capital does not have borders and the economies of different countries are interconnected. At the same time, labor was mostly local, lacking international organizations and representations. Therefore, Marxism invented proletarian internationalism in order to accommodate Marx and Engels’s teaching to these socioeconomic realities and attempt to mobilize the world proletariat for the world socialist revolution. In The Communist Manifesto, the founders of Marxism simply postulated that the proletariat has no boundaries and called on the proletariat of all countries to unite. Marx substantiated this postulate by the fact that the capitalists themselves created the preconditions for the proletarian brotherhood that would ultimately erase the “national one-sidedness” of consciousness within the masses of the proletariat. This conclusion seems farfetched and looks more like wishful thinking.

The Marxist suggestion that proletarians possess exceptional moral qualities which oppose nationalism and bigotry and exhibit an unconditional love for all people is empirically unwarranted, and there is no historical evidence to support it. It was, instead, a necessary condition in order for the Marxist theory to be logically consistent; that is, the world socialist revolution against the world bourgeoisie could not take place without a united front of proletarians. Marxism consolidated and expanded internationalism as an integral feature of the workers’ and socialist movements, placing itself in opposition to the contrived nationalism of capitalist society. It was an act of intellectual dishonesty that is still difficult to eradicate.

Thus, internationalism in the interpretation of libertarian philosophy and Marxist doctrine are completely different concepts. Proletarian internationalism is a political myth postulated by the founders of Marxism and used as a propaganda tool then and now. It is characterized by extreme aggressiveness, since it was invented as a weapon for the political fight against world capital. Libertarian internationalism, in contrast, is peaceful and constructive. It follows naturally from the logical and consistent development of human society in terms of the division and cooperation of labor and is based on respect for private property rights.

1...3,3013,3023,303...3,903Page 3,302 of 3,903
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2025 American Faith Media Network. All rights reserved.