Select Page ::

Smallpox in Canada | The Canadian Encyclopedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

A woman with smallpox in Prince Edward Island, c. 1909.

Smallpox is an infectious disease most commonly caused by the variola major virus. Its symptoms include fever, headache, vomiting, mouth sores and an extensive skin rash. The rash blistersand scabs, leaving pitted scars or pocks. Smallpox can cause pneumonia, blindness, and infection in joints and bones. There is also a less virulent form of smallpox called alastrim, caused by the variola minor virus.

Smallpox spreads in saliva droplets and through contact with the infectious rash. It can be passed between people and from contaminated objects to people. The rate of death from variola major is 30 per cent but from variola minor it is 1 per cent or less.

Smallpox crossed the Atlantic Ocean when European empires began to expand in the 16th century. The disease had long decimated populations and caused terror. It was first reported in New France in 1616 near Tadoussac, the colonys first fur-trading post. The budding fur trade repeatedlyexposed nearbyInnu and Algonquin communities to the disease. Many fell ill and died due to their lackof immunity. The disease spread into the Maritime,James Bay and Great Lakes regions.

Between 1634 and 1640, Jesuit priests introduced smallpox into Wendake (Huronia),west of Lake Simcoe and south of Georgian Bay. Priests insisted on baptizing sick and dyingHuron-Wendat.However,the priests presence contributed to the spread of the disease. Due to smallpox and other infectious diseases, the Huron-Wendat population declined by roughly 60 per cent by 1640.

Smallpox played a large role in the struggles between the French, British and Americans to control the St. Lawrence region. In 173233, a smallpox epidemic swept through Louisbourg, a French settlement in what is now Nova Scotia. It killed at least 150 people, including people the French had enslaved and brought to the colony. Another epidemic hit Louisbourg in 1755. This was the worst epidemic in New France. It was part of a larger epidemic that swept acrossNorth America between 1755 and 1782. During the Seven Years War, an outbreak forced de Vaudreuil,the French commander, to delay his invasion of Fort Oswego in what is now New York State. In 1763, the British under Jeffrey Amherst used blankets exposedto smallpox as germ warfare in an attempt to subdue the First Nations resistance led byObwandiyag (Pontiac). In 1775, during theAmerican Revolution,American troops besiegingQuebec City were stricken with smallpox.

As European fur-trading posts moved west, so did the virus. From 1779 to 1783, smallpox spread to areas that now form parts of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Some communities of Plains Indigenous peoples lost 75 per centor more of their members. It is estimated that more than half of First Nations people living along the Saskatchewan River(territory of the Nehiyawak, Saulteaux, Assiniboine and Niitsitapi) died of smallpox orepidemic-related starvation.

In 1838, a second smallpox epidemic struck the Prairies. The epidemic began with an infected person aboard an American Fur Company steamship on the Missouri River. The captain refusedto halt or quarantine the ship. The virus eventually reached Forts Union and McKenzie, in what is now North Dakota and Montana. Traders representing various nations, including the Assiniboine and Niitsitapi (Blackfoot), frequented the affected American trading posts.

Hudsons Bay Company employees started giving inoculations and teaching the technique to others after the two Prairie epidemics. Smallpox changed power structures andalliances, as well as land use and occupancy. Some distinct cultural groups disappeared as almost all of their members died. Survivors sometimes joined other ethnic groups.

Mtis communities in what is now central Alberta experienced a smallpox outbreak in 1870. St. Alberts Mtis populationdeclined by roughly 37 per cent that year.

Smallpox first reached the Pacific Northwest in the late 18th century. In the late 1770s, the disease killed many members of Tlingit, Haida,Kwakwakawakw, Nuu-chah-nulth, Salish and Ktunaxacommunities. In 1782, roughly two-thirds of the St:l population died after contracting smallpox.

In 1862, a person infected with smallpox arrived in Victoria aboard a steamship travelling from San Francisco. The disease spread to an encampment north of the city, where tradersfrom many First Nations stayed. The few efforts colonists made to control the disease were disorganized. Some demanded the eviction of Indigenous people from colonial communities to protect themselves from the disease. When the residents of the north encampment left for their homelands, the disease spread across the colonies of Vancouver Islandand British Columbia. The disease had devastating impacts on many peoples, including the nations of Kwakwakawakw, Tlingit, Heiltsuk, Haida, Tsimshianand Tilhqotin, as well as some Coast Salish and Interior Salish nations. On the coast alone, some 14,000 Indigenous people died, representing a loss of roughly half of the regions population.

The1862 epidemic left mass gravesites, empty settlements and grieving survivors. It also impacted governance in some nations. Stories, knowledge and skills were lost with those who carried them. The massive population decline paved the way for coloniststo move further into Indigenous lands without establishing treaty relations. Fear ofsmallpox was one cause of the Chilcotin War of 1864 (see Tilhqotin).

Beginning in 1768, arm-to-arm variolation, an inoculation using the live smallpox virus, became more widely practised in North America and helped limit the spread of the disease. Reverend John Clinch introduced a safer vaccine in North America in 1798.After Confederation, the provinces made it mandatory to vaccinate schoolchildren. They also passed laws allowing municipalities and townships to carry out general vaccinationwhen an epidemic threatened. However, many people opposed mandatory vaccination. Anti-vaccinationists were critical of the unclean administration of vaccines and viewed vaccines asa way for public health units to avoid more costly sanitary measures. Some believed that vaccines would cause illness and suffering. Anti-vaccinationists also viewed mandatoryvaccination as a breach of individual rights. Many French Canadians in Montreal opposed vaccination during a major smallpox outbreak in 1885.Riots broke out in the city, in part as a response to officials attempts to enforce control measures.

Modern smallpox vaccine production began in Canada in 1916. Nevertheless, a notable outbreak occurred in Windsor, Ontarioin 1924. Sixty-seven unvaccinated people contracted the disease and thirty-two died. Smallpox persisted in Canada until 1946, when vaccination campaigns eliminated it. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared it globally eradicated in 1979 aftera 10-year campaign in South America, Africa and Asia. Smallpox is the first major disease to have been wiped out by public health measures.

Canadian scientists played a key role in the eradication. Connaught Laboratories, based in Palmerston, Ontario, consulted on vaccine production across the Americas.Between 1980 and 2001, Connaught and its successors kept smallpox samples in a deep-freeze in case the vaccine was needed in the future. After 9/11, in the context of new fearsof bioterrorism, pharmaceutical company Aventis Pasteur retrieved the stocks to create a new stockpile of the vaccine.

Read the original here:

Smallpox in Canada | The Canadian Encyclopedia

History of biological warfare – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Before the 20th century, the use of biological agents took three major forms:

In the 20th century, sophisticated bacteriological and virological techniques allowed the production of significant stockpiles of weaponized bio-agents:

The earliest documented incident of the intention to use biological weapons is possibly recorded in Hittite texts of 15001200 BC, in which victims of tularemia were driven into enemy lands, causing an epidemic.[1] Although the Assyrians knew of ergot, a parasitic fungus of rye which produces ergotism when ingested, there is no evidence that they poisoned enemy wells with the fungus, as has been claimed.

According to Homer's epic poems about the legendary Trojan War, the Iliad and the Odyssey, spears and arrows were tipped with poison. During the First Sacred War in Greece, in about 590 BC, Athens and the Amphictionic League poisoned the water supply of the besieged town of Kirrha (near Delphi) with the toxic plant hellebore.[2] According to Herodotus, during the 4th century BC Scythian archers dipped their arrow tips into decomposing cadavers of humans and snakes[3] or in blood mixed with manure,[4] supposedly making them contaminated with dangerous bacterial agents like Clostridium perfringens and Clostridium tetani, and snake venom.[5]

In a naval battle against King Eumenes of Pergamon in 184 BC, Hannibal of Carthage had clay pots filled with venomous snakes and instructed his sailors to throw them onto the decks of enemy ships.[6] The Roman commander Manius Aquillius poisoned the wells of besieged enemy cities in about 130 BC. In about AD 198, the Parthian city of Hatra (near Mosul, Iraq) repulsed the Roman army led by Septimius Severus by hurling clay pots filled with live scorpions at them.[7] Like Scythian archers, Roman soldiers dipped their swords into excrements and cadavers too victims were commonly infected by tetanus as result.[8]

There are numerous other instances of the use of plant toxins, venoms, and other poisonous substances to create biological weapons in antiquity.[9]

The Mongol Empire established commercial and political connections between the Eastern and Western areas of the world, through the most mobile army ever seen. The armies, composed of the most rapidly moving travelers who had ever moved between the steppes of East Asia (where bubonic plague was and remains endemic among small rodents), managed to keep the chain of infection without a break until they reached, and infected, peoples and rodents who had never encountered it. The ensuing Black Death may have killed up to 25 million total, including China and roughly a third of the population of Europe and in the next decades, changing the course of Asian and European history.

Biologicals were extensively used in many parts of Africa from the sixteenth century AD, most of the time in the form of poisoned arrows, or powder spread on the war front as well as poisoning of horses and water supply of the enemy forces.[10][11] In Borgu, there were specific mixtures to kill, hypnotize, make the enemy bold, and to act as an antidote against the poison of the enemy as well. The creation of biologicals was reserved for a specific and professional class of medicine-men.[11] In South Sudan, the people of the Koalit Hills kept their country free of Arab invasions by using tsetse flies as a weapon of war.[12] Several accounts can give an idea of the efficiency of the biologicals. For example, Mockley-Ferryman in 1892 commented on the Dahomean invasion of Borgu, stating that "their (Borgawa) poisoned arrows enabled them to hold their own with the forces of Dahomey notwithstanding the latter's muskets."[11] The same scenario happened to Portuguese raiders in Senegambia when they were defeated by Mali's Gambian forces, and to John Hawkins in Sierra Leone where he lost a number of his men to poisoned arrows.[13]

During the Middle Ages, victims of the bubonic plague were used for biological attacks, often by flinging fomites such as infected corpses and excrement over castle walls using catapults. Bodies would be tied along with cannonballs and shot towards the city area. In 1346, during the siege of Caffa (now Feodossia, Crimea) the attacking Tartar Forces (subjugated by the Mongol empire under Genghis Khan more than a century earlier), used the bodies of Mongol warriors of the Golden Horde who had died of plague, as weapons. It has been speculated that this operation may have been responsible for the advent of the Black Death in Europe. At the time, the attackers thought that the stench was enough to kill them, though it was the disease that was deadly.[14][15]

At the siege of Thun-l'vque in 1340, during the Hundred Years' War, the attackers catapulted decomposing animals into the besieged area.[16]

In 1422, during the siege of Karlstein Castle in Bohemia, Hussite attackers used catapults to throw dead (but not plague-infected) bodies and 2000 carriage-loads of dung over the walls.[17]

English Longbowmen usually did not draw their arrows from a quiver; rather, they stuck their arrows into the ground in front of them. This allowed them to nock the arrows faster and the dirt and soil was likely to stick to the arrowheads, thus making the wounds much more likely to become infected.

The last known incident of using plague corpses for biological warfare may have occurred in 1710, when Russian forces attacked Swedish troops by flinging plague-infected corpses over the city walls of Reval (Tallinn) (although this is disputed).[18][19][20] However, during the 1785 siege of La Calle, Tunisian forces flung diseased clothing into the city.[17]

During Pontiac's Rebellion, in June 1763 a group of Native Americans laid siege to British-held Fort Pitt.[21][22] During a parley in the middle of the siege on June 24, Captain Simeon Ecuyer gave representatives of the besieging Delawares, including Turtleheart, two blankets and a handkerchief enclosed in small metal boxes that had been exposed to smallpox, in an attempt to spread the disease to the besieging Native warriors in order to end the siege.[23] William Trent, the trader turned militia commander who had come up with the plan, sent an invoice to the British colonial authorities in North America indicating that the purpose of giving the blankets was "to Convey the Smallpox to the Indians." The invoice was approved by General Thomas Gage, then serving as Commander-in-Chief, North America.[24] A reported outbreak that began the spring before left as many as one hundred Native Americans dead in Ohio Country from 1763 to 1764. It is not clear whether the smallpox was a result of the Fort Pitt incident or the virus was already present among the Delaware people as outbreaks happened on their own every dozen or so years[25] and the delegates were met again later and seemingly had not contracted smallpox.[26][27][28] Trade and combat also provided ample opportunity for transmission of the disease.[29]

A month later, Colonel Henry Bouquet, who was leading a relief attempt towards Fort Pitt, wrote to his superior Sir Jeffery Amherst to discuss the possibility of using smallpox-infested blankets to spread smallpox amongst Natives. Amherst wrote to Bouquet that: "Could it not be contrived to send the small pox among the disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them." Bouquet replied in a latter, writing that "I will try to inocculate [sic] the Indians by means of Blankets that may fall in their hands, taking care however not to get the disease myself. As it is pity to oppose good men against them, I wish we could make use of the Spaniard's Method, and hunt them with English Dogs. Supported by Rangers, and some Light Horse, who would I think effectively extirpate or remove that Vermine." After receiving Bouquet's response, Amherst wrote back to him, stating that "You will Do well to try to Innoculate [sic] the Indians by means of Blankets, as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your Scheme for Hunting them Down by Dogs could take Effect, but England is at too great a Distance to think of that at present."[30][31][21]

Many Aboriginal Australians have claimed that smallpox outbreaks in Australia were a deliberate result of European colonisation,[32] though this possibility has only been raised by historians from the 1980s onwards, when Dr. Noel Butlin suggested "there are some possibilities that... disease could have been used deliberately as an exterminating agent."[33]

In 1997, scholar David Day claimed there "remains considerable circumstantial evidence to suggest that officers other than Phillip, or perhaps convicts or soldiers... deliberately spread smallpox among aborigines",[34] and in 2000, Dr. John Lambert argued that "strong circumstantial evidence suggests the smallpox epidemic which ravaged Aborigines in 1789, may have resulted from deliberate infection."[35]

Judy Campbell argued in 2002 that it is highly improbable that the First Fleet was the source of the epidemic as "smallpox had not occurred in any members of the First Fleet"; the only possible source of infection from the Fleet being exposure to variolous matter imported for the purposes of inoculation against smallpox. Campbell argued that, while there has been considerable speculation about a hypothetical exposure to the First Fleet's variolous matter, there was no evidence that Aboriginal people were ever actually exposed to it. She pointed to regular contact between fishing fleets from the Indonesia archipelago, where smallpox was always present, and Aboriginal people in Australia's North as a more likely source for the introduction of smallpox. She notes that while these fishermen are generally referred to as 'Macassans', referring to the port of Macassar on the island of Sulawesi from which most of the fishermen originated, "some travelled from islands as distant as New Guinea". She noted that there is little disagreement that the smallpox epidemic of the 1860s was contracted from Macassan fishermen and spread through the Aboriginal population by Aborigines fleeing outbreaks and also via their traditional social, kinship and trading networks. She argued that the 178990 epidemic followed the same pattern.[36]

These claims are controversial as it is argued that any smallpox virus brought to New South Wales probably would have been sterilised by heat and humidity encountered during the voyage of the First Fleet from England and incapable of biological warfare. However, in 2007, Christopher Warren demonstrated that any smallpox which might have been carried onboard the First Fleet may have been still viable upon landing in Australia.[37] Since them, some scholars have argued that smallpox in Australia was deliberately spread by the inhabitants of the British penal colony at Port Jackson in 1789.[38][39]

In 2013, Warren reviewed the issue and argued that smallpox did not spread across Australia before 1824 and showed that there was no smallpox at Macassar that could have caused the outbreak at Sydney. Warren, however, did not address the issue of persons who joined the Macassan fleet from other islands and from parts of Sulawesi other than the port of Macassar. Warren concluded that the British were "the most likely candidates to have released smallpox" near Sydney Cove in 1789. Warren proposed that the British had no choice as they were confronted with dire circumstances when, among other factors, they ran out of ammunition for their muskets; he also used Aboriginal oral tradition and archaeological records from indigenous gravesites to analyse the cause and effect of the spread of smallpox in 1789.[40]

Prior to the publication of Warren's article (2013), a professor of physiology John Carmody argued that the epidemic was an outbreak of chickenpox which took a drastic toll on an Aboriginal population without immunological resistance.[41] With regard to how smallpox might have reached the Sydney region, Dr Carmody said: "There is absolutely no evidence to support any of the theories and some of them are fanciful and far-fetched.."[42][43] Warren argued against the chickenpox theory at endnote 3 of Smallpox at Sydney Cove Who, When, Why?.[44] However, in a 2014 joint paper on historic Aboriginal demography, Carmody and the Australian National University's Boyd Hunter argued that the recorded behavior of the epidemic ruled out smallpox and indicated chickenpox.[45]

By the turn of the 20th century, advances in microbiology had made thinking about "germ warfare" part of the zeitgeist. Jack London, in his short story '"Yah! Yah! Yah!"' (1909), described a punitive European expedition to a South Pacific island deliberately exposing the Polynesian population to measles, of which many of them died. London wrote another science fiction tale the following year, "The Unparalleled Invasion" (1910), in which the Western nations wipe out all of China with a biological attack.

During the First World War (19141918), the Empire of Germany made some early attempts at anti-agriculture biological warfare. Those attempts were made by special sabotage group headed by Rudolf Nadolny. Using diplomatic pouches and couriers, the German General Staff supplied small teams of saboteurs in the Russian Duchy of Finland, and in the then-neutral countries of Romania, the United States, and Argentina.[46] In Finland, saboteurs mounted on reindeer placed ampoules of anthrax in stables of Russian horses in 1916.[47] Anthrax was also supplied to the German military attach in Bucharest, as was glanders, which was employed against livestock destined for Allied service. German intelligence officer and US citizen Dr. Anton Casimir Dilger established a secret lab in the basement of his sister's home in Chevy Chase, Maryland, that produced glanders which was used to infect livestock in ports and inland collection points including, at least, Newport News, Norfolk, Baltimore, and New York City, and probably St. Louis and Covington, Kentucky. In Argentina, German agents also employed glanders in the port of Buenos Aires and also tried to ruin wheat harvests with a destructive fungus. Also, Germany itself became a victim of similar attacks horses bound for Germany were infected with Burkholderia by French operatives in Switzerland.[48]

The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibited the use of chemical weapons and biological weapons, but said nothing about experimentation, production, storage, or transfer; later treaties did cover these aspects. Twentieth-century advances in microbiology enabled the first pure-culture biological agents to be developed by World War II.

In the interwar period, little research was done in biological warfare in both Britain and the United States at first. In the United Kingdom the preoccupation was mainly in withstanding the anticipated conventional bombing attacks that would be unleashed in the event of war with Germany. As tensions increased, Sir Frederick Banting began lobbying the British government to establish a research program into the research and development of biological weapons to effectively deter the Germans from launching a biological attack. Banting proposed a number of innovative schemes for the dissemination of pathogens, including aerial-spray attacks and germs distributed through the mail system.

With the onset of hostilities, the Ministry of Supply finally established a biological weapons programme at Porton Down, headed by the microbiologist Paul Fildes. The research was championed by Winston Churchill and soon tularemia, anthrax, brucellosis, and botulism toxins had been effectively weaponized. In particular, Gruinard Island in Scotland, during a series of extensive tests, was contaminated with anthrax for the next 48 years. Although Britain never offensively used the biological weapons it developed, its program was the first to successfully weaponize a variety of deadly pathogens and bring them into industrial production.[49] Other nations, notably France and Japan, had begun their own biological-weapons programs.[50]

When the United States entered the war, mounting British pressure for the creation of a similar research program for an Allied pooling of resources led to the creation of a large industrial complex at Fort Detrick, Maryland in 1942 under the direction of George W. Merck.[51] The biological and chemical weapons developed during that period were tested at the Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah. Soon there were facilities for the mass production of anthrax spores, brucellosis, and botulism toxins, although the war was over before these weapons could be of much operational use.[52]

However, the most notorious program of the period was run by the secret Imperial Japanese Army Unit 731 during the war, based at Pingfan in Manchuria and commanded by Lieutenant General Shir Ishii. This unit did research on BW, conducted often fatal human experiments on prisoners, and produced biological weapons for combat use.[53] Although the Japanese effort lacked the technological sophistication of the American or British programs, it far outstripped them in its widespread application and indiscriminate brutality. Biological weapons were used against both Chinese soldiers and civilians in several military campaigns. Three veterans of Unit 731 testified in a 1989 interview to the Asahi Shimbun that they contaminated the Horustein river with typhoid near the Soviet troops during the Battle of Khalkhin Gol.[54] In 1940, the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force bombed Ningbo with ceramic bombs full of fleas carrying the bubonic plague.[55] A film showing this operation was seen by the imperial princes Tsuneyoshi Takeda and Takahito Mikasa during a screening made by mastermind Shiro Ishii.[56] During the Khabarovsk War Crime Trials the accused, such as Major General Kiyashi Kawashima, testified that as early as 1941 some 40 members of Unit 731 air-dropped plague-contaminated fleas on Changde. These operations caused epidemic plague outbreaks.[57]

Many of these operations were ineffective due to inefficient delivery systems, using disease-bearing insects rather than dispersing the agent as a bioaerosol cloud.[53]

Ban Shigeo, a technician at the Japanese Army's 9th Technical Research Institute, left an account of the activities at the Institute which was published in "The Truth About the Army Noborito Institute".[58] Ban included an account of his trip to Nanking in 1941 to participate in the testing of poisons on Chinese prisoners.[58] His testimony tied the Noborito Institute to the infamous Unit 731, which participated in biomedical research.[58]

During the final months of World War II, Japan planned to utilize plague as a biological weapon against U.S. civilians in San Diego, California, during Operation Cherry Blossoms at Night. They hoped that it would kill tens of thousands of U.S. civilians and thereby dissuade America from attacking Japan. The plan was set to launch on September 22, 1945, at night, but it never came into fruition due to Japan's surrender on August 15, 1945.[59][60][61][62]

When the war ended, the US Army quietly enlisted certain members of Noborito in its efforts against the communist camp in the early years of the Cold War.[58] The head of Unit 731, Shiro Ishii, was granted immunity from war crimes prosecution in exchange for providing information to the United States on the Unit's activities.[63] Allegations were made that a "chemical section" of a US clandestine unit hidden within Yokosuka naval base was operational during the Korean War, and then worked on unspecified projects inside the United States from 1955 to 1959, before returning to Japan to enter the private sector.[58][64]

Some of the Unit 731 personnel were imprisoned by the Soviets[citation needed], and may have been a potential source of information on Japanese weaponization.

Considerable research into BW was undertaken throughout the Cold War era by the US, UK and USSR, and probably other major nations as well, although it is generally believed that such weapons were never used.

In Britain, the 1950s saw the weaponization of plague, brucellosis, tularemia and later equine encephalomyelitis and vaccinia viruses. Trial tests at sea were carried out including Operation Cauldron off Stornoway in 1952. The programme was cancelled in 1956, when the British government unilaterally renounced the use of biological and chemical weapons.

The United States initiated its weaponization efforts with disease vectors in 1953, focused on Plague-fleas, EEE-mosquitoes, and yellow fever mosquitoes (OJ-AP).[citation needed] However, US medical scientists in occupied Japan undertook extensive research on insect vectors, with the assistance of former Unit 731 staff, as early as 1946.[63]

The United States Army Chemical Corps then initiated a crash program to weaponize anthrax (N) in the E61 1/2-lb hour-glass bomblet. Though the program was successful in meeting its development goals, the lack of validation on the infectivity of anthrax stalled standardization.[citation needed] The United States Air Force was also unsatisfied with the operational qualities of the M114/US bursting bomblet and labeled it an interim item until the Chemical Corps could deliver a superior weapon.[citation needed]

Around 1950 the Chemical Corps also initiated a program to weaponize tularemia (UL). Shortly after the E61/N failed to make standardization, tularemia was standardized in the 3.4" M143 bursting spherical bomblet. This was intended for delivery by the MGM-29 Sergeant missile warhead and could produce 50% infection over a 7-square-mile (18km2) area.[65] Although tularemia is treatable by antibiotics, treatment does not shorten the course of the disease. US conscientious objectors were used as consenting test subjects for tularemia in a program known as Operation Whitecoat.[66] There were also many unpublicized tests carried out in public places with bio-agent simulants during the Cold War.[67]

In addition to the use of bursting bomblets for creating biological aerosols, the Chemical Corps started investigating aerosol-generating bomblets in the 1950s. The E99 was the first workable design, but was too complex to be manufactured. By the late 1950s the 4.5" E120 spraying spherical bomblet was developed; a B-47 bomber with a SUU-24/A dispenser could infect 50% or more of the population of a 16-square-mile (41km2) area with tularemia with the E120.[68] The E120 was later superseded by dry-type agents.

Dry-type biologicals resemble talcum powder, and can be disseminated as aerosols using gas expulsion devices instead of a burster or complex sprayer.[citation needed] The Chemical Corps developed Flettner rotor bomblets and later triangular bomblets for wider coverage due to improved glide angles over Magnus-lift spherical bomblets.[69] Weapons of this type were in advanced development by the time the program ended.[69]

From January 1962, Rocky Mountain Arsenal "grew, purified and biodemilitarized" plant pathogen Wheat Stem Rust (Agent TX), Puccinia graminis, var. tritici, for the Air Force biological anti-crop program. TX-treated grain was grown at the Arsenal from 19621968 in Sections 2326. Unprocessed TX was also transported from Beale AFB for purification, storage, and disposal.[70] Trichothecenes Mycotoxin is a toxin that can be extracted from Wheat Stem Rust and Rice Blast and can kill or incapacitate depending on the concentration used. The "red mold disease" of wheat and barley in Japan is prevalent in the region that faces the Pacific Ocean. Toxic trichothecenes, including nivalenol, deoxynivalenol, and monoace tylnivalenol (fusarenon- X) from Fusarium nivale, can be isolated from moldy grains. In the suburbs of Tokyo, an illness similar to "red mold disease" was described in an outbreak of a food borne disease, as a result of the consumption of Fusarium- infected rice. Ingestion of moldy grains that are contaminated with trichothecenes has been associated with mycotoxicosis.[71]

Although there is no evidence that biological weapons were used by the United States, China and North Korea accused the US of large-scale field testing of BW against them during the Korean War (19501953). At the time of the Korean War the United States had only weaponized one agent, brucellosis ("Agent US"), which is caused by Brucella suis. The original weaponized form used the M114 bursting bomblet in M33 cluster bombs. While the specific form of the biological bomb was classified until some years after the Korean War, in the various exhibits of biological weapons that Korea alleged were dropped on their country nothing resembled an M114 bomblet. There were ceramic containers that had some similarity to Japanese weapons used against the Chinese in World War II, developed by Unit 731.[53][72]

Cuba also accused the United States of spreading human and animal disease on their island nation.[73][74]

During the 1948 19471949 Palestine war, International Red Cross reports raised suspicion that the Israeli Haganah militia had released Salmonella typhi bacteria into the water supply for the city of Acre, causing an outbreak of typhoid among the inhabitants. Egyptian troops later claimed to have captured disguised Haganah soldiers near wells in Gaza, whom they executed for allegedly attempting another attack. Israel denies these allegations.[75][76]

In mid-1969, the UK and the Warsaw Pact, separately, introduced proposals to the UN to ban biological weapons, which would lead to the signing of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention in 1972. United States President Richard Nixon signed an executive order in November 1969, which stopped production of biological weapons in the United States and allowed only scientific research of lethal biological agents and defensive measures such as immunization and biosafety. The biological munition stockpiles were destroyed, and approximately 2,200 researchers became redundant.[77]

Special munitions for the United States Special Forces and the CIA and the Big Five Weapons for the military were destroyed in accordance with Nixon's executive order to end the offensive program. The CIA maintained its collection of biologicals well into 1975 when it became the subject of the senate Church Committee.

The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention was signed by the US, UK, USSR and other nations, as a ban on "development, production and stockpiling of microbes or their poisonous products except in amounts necessary for protective and peaceful research" in 1972. The convention bound its signatories to a far more stringent set of regulations than had been envisioned by the 1925 Geneva Protocols. By 1996, 137 countries had signed the treaty; however it is believed that since the signing of the Convention the number of countries capable of producing such weapons has increased.

The Soviet Union continued research and production of offensive biological weapons in a program called Biopreparat, despite having signed the convention. The United States had no solid proof of this program until Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik defected in 1989, and Dr. Kanatjan Alibekov, the first deputy director of Biopreparat defected in 1992. Pathogens developed by the organization would be used in open-air trials. It is known that Vozrozhdeniye Island, located in the Aral Sea, was used as a testing site.[78] In 1971, such testing led to the accidental aerosol release of smallpox over the Aral Sea and a subsequent smallpox epidemic.[79]

During the closing stages of the Rhodesian Bush War, the Rhodesian government resorted to use chemical and biological warfare agents. Watercourses at several sites inside the Mozambique border were deliberately contaminated with cholera. These biological attacks had little overall impact on the fighting capability of ZANLA, but resulted in at least 809 recorded deaths of insurgents. It also caused considerable distress to the local population. The Rhodesians also experimented with several other pathogens and toxins for use in their counterinsurgency.[80]

After the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Iraq admitted to the United Nations inspection team to having produced 19,000 liters of concentrated botulinum toxin, of which approximately 10,000 L were loaded into military weapons; the 19,000 liters have never been fully accounted for. This is approximately three times the amount needed to kill the entire current human population by inhalation,[81]although in practice it would be impossible to distribute it so efficiently, and, unless it is protected from oxygen, it deteriorates in storage.[82]

According to the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment 8 countries were generally reported as having undeclared offensive biological warfare programs in 1995: China, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, North Korea, Syria and Taiwan. Five countries had admitted to having had offensive weapon or development programs in the past: United States, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, and Canada.[83] Offensive BW programs in Iraq were dismantled by Coalition Forces and the UN after the first Gulf War (199091), although an Iraqi military BW program was covertly maintained in defiance of international agreements until it was apparently abandoned during 1995 and 1996.[84]

On September 18, 2001, and for a few days thereafter, several letters were received by members of the U.S. Congress and American media outlets which contained intentionally prepared anthrax spores; the attack sickened at least 22 people of whom five died. The identity of the bioterrorist remained unknown until 2008, when an official suspect, who had committed suicide, was named. (See 2001 anthrax attacks.)

Suspicions of an ongoing Iraqi biological warfare program were not substantiated in the wake of the March 2003 invasion of that country. Later that year, however, Muammar Gaddafi was persuaded to terminate Libya's biological warfare program. In 2008, according to a U.S. Congressional Research Service report, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Syria and Taiwan are considered, with varying degrees of certainty, to have some BW capability.[85] According to the same 2008 report by the U.S. Congressional Research Service, "Developments in biotechnology, including genetic engineering, mayproduce a wide variety of live agents and toxins that are difficult todetect and counter; and new chemical warfare agents and mixtures of chemical weapons andbiowarfare agents are being developed . . . Countries are using the natural overlap between weapons andcivilian applications of chemical and biological materials to concealchemical weapon and bioweapon production." By 2011, 165 countries had officially joined the BWC and pledged to disavow biological weapons.[86]

Democrat Hassan Claims Gen. Bolduc’s Attacker Was Libertarian Activist

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Republican Gen. Don Bolduc (R-NH) was physically attacked by a libertarian activist before Wednesdays debate, according to opponent Sen. Maggie Hassans (D-NH) campaign staff.

Hassans campaign communications director Kevin Donohoetweetedthat the assailantwhophysically attacked the general outside last nights debate was a Libertarian activist.

Kate Constantini, Bolduc for Senate spokeswoman, told Breitbart News that law enforcement was quickly on the scene and apprehended the individual.

Prior to the debate, an individual in the crowd gathered outside attempted to punch the General and was quickly apprehended and arrested,Constantiniexplained. We are grateful to the quick response from law enforcement on the scene, she said about theGoffstown police department.

As the General said on stage tonight, its time to lower the temperature of the political discourse in this country,she added.

DERRY, NH OCTOBER 15: Republican senate nominee Don Bolduc shakes hands with attendees during a campaign event on October 15, 2022 in Derry, New Hampshire. Bolduc, and Army General who won the GOP primary will take on Sen. Maggie Hassan (D) in November. (Photo by Scott Eisen/Getty Images)

The attack occurred without mention from the debate moderators or WMUR ABC, even though the attack occurred before the debate. The network asked candidates about the rise in violence against politicians, mentioning January 6 and the attack against Paul Pelosi, but failed to mention the incident that occurred minutes before against the Republican candidate.

The debate took place one hour before President Joe Biden condemned Republicans for political violence in a speech at Union Station in Washington, D.C.

More here:

Democrat Hassan Claims Gen. Bolduc's Attacker Was Libertarian Activist

Democrats, not Republicans, block over-the-counter birth control

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Glenn Harlan Reynolds| Opinion columnist

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezsaysbirth control should be available over the counter.Shes right.

(At least, if by birth control she means birth control pills. I presume no one, least of all the pharmacist at Walgreens, wants pharmaciststo insert IUDs.)

Birth control pills are available over the counter in most other countries. The morning-after pill, better known as Plan B, is already available over the counter in America.

Most American women favor making the birth control pill accessibleover the counter.According to a 2017 Kaiser Family Foundation survey, three-quartersof women of reproductive age support over-the-counteraccess to birth control pills.

So why hasnt it happened? It must be that awful, religious-right-dominated GOP thats standing in the way, right?

Actually, not so much.

Republicans, in fact, have repeatedly tried to make birth control pills available without a prescription, only to face opposition from . . . Democrats and Planned Parenthood.

Yes, you heard that right. Democrats and Planned Parenthood have fought against making it easier for women to get birth control pills. Why? Well, they have their reasons.

In Planned Parenthoods case, its probably, according to Hadley Heath Manning writingin Forbes, because theyd make less money.Planned Parenthoods stance on expanding access to birth control may be illogical in light of their mission statement, but it is perfectly logical when you consider the groups financial interests.Planned Parenthood brings in 1.7 billion dollars in revenue annually according to it's latest financial reportand contraception accounts for 27% of the services they provide.

Immigration | Libertarian Party

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are very peaceful and highly productive.

Indeed, the United States is a country of immigrants, of all backgrounds and walks of lifesome families have just been here for more generations than others. Newcomers bring great vitality to our society.

A trulyfree market requires the free movement of people, not justproductsand ideas.

Whether theyare from India or Mexico, whether they have advanced degrees or very little education, immigrants have one great thing in common: they bravely left their familiar surroundings in search of a better life. Many are fleeing extreme poverty and violence and are searching for afree and safe place to try to build their lives.We respect and admire their courage and are proud that they see the United States as a placeof freedom, stability, and prosperity.

Of course, if someone has a record of violence, credible plans for violence, or acts violently, then Libertarianssupport blocking their entry, deporting, and/or prosecuting and imprisoning them, depending on the offense.

Libertarians do not support classifying undocumented immigrants as criminals. Our current immigration system is an embarrassment. People who would like to follow the legal procedures are unable to because these procedures are so complex and expensive and lengthy. If Americanswant immigrants to enter through legal channels, we need to make those channels fair, reasonable, and accessible.

What happened to John McAfee? Death, prison, net worth | GoodTo

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Netflix is back with another gripping true crime documentary, and viewers are in for a a wild ride with Running with the Devil: The Wild World of John McAfee. But many will be asking, what happened to John McAfee?

First came The Most Hated Man on the Internet about revenge porn criminal Hunter Moore (opens in new tab), closely followed by the bingeworthy I Just Killed My Dad documentary about Anthony Templet (opens in new tab). Untold: The Girlfriend Who Didn't Exist similarly shocked Netflix viewers with the true story of catfishRonaiah Tuiasosopo (opens in new tab) - but if you thought those were wild you've got another thing coming. Running with the Devil: The Wild World of John McAfee, tells the colourful story of John McAfee, the creator of one of the most successful pieces of computer software of all time, McAfee Anti-Virus. But while he was hugely successful, John also found himself in trouble with the law several times and eventually fled when police sought him for questioning about the murder of his neighbour and he took a film crew with him.

Netflix says of the feature-length documentary: "With access to hundreds of hours of never-before-broadcast footage of McAfee as hes pursued by the authorities, this is the definitive story of a larger-than-life character, a man who ran for President, escaped from prison multiple times, and claimed to have hacked the world." Many who have tuned in are keen for up-to-date details about John McAfee and his wife Janice McAfee now - and we've shared exactly what happened to him.

John McAfee was found dead at age 75 in a prison cell in theBrians 2 Penitentiary Centre near Barcelona, Spain on 23 June 2021. His death occurred shortly after theSpanish National Courtauthorised hisextraditionto the U.S.

Before his arrest, John McAfee had been on the run on and off for years. The Netflix documentary follows McAfee on the run and fleeing Belize police after being suspected of murdering of his neighbour.

He was later arrested in Guatemala (opens in new tab) for illegally entering the country, and was eventually released and deported to the United States in 2012 after faking a heart attack.

While back in the States, John, who believed that taxes were "illegal," decided to try and run for president in 2016 and again in 2020.

Over the years, John's behaviour became increasingly erratic and paranoid and he often believed he was 'targeted' by police.

John McAfee's cause of death was officially ruled as suicide by hanging. He was allegedly found with a suicide note in his pocket. TheCatalan Justice Departmentsaid 'everything indicates' he killed himself by hanging and this was later confirmed in an official autopsy.

However, John's wife Janice doesn't believe his death was suicide and has been campaigning to have an independent autopsy performed on John's body since July of 2021, to determine if the official cause of death can be challenged, or investigated privately.

John's body has been in the custody of the Spanish legal system since the date of his death, June 23, 2021, and Janice is petitioning to have his body released (opens in new tab) back to her.

Explaining how he didn't appear suicidal when they last spoke, Janice said: "His last words to me were 'I love you and I will call you in the evening. Those words are not words of somebody who is suicidal.

She also pointed out a tattoo that John got two years prior to his death and of which he tweeted: I got a tattoo today just in case. If I suicide myself, I didn't. I was whackd. Check my right arm.

John was arrested on 5 October 2020 in Spain at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice for tax evasion. John had avoided paying taxes on his income from 2014 to 2018 despite earning millions, federal investigators said. The tax-related criminal charges carried a sentence of up to 30 years in prison.

In 2019, John told Fox News that he had paid no tax since 2010 and has made it clear he thinks taxes are 'illegal.'

The day after he was arrested, on 6 October, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (opens in new tab) filed a complaint alleging that John and his bodyguard promoted certain initial coin offerings in a fraudulent cryptocurrency pump and dump scheme.

On 5 March 2021, theU.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New Yorkformally indicted him (opens in new tab) and an executive adviser on these charges. He was held in Spain following his arrest until his death in June 2021.

John McAfee was on the run several times throughout his life. He first stint was in 2012, following the death of his neighbour, Gregory Faull, in Belize.

A local resident explains in the documentary how John and Gregory had fallen out earlier in the year over John's four dogs, which were harassing his neighbour's parrot.

John's dogs were poisoned and killed, and just a day later, Gregory was found dead with a single gunshot through his head.

Paranoid John believed authorities in Belize would kill him if he turned himself in for questioning, to which Belizes then-Prime Minister Dean Barrow called John 'paranoid and bonkers.'

John was never charged in Gregory Faulls murder. However, John went on the run again in 2019 - this time from US authorities over tax evasion charges. He lived on a boat until his arrest in Spain in October 2020.

(Image credit: Netflix)

Even before the murder of Gregory, John claimed to have been targeted by the police, especially when he was arrested for unlicensed drug manufacturing and possession of an unlicensed weapon in Belize.

Other charges in the US against him started to build up too, including a civil lawsuit after two deaths related to his involvement in a aerotrekking accident, plus a DUI and possession of a firearm charge in Tennessee.

John got caught for the first time thanks to two VICE reporters, who had joined him on the run. They inadvertently revealed his hiding place by publishing a geo-tagged photo in an article titled Were with John McAfee right now, suckers!" (opens in new tab)

They travelled with him to Guatemala, where he was arrested for illegally entering the country. He was due to be deported back to Belize, but John faked a heart attack which led to him being hospitalised. He then flew back to America after being released.

John later explainedthat he faked the heart attacks to buy time for his attorney to file a series of appeals that ultimately prevented his deportation to Belize.

He was caught and subsequently arrested at Barcelona's El Prat airport in October 2020 while trying to travel to Instanbul, Turkey. A Spanish police source said: He was travelling to Istanbul and when his documents were run through the database, it emerged that he was the subject of a US warrant on fraud charges."

John McAfee's net worth at the time of his death was $4million. His net worth was as high as $100 million after he resigned as chief executive of McAfee in 1994 and sold his stock holdings in the business.

However, he lost much of it thanks to bad investments, increasing legal troubles and the 2008 global recession.According to Celebrity Net Worth: A series of bad investments, including a large bet on Lehman Brothers' bonds, cost McAfee millions and forced him to sell real estate and other assets for pennies on the dollar.

"McAfee sold a $25mColorado estate for just $5.7m. He also sold a mansion in Hawaii, a ranch in New Mexico and a Cessna private jet."

The Lehman Brothers went bankrupt in the 2008 global financial crisis.

(Image credit: Getty)

John sold his stake in McAfee in 1994 for a reported$100 million. In August 1993, McAfee stepped down as chief executive, but remained with the company as the chief technical officer. He was succeeded by Bill Larson (opens in new tab).

After various mergers and ownership changes,Intelacquired McAfee in August 2010. In January 2014, Intel announced that McAfee-related products would be marketed as Intel Security.

John expressed his joy at the name change, saying: "I am now everlastingly grateful to Intel for freeing me from this terrible association with the worst software on the planet."

John continued tobad-mouth the company and the business was soon de-merged from Intel, once more under the McAfee name.

In March 2022, McAfee went private via a buyout from an investor group led byAdvent International Corporation, in a deal valued at more than $14 billion.

Back in October 2020, the company returned to the public stock market and was valued at about $8.6 billion based on the outstanding shares listed in its prospectus.

McAfee shares were traded on theNASDAQstock exchange under ticker symbol MCFE, which marked its return to the public market after 9 years. However, less than two years later, the stock were delisted when the company was taken private.

The current CEO of McAfee is Greg Johnson (opens in new tab).

Related Netflix features:

Video of the Week

Follow this link:

What happened to John McAfee? Death, prison, net worth | GoodTo

John McAfee – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

British-American programmer and businessman (19452021)

John David McAfee ( MAK--fee;[1][2] 18 September 1945 23 June 2021)[3][4] was a British-American computer programmer, businessman, and two-time presidential candidate who unsuccessfully sought the Libertarian Party nomination for president of the United States in 2016 and in 2020. In 1987, he wrote the first commercial anti-virus software, founding McAfee Associates to sell his creation. He resigned in 1994 and sold his remaining stake in the company.[5] McAfee became the company's most vocal critic in later years, urging consumers to uninstall the company's anti-virus software, which he characterized as bloatware. He disavowed the company's continued use of his name in branding, a practice that has persisted in spite of a short-lived corporate rebrand attempt under Intel ownership.

McAfee's fortunes plummeted in the financial crisis of 20072008. After leaving McAfee Associates, he founded the companies Tribal Voice (makers of the PowWow chat program), QuorumEx, and Future Tense Central, among others, and was involved in leadership positions in the companies Everykey, MGT Capital Investments, and Luxcore, among others. His personal and business interests included smartphone apps, cryptocurrency, yoga, light-sport aircraft[6] and recreational drug use. He resided for a number of years in Belize, but returned to the United States in 2013 while wanted in Belize for questioning on suspicion of murder.[7]

In October 2020, McAfee was arrested in Spain over U.S. tax evasion charges.[8] U.S. federal prosecutors brought criminal and civil charges alleging that McAfee had failed to file income taxes over a four-year period.[9][10] On 23 June 2021, he was found dead due to an apparent suicide by hanging in his prison cell near Barcelona shortly after the Spanish National Court authorized his extradition to the U.S.[11][12][13] His death generated speculation and conspiracy theories about the possibility that he was murdered.[14] McAfee's wife, Janice McAfee, said she did not believe McAfee committed suicide, and claimed the suicide note was a forgery.[15][16]

McAfee was born in Cinderford, in the Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, England,[17] on 18 September 1945,[18] on a U.S. Army base (of the 596th Ordnance Ammunition Company), to an American father, Don McAfee, who was stationed there, and a British mother, Joan (Williams).[19][20] His father was from Roanoke, Virginia, and McAfee was himself primarily raised in Salem, Virginia, United States. He said he felt as much British as American.[21] When he was 15, his father, whom a BBC columnist described as "an abusive alcoholic", killed himself with a gun.[21] He had spent his childhood living in fear that a beating from his father could happen at any time, and struggled to make sense of why this was happening to him.[18]

McAfee received a bachelor's degree in mathematics in 1967 from Roanoke College in Virginia, which subsequently awarded him an honorary Doctor of Science degree in 2008.[22] After receiving his bachelor's degree, McAfee began working towards a doctorate in mathematics at Northeast Louisiana State College but was expelled, in about 1968, because of a relationship with an undergraduate student, who became his first wife.[23]

McAfee was employed as a programmer by NASA's Institute for Space Studies in New York City from 1968 to 1970 working on the Apollo program. From there, he went to Univac as a software designer, and later to Xerox as an operating system architect. In 1978, he joined Computer Sciences Corporation as a software consultant. He worked for consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton from 1980 to 1982.[24] In 1986, while employed by Lockheed, he read about the Brain computer virus made for the PC, and he found it terrifying.[23] Sensing a business opportunity, he went about creating an antivirus software that could detect the computer virus and remove it automatically.[20] In 1987 McAfee created McAfee Associates Inc. to sell this software, which he named VirusScan.[22] This was the first anti-virus software brought to market, and one of the first software products to be distributed over the Internet.[20][22]

Initially McAfee did not seek a large userbase of paying users, but rather wanted to raise awareness of the need to be protected from computer viruses. However, by making people fear such malware, he managed to generate millions of sales, and by 1990 he was making five million dollars a year.[18] The company was incorporated in Delaware in 1992, and had its initial public offering the same year. In August 1993, McAfee stepped down as chief executive and remained with the company as the chief technical officer. He was succeeded by Bill Larson.[25] In 1994 he sold his remaining stake in the company.[26] He had no further involvement in its operations.[5]

After various mergers and ownership changes, Intel acquired McAfee in August 2010.[27] In January 2014, Intel announced that McAfee-related products would be marketed as Intel Security. McAfee expressed his pleasure at the name change, saying, "I am now everlastingly grateful to Intel for freeing me from this terrible association with the worst software on the planet."[28] The business was soon de-merged from Intel, once more under the McAfee name.

Other business ventures that were founded by McAfee include Tribal Voice, which developed one of the first instant messaging programs,[29] PowWow. In 2000, he invested in and joined the board of directors of Zone Labs, makers of firewall software, prior to its acquisition by Check Point Software in 2003.[30]

In the 2000s McAfee invested in and advertised ultra-light flights, which he marketed as aerotrekking.[6]

In August 2009 The New York Times reported that McAfee's personal fortune had declined to $4 million from a peak of $100 million due to the effect of the financial crisis of 20072008 on his investments.[26]

In 2009, McAfee was interviewed in Belize for the CNBC special The Bubble Decade, in which it was reported that he had invested in and/or built many mansions in the USA that went unsold when the 2007 global recession hit. The report also discussed his quest to raise plants for possible medicinal uses on his land in Belize.[31]

In February 2010, McAfee started the company QuorumEx,[32] headquartered in Belize, which aimed to produce herbal antibiotics that disrupt quorum sensing in bacteria.[33][34]

In June 2013, McAfee uploaded a parody video titled How to Uninstall McAfee Antivirus onto his YouTube channel. In it, he critiques the antivirus software while snorting white powder and being stripped by scantily clad women. It received ten million views. He told Reuters the video was meant to ridicule the media's negative coverage of him. A spokesman for McAfee Inc. called the video's statements "ludicrous".[35]

Also in 2013, McAfee founded Future Tense Central, which aimed to produce a secure computer network device called the D-Central.[36] By 2016, it was also an incubator.[37]

In February 2014, McAfee announced Cognizant, an application for smartphones, which displays information about the permissions of other installed applications.[38] In April 2014, it was renamed DCentral 1, and an Android version was released for free on Google Play.[39][40]

At the DEF CON conference in Las Vegas in August 2014, McAfee warned people not to use smartphones, suggesting apps are used to spy on clueless consumers who do not read privacy user agreements.[41] In January 2016, he became the chief evangelist for security startup Everykey.[37]

In February 2016, McAfee publicly volunteered to decrypt the iPhone used by Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik in San Bernardino, avoiding the need for Apple to build a backdoor.[42] He later admitted that his claims regarding the ease of cracking the phone were a publicity stunt, while still asserting its possibility.[43]

In May 2016, McAfee was appointed chairman and CEO of MGT Capital Investments, a technology holding company. It initially said it would rename itself John McAfee Global Technologies,[44] although this plan was abandoned due to a dispute with Intel over rights to the "McAfee" name.[45] He changed MGT's focus from social gaming to cybersecurity, saying "anti-virus software is dead, it no longer works", and that "the new paradigm has to stop the hacker getting in" before he or she can do damage.[46]

Soon after joining MGT, McAfee said he and his team had exploited a flaw in the Android operating system that allowed him to read encrypted messages from WhatsApp.[47] Gizmodo investigated his claim, and reported that he had sent reporters malware-infected phones to make this hack work. He replied: "Of course the phones had malware on them. How that malware got there is the story, which we will release after speaking with Google. It involves a serious flaw in the Android architecture."[48]

McAfee moved MGT into the mining of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, both to make money for the company, and to increase MGT's expertise in dealing with blockchains, which he thought was important for cybersecurity.[49]

In August 2017, McAfee stepped down as CEO, instead serving as MGT's "chief cybersecurity visionary". In January 2018, he left the company altogether. Both sides said the split was amicable; he said he wanted to spend all of his time on cryptocurrencies, while the company told of pressure from potential investors to disassociate itself from him.[50]

On 13 August 2018, McAfee took a position of CEO with Luxcore, a cryptocurrency company focused on enterprise solutions.[51]

McAfee was a libertarian, advocating the decriminalization of cannabis, an end to the war on drugs, non-interventionism in foreign policy, a free market economy which does not redistribute wealth, and upholding free trade. He supported abolishing the Transportation Security Administration.[52]

McAfee advocated increased cyber awareness and more action against the threat of cyberwarfare.[53] He pushed religious liberty, saying that business owners should be able to deny service in circumstances that contradict their religious beliefs, adding: "No one is forcing you to buy anything or to choose one person over another. So why should I be forced to do anything if I am not harming you? It's my choice to sell, your choice to buy."[54]

On 8 September 2015, McAfee announced a bid for president of the United States in the 2016 presidential election, as the candidate of a newly formed political party called the Cyber Party.[19][55] On 24 December 2015, he re-announced his candidacy bid saying that he would instead seek the presidential nomination of the Libertarian Party.[37][56] On the campaign trail, he consistently polled alongside the party's other top candidates, Gary Johnson and Austin Petersen.[57] The three partook in the Libertarian Party's first nationally televised presidential debate on 29 March 2016.[58] His running mate was photographer, commercial real estate broker and Libertarian activist Judd Weiss.[59]

McAfee came in second in the primaries[60] and third at the 2016 Libertarian National Convention.[61]

Contrary to his assertion at the 2016 convention, McAfee tweeted on 3 June 2018 that he would run for president again in 2020, either with the Libertarian Party or a separate party that he would create.[65] He later chose to run as a Libertarian.[66] He mainly campaigned for wider cryptocurrency use.

On 22 January 2019, McAfee tweeted that he would continue his campaign "in exile", following reports that he, his wife, and four campaign staff were indicted for tax-related felonies by the IRS. He said he was in "international waters", and had previously tweeted that he was going to Venezuela.[67] The IRS has not commented on the alleged indictments.[68] He defended Communist revolutionary Che Guevara on Twitter, putting himself at odds with Libertarian National Committee chairman Nicholas Sarwark, who wrote, "I hear very little buzz about McAfee this time around... making a defense of Che Guevara from Cuba may ingratiate him with the Cuban government, but it didn't resonate well with Libertarians."[69]

In a tweet on 4 March 2020, McAfee simultaneously suspended his 2020 presidential campaign, endorsed Vermin Supreme, and announced his campaign for the Libertarian Party vice presidential nomination.[70] The next day, he returned to the presidential field, reversing the suspension of his bid, as "No one in the Libertarian Party Would consider me For Vice President."[71] The next month, he endorsed Adam Kokesh and became Kokesh's vice-presidential candidate, while still seeking the presidency for himself.[72] At the 2020 Libertarian National Convention, he again lost, now to Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen for the presidential and vice-presidential slots.[73]

McAfee contended that taxes were illegal, and claimed in 2019 that he had not filed a tax return since 2010. He referred to himself as "a prime target" of the Internal Revenue Service.[74]

In July 2017, McAfee predicted on Twitter that the price of a bitcoin would jump to $500,000 within three years, adding: "If not, I will eat my own dick on national television."[75] In July 2019, he predicted a price of $1 million by the end of 2020.[76] In January 2020, he tweeted that his predictions were "a ruse to onboard new users", and that bitcoin had limited potential because it is "an ancient technology."[77]

McAfee was named a defendant in a 2008 civil court case related to his Aerotrekking light-sport aircraft venture and the death of nephew Joel Bitow and a passenger.[78]

On 30 April 2012, McAfee's property in Orange Walk Town, Belize, was raided by the Gang Suppression Unit of the Belize Police Department. A GSU press release said he was arrested for unlicensed drug manufacturing and possession of an unlicensed weapon.[34][79][80] He was released without charge.[81]

In 2012, Belize police spokesman Raphael Martinez confirmed that McAfee was neither convicted nor charged, only suspected.[82]

In January 2014, while in Canada, he said that when the Belizean government raided his property, it seized his assets, and that his house later burned down under suspicious circumstances.[83]

On 2 August 2015, McAfee was arrested in Henderson County, Tennessee, on one count of driving under the influence and one count of possession of a firearm while intoxicated.[84]

In July 2019, McAfee and members of his entourage were arrested while his yacht was docked at Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic, on suspicion of carrying high-caliber weapons and ammunition. They were held for four days and released.[85] Weapons were seized, according to the Public Ministry.[86]

On 11 August 2020, McAfee falsely stated that he was arrested in Norway during the COVID-19 pandemic after refusing to replace a lace thong with a more effective face mask. He later tweeted a picture of himself with a bruised eye, claiming it occurred during this arrest.[87] The photo of the alleged arrest shows an officer with the German word for "police" on his uniform, invalidating McAfee's claim of having been arrested in Norway. The Augsburg police later said he tried to enter Germany on that day, but was not arrested.[88]

On 12 November 2012, Belize police began to search for McAfee as a person of interest in connection to the homicide investigation of American expatriate Gregory Viant Faull, who was found dead of a gunshot wound the day before, at his home on the island of Ambergris Caye, the largest island in Belize.[89][90] Faull was a neighbor of McAfee's.[91] In a contemporary interview with Wired,[92] McAfee said he had been afraid police would kill him and refused their routine questions and evaded them.[91] He buried himself in sand for several hours with a cardboard box over his head.[18] Belize's prime minister, Dean Barrow, called him "extremely paranoid, even bonkers".[93] He fled Belize rather than cooperate.[94][95][96]

In December 2012, the magazine Vice accidentally gave away McAfee's location at a Guatemalan resort, when a photo taken by one of its journalists accompanying him was posted with the EXIF geolocation metadata still attached.[97]

While in Guatemala, McAfee asked Chad Essley, an American cartoonist and animator, to set up a blog so he could write about his experience while on the run.[98] He then appeared publicly in Guatemala City, where he unsuccessfully sought political asylum.[99]

On 5 December 2012, he was arrested for illegally entering Guatemala. Shortly afterward, the board reviewing his asylum plea denied it and he was taken to a detention center to await deportation to Belize.[100]

On 6 December 2012, Reuters and ABC News reported that McAfee had two minor heart attacks in the detention center and was hospitalized.[101][102] His lawyer said he had no heart attacks, rather high blood pressure and anxiety attacks.[103][104][105] McAfee later said he faked the heart attacks to buy time for his attorney to file a series of appeals that ultimately prevented his deportation to Belize, thus hastening that government's decision to send him back to the United States.[106]

On 12 December 2012, McAfee was released and deported to the United States.[107]

On 14 November 2018, the Circuit Court in Orlando, Florida, refused to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit against him for Faull's death.[108][109]

In January 2019, McAfee announced that he was on the run from U.S. authorities, and living internationally on a boat following the convening of a grand jury to indict him, his wife, and four of his 2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries staff on tax evasion charges.[110] At the time, the Internal Revenue Service had not independently confirmed the existence of any such indictment.[110]

On 5 October 2020, McAfee was arrested in Spain at the request of the United States Department of Justice for tax evasion. The June indictment, which was unsealed upon his arrest, alleged he earned millions of dollars from 2014 to 2018, and failed to file income tax returns.[111]

On 6 October, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a complaint further alleging McAfee and his bodyguard promoted certain initial coin offerings (ICOs) in a fraudulent cryptocurrency pump and dump scheme.[112] It claims he presented himself as an impartial investor when he promoted the ICOs, despite allegedly getting paid $23 million in digital assets in return.[112]

On 5 March 2021, the U.S. Attorney's Office for theSouthern District of New York formally indicted him and an executive adviser on these charges.[113]

McAfee was jailed in Spain, pending extradition to the United States.[113][114]

On 23 June 2021, the Spanish National Court authorized his extradition to face charges in Tennessee;[115][5] McAfee is suspected to have committed suicide several hours after the authorization. The New York extradition case was still pending in a lower Spanish court.[5]

McAfee married three times. He met his first wife circa 1968 while he was working towards a doctorate at Northeast Louisiana State College and she was an undergraduate student.[23] Their affair led to his expulsion from the college.[23] He married his second wife, Judy, a former flight attendant at American Airlines, circa 1987; they divorced in 2002.[23] The night after McAfee arrived in the United States after being deported from Guatemala in December 2012, he was solicited by and slept with Janice Dyson, then a sex worker 30 years his junior in South Beach, Miami Beach, Florida.[116] They began a relationship and married in 2013.[117] She claims that he saved her from human traffickers.[18]

The couple moved to Portland, Oregon, in 2013.[118]

In a 2012 article in Mensa Bulletin, the magazine of the American Mensa, McAfee said developing the first commercial antivirus program had made him "the most popular hacking target" and "[h]ackers see hacking me as a badge of honor". For his own cybersecurity, he said he had other people buy his computer equipment for him, used pseudonyms for setting up computers and logins, and changed his IP address several times a day.[119] When asked on another occasion if he personally used McAfee's antivirus software, he replied: "I take it off[...]it's too annoying."[120]

In 2015, he resided in Lexington, Tennessee.[84] In December 2018, he tweeted that he has "47 genetic children".[121][122][123][124] His third wife described him in a Father's Day message as "father of many, loved by few".[18]

On 23 June 2021, McAfee was found dead in his prison cell at the Brians 2 Penitentiary Center[ca] near Barcelona, hours after the Spanish National Court ordered his extradition to the United States on criminal charges filed in Tennessee by the United States Department of Justice Tax Division.[5] The Catalan Justice Department said "everything indicates" he killed himself by hanging.[11][125][126][127] An official autopsy confirmed his suicide.[128][13]

McAfee's death ignited speculation and conspiracy theories about the possibility that he was murdered. McAfee's death drew comparisons to the circumstances of the death of American financier Jeffrey Epstein, who was found dead in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.[129][130] Several times, McAfee claimed if he were ever found dead by hanging, it would mean he was murdered.[131] The day after his death, his lawyer told reporters that while he regularly maintained contact with McAfee in prison, there were no signs of suicidal intent.[132] McAfee's widow reaffirmed this position in her first public remarks since her husband's death, and also called for a "thorough" investigation.[133][134]

On 13 February 2022, a Spanish court ruled McAfee died by suicide.[135]

In a Netflix documentary released on August 24, 2022, entitled Running With the Devil: The Wild World of John McAfee, McAfee's ex-girlfriend, identified as Samantha Herrera, alleged that McAfee faked his death to avoid tax evasion charges. This allegation has not been proven, however.[136][137]

Gringo: The Dangerous Life of John McAfee is a Showtime Networks documentary about the portion of McAfee's life spent in Belize. It began airing in September 2016.[138] It covers allegations against him of raping his former business partner, Allison Adonizio, and murdering Belizean David Middleton and American expat Gregory Faull.[139][140] In an interview with Bloomberg's Pimm Fox and Kathleen Hayes on 8 September 2016, he said these incidents were fabricated, and "Belize is a third-world banana republic and you can go down there and make any story you want if you pay your interviewees, which Showtime did."[141][142]

In March 2017, it was reported that Glenn Ficarra and John Requa would direct a film about McAfee titled King of the Jungle, written by Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski. At various points, Johnny Depp, Michael Keaton, and Seth Rogen were reported to have taken roles and later to have left the project. In November 2019, Zac Efron was reported to star as journalist Ari Furman.[143][144][145][146]

On 12 May 2017, McAfee and his wife were interviewed on ABC News's 20/20 regarding Faull's alleged murder.[147]

The aforementioned documentary Running With the Devil: The Wild World of John McAfee includes footage from an unreleased documentary by Vice, and interviews by Rocco Castoro, Alex Cody Foster, and Robert King.[148]

Read this article:

John McAfee - Wikipedia

Libertarianism (metaphysics) – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Term in metaphysics

Libertarianism is one of the main philosophical positions related to the problems of free will and determinism which are part of the larger domain of metaphysics.[1] In particular, libertarianism is an incompatibilist position[2][3] which argues that free will is logically incompatible with a deterministic universe. Libertarianism states that since agents have free will, determinism must be false.[4]

One of the first clear formulations of libertarianism is found in John Duns Scotus. In theological context, metaphysical libertarianism was notably defended by Jesuit authors like Luis de Molina and Francisco Surez against rather compatibilist Thomist Baecianism. Other important metaphysical libertarians in the early modern period were Ren Descartes, George Berkeley, Immanuel Kant and Thomas Reid.[5]

Roderick Chisholm was a prominent defender of libertarianism in the 20th century[6] and contemporary libertarians include Robert Kane, Peter van Inwagen and Robert Nozick.

The first recorded use of the term libertarianism was in 1789 by William Belsham in a discussion of free will and in opposition to necessitarian or determinist views.[7][8]

Metaphysical libertarianism is one philosophical viewpoint under that of incompatibilism. Libertarianism holds onto a concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.

Accounts of libertarianism subdivide into non-physical theories and physical or naturalistic theories. Non-physical theories hold that the events in the brain that lead to the performance of actions do not have an entirely physical explanation, and consequently the world is not closed under physics. Such interactionist dualists believe that some non-physical mind, will, or soul overrides physical causality.

Explanations of libertarianism that do not involve dispensing with physicalism require physical indeterminism, such as probabilistic subatomic particle behavior a theory unknown to many of the early writers on free will. Physical determinism, under the assumption of physicalism, implies there is only one possible future and is therefore not compatible with libertarian free will. Some libertarian explanations involve invoking panpsychism, the theory that a quality of mind is associated with all particles, and pervades the entire universe, in both animate and inanimate entities. Other approaches do not require free will to be a fundamental constituent of the universe; ordinary randomness is appealed to as supplying the "elbow room" believed to be necessary by libertarians.

Free volition is regarded as a particular kind of complex, high-level process with an element of indeterminism. An example of this kind of approach has been developed by Robert Kane,[9] where he hypothesizes that,

In each case, the indeterminism is functioning as a hindrance or obstacle to her realizing one of her purposesa hindrance or obstacle in the form of resistance within her will which has to be overcome by effort.

Although at the time quantum mechanics (and physical indeterminism) was only in the initial stages of acceptance, in his book Miracles: A preliminary study C. S. Lewis stated the logical possibility that if the physical world were proved indeterministic this would provide an entry point to describe an action of a non-physical entity on physical reality.[10] Indeterministic physical models (particularly those involving quantum indeterminacy) introduce random occurrences at an atomic or subatomic level. These events might affect brain activity, and could seemingly allow incompatibilist free will if the apparent indeterminacy of some mental processes (for instance, subjective perceptions of control in conscious volition) map to the underlying indeterminacy of the physical construct. This relationship, however, requires a causative role over probabilities that is questionable,[11] and it is far from established that brain activity responsible for human action can be affected by such events. Secondarily, these incompatibilist models are dependent upon the relationship between action and conscious volition, as studied in the neuroscience of free will. It is evident that observation may disturb the outcome of the observation itself, rendering limited our ability to identify causality.[12] Niels Bohr, one of the main architects of quantum theory, suggested, however, that no connection could be made between indeterminism of nature and freedom of will.[13]

In non-physical theories of free will, agents are assumed to have power to intervene in the physical world, a view known as agent causation.[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Proponents of agent causation include George Berkeley,[22] Thomas Reid,[23] and Roderick Chisholm.[24]

Most events can be explained as the effects of prior events. When a tree falls, it does so because of the force of the wind, its own structural weakness, and so on. However, when a person performs a free act, agent causation theorists say that the action was not caused by any other events or states of affairs, but rather was caused by the agent. Agent causation is ontologically separate from event causation. The action was not uncaused, because the agent caused it. But the agent's causing it was not determined by the agent's character, desires, or past, since that would just be event causation.[25] As Chisholm explains it, humans have "a prerogative which some would attribute only to God: each of us, when we act, is a prime mover unmoved. In doing what we do, we cause certain events to happen, and nothing or no one causes us to cause those events to happen."[26]

This theory involves a difficulty which has long been associated with the idea of an unmoved mover. If a free action was not caused by any event, such as a change in the agent or an act of the will, then what is the difference between saying that an agent caused the event and simply saying that the event happened on its own? As William James put it, "If a 'free' act be a sheer novelty, that comes not from me, the previous me, but ex nihilo, and simply tacks itself on to me, how can I, the previous I, be responsible? How can I have any permanent character that will stand still long enough for praise or blame to be awarded?"[27]

Agent causation advocates respond that agent causation is actually more intuitive than event causation. They point to David Hume's argument that when we see two events happen in succession, our belief that one event caused the other cannot be justified rationally (known as the problem of induction). If that is so, where does our belief in causality come from? According to Thomas Reid, "the conception of an efficient cause may very probably be derived from the experience we have had...of our own power to produce certain effects."[28] Our everyday experiences of agent causation provide the basis for the idea of event causation.[29]

Event-causal accounts of incompatibilist free will typically rely upon physicalist models of mind (like those of the compatibilist), yet they presuppose physical indeterminism, in which certain indeterministic events are said to be caused by the agent. A number of event-causal accounts of free will have been created, referenced here as deliberative indeterminism, centred accounts, and efforts of will theory.[30] The first two accounts do not require free will to be a fundamental constituent of the universe. Ordinary randomness is appealed to as supplying the "elbow room" that libertarians believe necessary. A first common objection to event-causal accounts is that the indeterminism could be destructive and could therefore diminish control by the agent rather than provide it (related to the problem of origination). A second common objection to these models is that it is questionable whether such indeterminism could add any value to deliberation over that which is already present in a deterministic world.

Deliberative indeterminism asserts that the indeterminism is confined to an earlier stage in the decision process.[31][32] This is intended to provide an indeterminate set of possibilities to choose from, while not risking the introduction of luck (random decision making). The selection process is deterministic, although it may be based on earlier preferences established by the same process. Deliberative indeterminism has been referenced by Daniel Dennett[33] and John Martin Fischer.[34] An obvious objection to such a view is that an agent cannot be assigned ownership over their decisions (or preferences used to make those decisions) to any greater degree than that of a compatibilist model.

Centred accounts propose that for any given decision between two possibilities, the strength of reason will be considered for each option, yet there is still a probability the weaker candidate will be chosen.[35][36][37][38][39][40][41] An obvious objection to such a view is that decisions are explicitly left up to chance, and origination or responsibility cannot be assigned for any given decision.

Efforts of will theory is related to the role of will power in decision making. It suggests that the indeterminacy of agent volition processes could map to the indeterminacy of certain physical events and the outcomes of these events could therefore be considered caused by the agent. Models of volition have been constructed in which it is seen as a particular kind of complex, high-level process with an element of physical indeterminism. An example of this approach is that of Robert Kane, where he hypothesizes that "in each case, the indeterminism is functioning as a hindrance or obstacle to her realizing one of her purposes a hindrance or obstacle in the form of resistance within her will which must be overcome by effort."[9] According to Robert Kane such "ultimate responsibility" is a required condition for free will.[42] An important factor in such a theory is that the agent cannot be reduced to physical neuronal events, but rather mental processes are said to provide an equally valid account of the determination of outcome as their physical processes (see non-reductive physicalism).

Epicurus, an ancient Hellenistic philosopher, argued that as atoms moved through the void, there were occasions when they would "swerve" (clinamen) from their otherwise determined paths, thus initiating new causal chains. Epicurus argued that these swerves would allow us to be more responsible for our actions, something impossible if every action was deterministically caused.

Epicurus did not say the swerve was directly involved in decisions. But following Aristotle, Epicurus thought human agents have the autonomous ability to transcend necessity and chance (both of which destroy responsibility), so that praise and blame are appropriate. Epicurus finds a tertium quid, beyond necessity and beyond chance. His tertium quid is agent autonomy, what is "up to us."

[S]ome things happen of necessity (), others by chance (), others through our own agency ( ). [...]. [N]ecessity destroys responsibility and chance is inconstant; whereas our own actions are autonomous, and it is to them that praise and blame naturally attach.[43]

The Epicurean philosopher Lucretius (1st century BC) saw the randomness as enabling free will, even if he could not explain exactly how, beyond the fact that random swerves would break the causal chain of determinism.

Again, if all motion is always one long chain, and new motion arises out of the old in order invariable, and if the first-beginnings do not make by swerving a beginning of motion such as to break the decrees of fate, that cause may not follow cause from infinity, whence comes this freedom (libera) in living creatures all over the earth, whence I say is this will (voluntas) wrested from the fates by which we proceed whither pleasure leads each, swerving also our motions not at fixed times and fixed places, but just where our mind has taken us? For undoubtedly it is his own will in each that begins these things, and from the will movements go rippling through the limbs.

However, the interpretation of these ancient philosophers is controversial. Tim O'Keefe has argued that Epicurus and Lucretius were not libertarians at all, but compatibilists.[44]

Robert Nozick put forward an indeterministic theory of free will in Philosophical Explanations (1981).[45]

When human beings become agents through reflexive self-awareness, they express their agency by having reasons for acting, to which they assign weights. Choosing the dimensions of one's identity is a special case, in which the assigning of weight to a dimension is partly self-constitutive. But all acting for reasons is constitutive of the self in a broader sense, namely, by its shaping one's character and personality in a manner analogous to the shaping that law undergoes through the precedent set by earlier court decisions. Just as a judge does not merely apply the law but to some degree makes it through judicial discretion, so too a person does not merely discover weights but assigns them; one not only weighs reasons but also weights them. Set in train is a process of building a framework for future decisions that we are tentatively committed to.

The lifelong process of self-definition in this broader sense is construed indeterministically by Nozick. The weighting is "up to us" in the sense that it is undetermined by antecedent causal factors, even though subsequent action is fully caused by the reasons one has accepted. He compares assigning weights in this deterministic sense to "the currently orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics", following von Neumann in understanding a quantum mechanical system as in a superposition or probability mixture of states, which changes continuously in accordance with quantum mechanical equations of motion and discontinuously via measurement or observation that "collapses the wave packet" from a superposition to a particular state. Analogously, a person before decision has reasons without fixed weights: he is in a superposition of weights. The process of decision reduces the superposition to a particular state that causes action.

One particularly influential contemporary theory of libertarian free will is that of Robert Kane.[30][46][47] Kane argues that "(1) the existence of alternative possibilities (or the agent's power to do otherwise) is a necessary condition for acting freely, and that (2) determinism is not compatible with alternative possibilities (it precludes the power to do otherwise)".[48] It is important to note that the crux of Kane's position is grounded not in a defense of alternative possibilities (AP) but in the notion of what Kane refers to as ultimate responsibility (UR). Thus, AP is a necessary but insufficient criterion for free will.[49] It is necessary that there be (metaphysically) real alternatives for our actions, but that is not enough; our actions could be random without being in our control. The control is found in "ultimate responsibility".

Ultimate responsibility entails that agents must be the ultimate creators (or originators) and sustainers of their own ends and purposes. There must be more than one way for a person's life to turn out (AP). More importantly, whichever way it turns out must be based in the person's willing actions. Kane defines it as follows:

(UR) An agent is ultimately responsible for some (event or state) E's occurring only if (R) the agent is personally responsible for E's occurring in a sense which entails that something the agent voluntarily (or willingly) did or omitted either was, or causally contributed to, E's occurrence and made a difference to whether or not E occurred; and (U) for every X and Y (where X and Y represent occurrences of events and/or states) if the agent is personally responsible for X and if Y is an arche (sufficient condition, cause or motive) for X, then the agent must also be personally responsible for Y.

In short, "an agent must be responsible for anything that is a sufficient reason (condition, cause or motive) for the action's occurring."[50]

What allows for ultimacy of creation in Kane's picture are what he refers to as "self-forming actions" or SFAsthose moments of indecision during which people experience conflicting wills. These SFAs are the undetermined, regress-stopping voluntary actions or refraining in the life histories of agents that are required for UR. UR does not require that every act done of our own free will be undetermined and thus that, for every act or choice, we could have done otherwise; it requires only that certain of our choices and actions be undetermined (and thus that we could have done otherwise), namely SFAs. These form our character or nature; they inform our future choices, reasons and motivations in action. If a person has had the opportunity to make a character-forming decision (SFA), they are responsible for the actions that are a result of their character.

Randolph Clarke objects that Kane's depiction of free will is not truly libertarian but rather a form of compatibilism. The objection asserts that although the outcome of an SFA is not determined, one's history up to the event is; so the fact that an SFA will occur is also determined. The outcome of the SFA is based on chance, and from that point on one's life is determined. This kind of freedom, says Clarke, is no different from the kind of freedom argued for by compatibilists, who assert that even though our actions are determined, they are free because they are in accordance with our own wills, much like the outcome of an SFA.[51]

Kane responds that the difference between causal indeterminism and compatibilism is "ultimate controlthe originative control exercised by agents when it is 'up to them' which of a set of possible choices or actions will now occur, and up to no one and nothing else over which the agents themselves do not also have control".[52] UR assures that the sufficient conditions for one's actions do not lie before one's own birth.

Galen Strawson holds that there is a fundamental sense in which free will is impossible, whether determinism is true or not. He argues for this position with what he calls his "basic argument", which aims to show that no-one is ever ultimately morally responsible for their actions, and hence that no one has free will in the sense that usually concerns us.

In his book defending compatibilism, Freedom Evolves, Daniel Dennett spends a chapter criticising Kane's theory.[53] Kane believes freedom is based on certain rare and exceptional events, which he calls self-forming actions or SFA's. Dennett notes that there is no guarantee such an event will occur in an individual's life. If it does not, the individual does not in fact have free will at all, according to Kane. Yet they will seem the same as anyone else. Dennett finds an essentially indetectable notion of free will to be incredible.

See original here:

Libertarianism (metaphysics) - Wikipedia

Vagrancy – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Condition of homelessness without regular employment or income

Vagrancy is the condition of homelessness without regular employment or income. Vagrants (also known as vagabonds, rogues, tramps or drifters)[1] usually live in poverty and support themselves by begging, scavenging, petty theft, temporary work, or social security (where available). Historically, vagrancy in Western societies was associated with petty crime, begging and lawlessness, and punishable by law with forced labor, military service, imprisonment, or confinement to dedicated labor houses.

Both vagrant and vagabond ultimately derive from the Latin word vagari, meaning "to wander". The term vagabond is derived from Latin vagabundus. In Middle English, vagabond originally denoted a person without a home or employment.[2]

Vagrants have been historically characterised as outsiders in settled, ordered communities: embodiments of otherness, objects of scorn or mistrust, or worthy recipients of help and charity.

Some ancient sources show vagrants as passive objects of pity, who deserve generosity and the gift of alms. Others show them as subversives, or outlaws, who make a parasitical living through theft, fear and threat.

Gyrovagues were itinerant monks of the upper Middle-Age.Some fairy tales of medieval Europe have beggars cast curses on anyone who was insulting or stingy toward them. In Tudor England, some of those who begged door-to-door for "milk, yeast, drink, pottage" were thought to be witches.[3]

Many world religions, both in history and today, have vagrant traditions or make reference to vagrants. In Christianity, Jesus is shown in the Bible as having compassion for beggars, prostitutes, and the disenfranchised. The Catholic Church also teaches compassion for people living in vagrancy.[4] Vagrant lifestyles are seen in Christian movements, such as in the mendicant orders. Many still exist in places like Europe, Africa, and the Near East, as preserved by Gnosticism, Hesychasm, and various esoteric practices.[citation needed]

In some East Asian and South Asian countries, the condition of vagrancy has long been historically associated with the religious life, as described in the religious literature of Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and Muslim Sufi traditions. Examples include sadhus, dervishes, bhikkhus, and the sramanic traditions generally.

From 27 November 1891, a vagabond could be jailed. Vagabonds, beggars and procurers were imprisoned in vagrancy prisons: Hoogstraten; Merksplas; and Wortel (Flanders). There, the prisoners had to work for their living by working on the land or in the prison. If the prisoners had earned enough money, then they could leave the "colony" (as it was called). On 12 January 1993, the Belgian vagrancy law was repealed.[5] At that time, 260 vagabonds still lived in the Wortel colony.

In medieval times, vagabonds were controlled by an official called the Stodderkonge who was responsible for a town or district and expelled those without a permit. Their role eventually transferred to the police.

In premodern Finland and Sweden, vagrancy was a crime, which could result in a sentence of forced labour or forced military service. There was a "legal protection" (Finnish: laillinen suojelu) obligation: those not part of the estates of the realm (nobility, clergy, burghers or land-owners) were obliged to be employed, or otherwise, they could be charged with vagrancy. Legal protection was mandatory already in medieval Swedish law, but Gustav I of Sweden began strictly enforcing this provision, applying it even when work was potentially available. In Finland, the legal protection provision was repealed in 1883; however, vagrancy still remained illegal, if connected with "immoral" or "indecent" behavior.[6] In 1936, a new law moved the emphasis from criminalization into social assistance. Forced labor sentences were abolished in 1971 and anti-vagrancy laws were repealed in 1987.[7] Sweden still has laws requiring vagrants to get employment, even employments without pay, or they'll have all of their belongings removed and be forced to live on the street.[8]

In Germany, according to the 1871 Penal Code ( 361 des Strafgesetzbuches von 1871), vagabondage was among the grounds to confine a person to a labor house.[9][10]

In the Weimar Republic, the law against vagrancy was relaxed, but it became much more stringent in Nazi Germany, where vagrancy, together with begging, prostitution, and "work-shyness" (arbeitsscheu), was classified "asocial behavior" as punishable by confinement to concentration camps.

In the Russian Empire, the legal term "vagrancy" (Russian: , brodyazhnichestvo) was defined in a different way than in Western Europe (vagabondage in France, Landstreicherei in Germany). Russian law recognized one as a vagrant if they could not prove their own standing (title), or if they changed residence without a permission from authorities, rather than punishing loitering or absence of livelihood. Foreigners who had been twice expatriated with prohibition of return to the Russian Empire and were arrested in Russia again were also recognized as vagrants. Punishments were harsh: according to Ulozhenie, the legal code, a vagrant who could not elaborate on his kinship, standing, or permanent residence, or gave false evidence, was sentenced to a 4-year imprisonment and a subsequent exile to Siberia or another far-off province.

In the Criminal Code of the RSFSR (1960)[ru], which came into force on 1 January 1961, systematic vagrancy (that which was identified more than once) was punishable by up to two years' imprisonment (section 209).[11]

This continued until 5 December 1991, when Section 209 was repealed and vagrancy ceased to be a criminal offense.[12]

At present, vagrancy is not a criminal offence in Russia, but it is an offence for someone over 18 to induce a juvenile (one who has not reached that age) to vagrancy, according to Chapter 20, Section 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The note, introduced by the Federal Law No. 162 of 8 December 2003, provides that the section does not apply, if such act is performed by a parent of the juvenile under harsh life circumstances due to the loss of livelihood or the absence of living place.

The Ordinance of Labourers 1349 was the first major vagrancy law in England and Wales. The ordinance sought to increase the available workforce following the Black Death in England by making idleness (unemployment) an offence. A vagrant was a person who could work but chose not to, and having no fixed abode or lawful occupation, begged. Vagrancy was punishable by human branding or whipping. Vagrants were distinguished from the impotent poor, who were unable to support themselves because of advanced age or sickness. In the Vagabonds Act 1530, Henry VIII decreed that "beggars who are old and incapable of working receive a beggar's licence. On the other hand, [there should be] whipping and imprisonment for sturdy vagabonds. They are to be tied to the cart-tail and whipped until the blood streams from their bodies, then they are to swear on oath to go back to their birthplace or to serve where they have lived the last three years and to 'put themselves to labour'. For the second arrest for vagabondage the whipping is to be repeated and half the ear sliced off; but for the third relapse the offender is to be executed as a hardened criminal and enemy of the common weal."[13]

In the Vagabonds Act 1547, Edward VI ordained that "if anyone refuses to work, he shall be condemned as a slave to the person who has denounced him as an idler. The master has the right to force him to do any work, no matter how vile, with whip and chains. If the slave is absent for a fortnight, he is condemned to slavery for life and is to be branded on forehead or back with the letter S; if he runs away three times, he is to be executed as a felon... If it happens that a vagabond has been idling about for three days, he is to be taken to his birthplace, branded with a red hot iron with the letter V on his breast, and set to work, in chains, on the roads or at some other labour... Every master may put an iron ring round the neck, arms or legs of his slave, by which to know him more easily."[14]

In England, the Vagabonds Act 1572 passed under Elizabeth I, defined a rogue as a person who had no land, no master, and no legitimate trade or source of income; it included rogues in the class of vagrants or vagabonds. If a person were apprehended as a rogue, he would be stripped to the waist, whipped until bleeding, and a hole, about the compass of an inch about, would be burned through the cartilage of his right ear with a hot iron.[15] A rogue who was charged with a second offence, unless taken in by someone who would give him work for one year, could face execution as a felony. A rogue charged with a third offence would only escape death if someone hired him for two years.

The Vagabonds Act of 1572 decreed that "unlicensed beggars above fourteen years of age are to be severely flogged and branded on the left ear unless someone will take them into service for two years; in case of a repetition of the offence, if they are over eighteen, they are to be executed, unless someone will take them into service for two years; but for the third offence they are to be executed without mercy as felons." The same act laid the legal groundwork for the enforced exile (penal transportation) of "obdurate idlers" to "such parts beyond the seas as shall be [] assigned by the Privy Council".[16] At the time, this meant exile for a fixed term to the Virginia Company's plantations in America. Those who returned unlawfully from their place of exile faced death by hanging.

The Vagabonds Act 1597 banished and transplanted "incorrigible and dangerous rogues" overseas.

In Das Kapital (Capital Volume One, Chapter Twenty-Eight: Bloody Legislation Against the Expropriated, from the End of the 15th Century. Forcing Down of Wages by Acts of Parliament), Karl Marx wrote:

James 1: Any one wandering about and begging is declared a rogue and a vagabond. Justices of the peace in petty sessions are authorised to have them publicly whipped and for the first offence to imprison them for 6 months, for the second for 2 years. Whilst in prison they are to be whipped as much and as often as the justices of the peace think fit Incorrigible and dangerous rogues are to be branded with an R on the left shoulder and set to hard labour, and if they are caught begging again, to be executed without mercy. These statutes, legally binding until the beginning of the 18th century, were only repealed by 12 Anne, c. 23.[17]

In late-eighteenth-century Middlesex, those suspected of vagrancy could be detained by the constable or watchman and brought before a magistrate who had the legal right to interview them to determine their status.[18] If declared vagrant, they were to be arrested, whipped, and physically expelled from the county by a vagrant contractor, whose job it was to take them to the edge of the county and pass them to the contractor for the next county on the journey.[18] This process would continue until the person reached his or her place of legal settlement, which was often but not always their place of birth.

In 1795, the Speenhamland system (also known as the Berkshire Bread Act)[19] tried to address some of the problems that underlay vagrancy. The Speenhamland system was a form of outdoor relief intended to mitigate rural poverty in England and Wales at the end of the 18th century and during the early 19th century. The law was an amendment to the Elizabethan Poor Law. It was created as an indirect result of Britain's involvements in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (17931815).[20]

In 1821, the existing vagrancy law was reviewed by a House of Commons select committee, resulting in the publication of the, 'Report from the Select Committee on The Existing Laws Relating to Vagrants'.[21] After hearing the views of many witnesses appearing before it the select committee made several recommendations. The select committee found that the existing vagrancy laws had become over-complicated and that they should be amended and consolidated into a single Act of Parliament. The payment of fixed rewards for the apprehension and taking vagrants before magistrates had led to abuses of the system. Due to the Poor Laws, vagrants to receive and poverty relief had to seek it from the parish where they were last legally settled, often the parish where they were born. This led to a system of convicted vagrants being 'passed' from parish to parish from where they had been convicted and punished to their own parish. The 'pass' system led to them being transported by vagrancy contractors, a system found to be open to abuses and fraud. It also found that in many instances the punishment for vagrancy offences were insufficient and certain types of vagrants should be given longer prison sentences and made to complete hard labour during it.[21]

Based on the findings and recommendations from the 1821 House of Commons Select on Vagrancy,[21] a new Act of Parliament was introduced, 'An Act for the Punishment of Idle and Disorderly Persons, and Rogues and Vagabonds, in that Part of Great Britain called England', commonly known as the Vagrancy Act 1824.[22] The Vagrancy Act 1824 consolidated the previous vagrancy laws and addressed many of the frauds and abuses identified during the select committee hearings. Much reformed since 1824, some of the offences included in it are still enforceable.[23]

Colonists imported British vagrancy laws when they settled in North America. Throughout the colonial and early national periods, vagrancy laws were used to police the mobility and economic activities of the poor. People experiencing homelessness and ethnic minorities were especially vulnerable to arrest as a vagrant. Thousands of inhabitants of colonial and early national America were incarcerated for vagrancy, usually for terms of 30 to 60 days, but occasionally longer.[24]

After the American Civil War, some Southern states passed Black Codes, laws that tried to control the hundreds of thousands of freed slaves. In 1866, the state of Virginia, fearing that it would be "overrun with dissolute and abandoned characters", passed an Act Providing for the Punishment of Vagrants. Homeless or unemployed persons could be forced into labour on public or private works, for very low pay, for a statutory maximum of three months; if fugitive and recaptured, they must serve the rest of their term at minimum subsistence, wearing ball and chain. In effect, though not in declared intent, the Act criminalized attempts by impoverished freed people to seek out their own families and rebuild their lives. The commanding general in Virginia, Alfred H. Terry, condemned the Act as a form of entrapment, the attempted reinstitution of "slavery in all but its name". He forbade its enforcement. It is not known how often it was applied, or what was done to prevent its implementation, but it remained statute in Virginia until 1904.[25] Other Southern states enacted similar laws to funnel blacks into their system of convict leasing.

Since at least as early as the 1930s, a vagrancy law in America typically has rendered "no visible means of support" a misdemeanor, yet it has commonly been used as a pretext to take one into custody for such things as loitering, prostitution, drunkenness, or criminal association.[citation needed] The criminal statutes of law in Louisiana specifically criminalize vagrancy as associating with prostitutes, being a professional gambler, being a habitual drunk, or living on the social welfare benefits or pensions of others.[26] This law establishes as vagrants all those healthy adults who are not engaged in gainful employment.

In the 1960s, laws proven unacceptably broad and vague were found to violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[citation needed] Such laws could no longer be used to obstruct the "freedom of speech" of a political demonstrator or an unpopular group. Ambiguous vagrancy laws became more narrowly and clearly defined.[citation needed]

In Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Florida vagrancy law was unconstitutional because it was too vague to be understood.[27]

Nevertheless, new local laws in the U.S. have been passed to criminalize aggressive panhandling.[28][29]

See the original post:

Vagrancy - Wikipedia

Land value tax – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Levy on the unimproved value of land

A land value tax (LVT) is a levy on the value of land without regard to buildings, personal property and other improvements.[1] It is also known as a location value tax, a site valuation tax, split rate tax, or a site-value rating.

Land value taxes are generally favored by economists as they do not cause economic inefficiency, and reduce inequality.[2] A land value tax is a progressive tax, in that the tax burden falls on land owners, because land ownership is correlated with wealth and income.[3][4] The land value tax has been referred to as "the perfect tax" and the economic efficiency of a land value tax has been accepted since the eighteenth century.[1][5][6] Economists since Adam Smith and David Ricardo have advocated this tax because it does not hurt economic activity or discourage or subsidize development.

LVT is associated with Henry George, whose ideology became known as Georgism. George argued that taxing the land value is most logical source of public revenue because the supply of land is fixed and because public infrastructure improvements would be reflected in (and thus paid for by) increased land values.[7]

Land value taxation is currently implemented throughout Denmark,[8] Estonia, Lithuania,[9] Russia,[10] Singapore,[11] and Taiwan;[12] it has also been applied to lesser extents in parts of Australia, Mexico (Mexicali), and the United States (e.g., Pennsylvania[13]).

Most taxes distort economic decisions and discourage beneficial economic activity. For example, property taxes discourage construction, maintenance, and repair because taxes increase with improvements. LVT is not based on how land is used. Because the supply of land is essentially fixed, land rents depend on what tenants are prepared to pay, rather than on landlord expenses. Thus landlords cannot pass LVT to tenants, who would move or rent smaller spaces before absorbing increased rent.[15]

The land's occupants benefit from improvements surrounding a site. Such improvements shift tenants' demand curve to the right (they will pay more). Landlords benefit from price competition among tenants; the only direct effect of LVT in this case is to reduce the amount of social benefit that is privately captured as land price by titleholders.

LVT is said to be justified for economic reasons because it does not deter production, distort markets, or otherwise create deadweight loss. Land value tax can even have negative deadweight loss (social benefits), particularly when land use improves.[16] Nobel Prize-winner William Vickrey believed that

"removing almost all business taxes, including property taxes on improvements, excepting only taxes reflecting the marginal social cost of public services rendered to specific activities, and replacing them with taxes on site values, would substantially improve the economic efficiency of the jurisdiction."[17]

LVT's efficiency has been observed in practice.[18] Fred Foldvary stated that LVT discourages speculative land holding because the tax reflects changes in land value (up and down), encouraging landowners to develop or sell vacant/underused plots in high demand. Foldvary claimed that LVT increases investment in dilapidated inner city areas because improvements don't cause tax increases. This in turn reduces the incentive to build on remote sites and so reduces urban sprawl.[19] For example, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania's LVT has operated since 1975. This policy was credited by mayor Stephen R. Reed with reducing the number of vacant downtown structures from around 4,200 in 1982 to fewer than 500.[20]

LVT is arguably an ecotax because it discourages the waste of prime locations, which are a finite resource.[21][22][23] Many urban planners claim that LVT is an effective method to promote transit-oriented development.[24][25]

The value of land reflects the value it can provide over time. This value can be measured by the ground rent that a piece of land receives on the market. The present value of ground-rent is the basis for land prices. A land value tax (LVT) will reduce the ground rent received by the landlord, and thus will decrease the price of land, holding all else constant. The rent charged for land may also decrease as a result of efficiency gains if speculators stop hoarding unused land.

Real estate bubbles direct savings towards rent seeking activities rather than other investments and can contribute to recessions. Advocates claim that LVT reduces the speculative element in land pricing, thereby leaving more money for productive capital investment.[26]

At sufficiently high levels, LVT would cause real estate prices to fall by taxing away land rents that would otherwise become 'capitalized' into the price of real estate. It also encourages landowners to sell or develop locations that they are not using. This might cause some landowners, especially pure landowners, to resist high land value tax rates. Landowners often possess significant political influence, which may help explain the limited spread of land value taxes so far.[27]

A land value tax has progressive tax effects, in that it is paid by the owners of valuable land who tend to be the rich, and since the amount of land is fixed, the tax burden cannot be passed on as higher rents or lower wages to tenants, consumers or workers.[3][28][4]

Several practical issues complicate LVT implementation. Most notably, it must be:

Levying an LVT requires an assessment and a title register. In a 1796 United States Supreme Court opinion, Justice William Paterson said that leaving the valuation process up to assessors would cause bureaucratic complexities, as well as non-uniform procedures.[29] Murray Rothbard later raised similar concerns, claiming that no government can fairly assess value, which can only be determined by a free market.[30]

Compared to modern property tax assessments, land valuations involve fewer variables and have smoother gradients than valuations that include improvements. This is due to variation of building design and quality. Modern statistical techniques have improved the process; in the 1960s and 1970s, multivariate analysis was introduced as an assessment tool.[31] Usually, such a valuation process commences with a measurement of the most and least valuable land within the taxation area. A few sites of intermediate value are then identified and used as "landmark" values. Other values are interpolated between the landmark values. The data is then collated in a database,[32] "smoothed" and mapped using a geographic information system (GIS). Thus, even if the initial valuation is difficult, once the system is in use, successive valuations become easier.

In the context of LVT as a single tax (replacing all other taxes), some have argued that LVT alone cannot raise enough tax revenue.[33] However, the presence of other taxes can reduce land values and hence the revenue that can be raised from them. The Physiocrats argued that all other taxes ultimately come at the expense of land rental values. Most modern LVT systems function alongside other taxes and thus only reduce their impact without removing them. Land taxes that are higher than the rental surplus (the full land rent for that time period) would result in land abandonment.[34]

In some countries, LVT is impractical because of uncertainty regarding land titles and tenure. For instance a parcel of grazing land may be communally owned by village inhabitants and administered by village elders. The land in question would need to be held in a trust or similar body for taxation purposes. If the government cannot accurately define ownership boundaries and ascertain the proper owners, it cannot know from whom to collect the tax. Clear titles are absent in many developing countries.[35] In African countries with imperfect land registration, boundaries may be poorly surveyed and the owner can be unknown.[36]

The owner of a vacant lot in a thriving city must still pay a tax and would rationally perceive the property as a financial liability, encouraging them to put the land to use in order to cover the tax. LVT removes financial incentives to hold unused land solely for price appreciation, making more land available for productive uses. Land value tax creates an incentive to convert these sites to more intensive private uses or into public purposes.

The selling price of a good that is fixed in supply, such as land, does not change if it is taxed. By contrast, the price of manufactured goods can rise in response to increased taxes, because the higher cost reduces the number of units that suppliers are willing to sell at the original price. The price increase is how the maker passes along some part of the tax to consumers.[3] However, if the revenue from LVT is used to reduce other taxes or to provide valuable public investment, it can cause land prices to rise as a result of higher productivity, by more than the amount that LVT removed.

Land tax incidence rests completely upon landlords, although business sectors that provide services to landlords are indirectly impacted. In some economies, 80 percent of bank lending finances real estate, with a large portion of that for land.[37] Reduced demand for land speculation might reduce the amount of circulating bank credit.

While land owners are unlikely to be able to charge higher rents to compensate for LVT, removing other taxes may increase rents, as this may affect the demand for land.[38][39]

Assuming constant demand, an increase in constructed space decreases the cost of improvements to land such as houses. Shifting property taxes from improvements to land encourages development. Infill of underutilized urban space is one common practice to reduce urban sprawl.

LVT is less vulnerable to tax evasion, since land cannot be concealed or moved overseas and titles are easily identified, as they are registered with the public.[40] Land value assessments are usually considered public information, which is available upon request. Transparency reduces tax evasion.[41]

Land acquires a scarcity value owing to the competing needs for space. The value of land generally owes nothing to the landowner and everything to the surroundings.[42]

It has been claimed that land is God's gift to mankind.[43] For example, the Catholic Church asserts in its 1967 "universal destination of goods" principle:

Everyone knows that the Fathers of the Church laid down the duty of the rich toward the poor in no uncertain terms. As St. Ambrose put it: "You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich."[44]

In addition, the Church maintains that civil authorities have the right and duty to regulate the legitimate exercise of the right to ownership for the sake of the common good, including the right to tax.[45]

LVT considers the effect on land value of location, and of improvements made to neighbouring land, such as proximity to roads and public works. LVT is the purest implementation of the public finance principle known as value capture.

A public works project can increase land values and thus increase LVT revenues. Arguably, public improvements should be paid for by the landowners who benefit from them.[47] Thus, LVT captures the land value of socially created wealth, allowing a reduction in tax on privately created (non-land) wealth.[48]

LVT generally is a progressive tax, with those of greater means paying more,[4][49] in that land ownership correlates to income[50] and landlords cannot shift the tax burden onto tenants.[51] LVT generally reduces economic inequality, removes incentives to misuse real estate, and reduces the vulnerability of economies to property booms and crashes.[52]

Land value taxation began after the introduction of agriculture. It was originally based on crop yield. This early version of the tax required simply sharing the yield at the time of the harvest, on a yearly basis.[53][clarification needed]

Rishis of ancient India claimed that land should be held in common and that unfarmed land should produce the same tax as productive land. "The earth ...is common to all beings enjoying the fruit of their own labour; it belongs...to all alike"; therefore, "there should be left some for everyone". Apastamba said "If any person holding land does not exert himself and hence bears no produce, he shall, if rich, be made to pay what ought to have been produced".[54]

Mencius[55] was a Chinese philosopher (around 300 BCE) who advocated for the elimination of taxes and tariffs, to be replaced by the public collection of urban land rent: "In the market-places, charge land-rent, but don't tax the goods."[56]

During the Middle Ages, in the West, the first regular and permanent land tax system was based on a unit of land known as the hide. The hide was originally the amount of land sufficient to support a household. It later became subject to a land tax known as "geld".[57]

The physiocrats were a group of economists who believed that the wealth of nations was derived solely from the value of land agriculture or land development. Before the Industrial Revolution, this was approximately correct. Physiocracy is one of the "early modern" schools of economics. Physiocrats called for the abolition of all existing taxes, completely free trade and a single tax on land.[58] They did not distinguish between the intrinsic value of land and ground rent.[59] Their theories originated in France and were most popular during the second half of the 18th century. The movement was particularly dominated by Anne Robert Jacques Turgot (17271781) and Franois Quesnay (16941774).[60] It influenced contemporary statesmen, such as Charles Alexandre de Calonne. The physiocrats were highly influential in the early history of land value taxation in the United States.

A participant in the Radical Movement, Thomas Paine contended in his Agrarian Justice pamphlet that all citizens should be paid 15 pounds at age 21 "as a compensation in part for the loss of his or her natural inheritance by the introduction of the system of landed property." "Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds."[61] This proposal was the origin of the citizen's dividend advocated by Geolibertarianism. Thomas Spence advocated a similar proposal except that the land rent would be distributed equally each year regardless of age.[62]

Adam Smith, in his 1776 book The Wealth of Nations, first rigorously analyzed the effects of a land value tax, pointing out how it would not hurt economic activity, and how it would not raise contract rents.

Ground-rents are a still more proper subject of taxation than the rent of houses. A tax upon ground-rents would not raise the rents of houses. It would fall altogether upon the owner of the ground-rent, who acts always as a monopolist, and exacts the greatest rent which can be got for the use of his ground. More or less can be got for it according as the competitors happen to be richer or poorer, or can afford to gratify their fancy for a particular spot of ground at a greater or smaller expense. In every country the greatest number of rich competitors is in the capital, and it is there accordingly that the highest ground-rents are always to be found. As the wealth of those competitors would in no respect be increased by a tax upon ground-rents, they would not probably be disposed to pay more for the use of the ground. Whether the tax was to be advanced by the inhabitant, or by the owner of the ground, would be of little importance. The more the inhabitant was obliged to pay for the tax, the less he would incline to pay for the ground; so that the final payment of the tax would fall altogether upon the owner of the ground-rent.

Henry George (2 September 1839 29 October 1897) was perhaps the most famous advocate of recovering land rents for public purposes. An American journalist, politician and political economist, he advocated a "single tax" on land that would eliminate the need for all other taxes. George first articulated the proposal in Our Land and Land Policy (1871).[63] Later, in his best-selling work Progress and Poverty (1879), George argued that because the value of land depends on natural qualities combined with the economic activity of communities, including public investments, the economic rent of land was the best source of tax revenue.[7] This book significantly influenced land taxation in the United States and other countries, including Denmark, which continues grundskyld ('ground duty') as a key component of its tax system.[8] The philosophy that natural resource rents should be captured by society is now often known as Georgism. Its relevance to public finance is underpinned by the Henry George theorem.

After the 1868 Meiji Restoration in Japan, land tax reform was undertaken. An LVT was implemented beginning in 1873. By 1880 initial problems with valuation and rural opposition had been overcome and rapid industrialisation began.

In the United Kingdom, LVT was an important part of the platform of the Liberal Party during the early part of the twentieth century. David Lloyd George and H. H. Asquith proposed "to free the land that from this very hour is shackled with the chains of feudalism."[64] It was also advocated by Winston Churchill early in his career.[65] The modern Liberal Party (not to be confused with the Liberal Democrats, who are the heir to the earlier Liberal Party and who offer some support for the idea)[66] remains committed to a local form of LVT,[67] as do the Green Party of England and Wales[68] and the Scottish Greens.[69]

The 1931 Labour budget included an LVT, but before it came into force it was repealed by the Conservative-dominated national government that followed.[70]

An attempt at introducing LVT in the administrative County of London was made by the local authority under the leadership of Herbert Morrison in the 19381939 Parliament, called the London Rating (Site Values) Bill. Although it failed, it detailed legislation for the implementation of a system of LVT using annual value assessment.[71]

After 1945, the Labour Party adopted the policy, against substantial opposition, of collecting "development value": the increase in land price arising from planning consent. This was one of the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1947, but it was repealed when the Labour government lost power in 1951.

Senior Labour figures in recent times have advocated an LVT, notably Andy Burnham in his 2010 leadership campaign, former Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn, and Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.

The Republic of China was one of the first jurisdictions to implement an LVT, specified in its constitution. Sun Yat-Sen would learn about LVT from the Kiautschou Bay concession, which had successful implementation of LVT, bringing increased wealth and financial stability to the colony. The Republic of China would go on to implement LVT in farms at first, later implementing it in the urban areas due to its success.[72]

Alfred Marshall argued in favour of a "fresh air rate", a tax to be charged to urban landowners and levied on that value of urban land that is caused by the concentration of population.[73] That general rate should have to be spent on breaking out small green spots in the midst of dense industrial districts, and on the preservation of large green areas between different towns and between different suburbs which are tending to coalesce. This idea influenced Marshall's pupil Arthur Pigou's ideas on taxing negative externalities.[74]

Pigou wrote an essay supporting LVT, interpreted as support for Lloyd George's People's Budget.[75]

Paul Samuelson supported LVT. "Our ideal society finds it essential to put a rent on land as a way of maximizing the total consumption available to the society. ...Pure land rent is in the nature of a 'surplus' which can be taxed heavily without distorting production incentives or efficiency. A land value tax can be called 'the useful tax on measured land surplus'."

Milton Friedman stated: "There's a sense in which all taxes are antagonistic to free enterprise and yet we need taxes. ...So the question is, which are the least bad taxes? In my opinion the least bad tax is the property tax on the unimproved value of land, the Henry George argument of many, many years ago."[76]

Michael Hudson is a proponent for taxing rent, especially land rent. ".... politically, taxing economic rent has become the bte noire of neoliberal globalism. It is what property owners and rentiers fear most of all, as land, subsoil resources and natural monopolies far exceed industrial capital in magnitude. What appears in the statistics at first glance as 'profit' turns out upon examination to be Ricardian or 'economic' rent."

Paul Krugman agreed that LVT is efficient, however he disputed whether it should be considered a single tax, as he believed it would not be enough alone, excluding taxes on natural resource rents and other Georgist taxes, to fund a welfare state. "Believe it or not, urban economics models actually do suggest that Georgist taxation would be the right approach at least to finance city growth. But I would just say: I don't think you can raise nearly enough money to run a modern welfare state by taxing land [only]."[77]

Joseph Stiglitz, articulating the Henry George theorem wrote that, "Not only was Henry George correct that a tax on land is nondistortionary, but in an equilitarian society ... tax on land raises just enough revenue to finance the (optimally chosen) level of government expenditure."[78]

Rick Falkvinge proposed a "simplified taxless state" where the state owns all the land it can defend from other states, and leases this land to people at market rates.[79]

Land taxes in Australia are levied by the states. The exemption thresholds vary, as do tax rates and other rules.

In New South Wales, the state land tax exempts farmland and principal residences and there is a tax threshold. Determination of land value for tax purposes is the responsibility of the Valuer-General.[80] In Victoria, the land tax threshold is $250,000 on the total value of all Victorian property owned by a person on 31 December of each year, and taxed at a progressive rate. The principal residence, primary production land and land used by a charity are exempt from land tax.[81] In Tasmania the threshold is $25,000 and the audit date is 1 July. Between $25,000 and $350,000 the tax rate is 0.55% and over $350,000 it is 1.5%.[82] In Queensland, the threshold for individuals is $600,000 and $350,000 for other entities, and the audit date is 30 June.[83] In South Australia the threshold is $332,000 and taxed at a progressive rate, the audit date is 30 June.[84]

By revenue, property taxes represent 4.5% of total taxation in Australia.[85] A government report[86] in 1986 for Brisbane, Queensland advocated an LVT.

The Henry Tax Review of 2010 commissioned by the federal government recommended that state governments replace stamp duty with LVT. The review proposed multiple marginal rates and that most agricultural land would be in the lowest band with a rate of zero. The Australian Capital Territory moved to adopt this system and planned to reduce stamp duty by 5% and raise land tax by 5% for each of twenty years.

LVT were common in Western Canada at the turn of the twentieth century. In Vancouver LVT became the sole form of municipal taxation in 1910 under the leadership of mayor, Louis D. Taylor.[87] Gary B. Nixon (2000) stated that the rate never exceeded 2% of land value, too low to prevent the speculation that led directly to the 1913 real estate crash.[88] All Canadian provinces later taxed improvements.

Estonia levies an LVT to fund municipalities. It is a state level tax, but 100% of the revenue funds Local Councils. The rate is set by the Local Council within the limits of 0.12.5%. It is one of the most important sources of funding for municipalities.[89] LVT is levied on the value of the land only. Few exemptions are available and even public institutions are subject to it. Church sites are exempt, but other land held by religious institutions is not.[89] The tax has contributed to a high rate (~90%)[89] of owner-occupied residences within Estonia, compared to a rate of 67.4% in the United States.[90]

Government rent in Hong Kong, formerly the crown rent, is levied in addition to Rates. Properties located in the New Territories (including New Kowloon), or located in the rest of the territory and whose land grant was recorded after 27 May 1985, pay 3% of the rateable rental value.[91][92]

Municipal governments in Hungary levy an LVT based on the area or the land's adjusted market value. The maximum rate is 3% of the adjusted market value.[93]

Kenya's LVT history dates to at least 1972, shortly after it achieved independence. Local governments must tax land value, but are required to seek approval from the central government for rates that exceed 4 percent. Buildings were not taxed in Kenya as of 2000. The central government is legally required to pay municipalities for the value of land it occupies. Kelly claimed that possibly as a result of this land reform, Kenya became the only stable country in its region.[94] As of late 2014, the city of Nairobi still taxed only land values, although a tax on improvements had been proposed.[95]

The capital city of Baja California, Mexicali, has had an LVT since the 1990s when it became the first locality in Mexico to implement such a tax.[96]

A land value taxation on rural land was introduced in Namibia, with the primary intention of improving land use.[97]

In 1990, several economists wrote[98] to then President Mikhail Gorbachev suggesting that Russia adopt LVT; its failure to do so was argued as causal in the rise of oligarchs.[citation needed]Currently, Russia has an LVT of 0.3% on residential, agricultural and utilities lands as well as a 1.5% tax for other types of land.[10]

Singapore owns the majority of its land which it leases for 99-year terms. In addition, Singapore taxes development uplift at around 70%. These two sources of revenue fund most of Singapore's new infrastructure.[11]

South Korea has an aggregate land tax that is levied annually based on an individual's landholding value across the whole country. Speculative and residential land has a progressive tax rate of 0.25%, commercial and building sites 0.32%, farm and forest lands 0.1% and luxury properties 5%.[99]

As of 2010, land value taxes and land value increment taxes accounted for 8.4% of total government revenue in Taiwan.[12]

The Thai government introduced the Land and Building Tax Act B.E. 2562 in March 2019, which came into effect on 1 January 2020. It sets a maximum tax rate of 1.2% on commercial and vacant land, 0.3% for residential land and 0.15% for agricultural land.[100]

In the late 19th century George's followers founded a single tax colony at Fairhope, Alabama. Although the colony, now a nonprofit corporation, still holds land in the area and collects a relatively small ground rent, the land is subject to state and local property taxes.[101]

Common property taxes include land value, which usually has a separate assessment. Thus, land value taxation already exists in many jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have attempted to rely more heavily on it. In Pennsylvania certain cities raised the tax on land value while reducing the tax on improvement/building/structure values. For example, the city of Altoona adopted a property tax that solely taxes land value in 2002 but repealed the tax in 2016.[102] Many Pennsylvania cities use a split-rate tax, which taxes the value of land at a higher rate than the value of buildings.[13]

China's Real Rights Law contains provisions founded on LVT analysis.[103]

In 2010 the government of Ireland announced that it would introduce an LVT, beginning in 2013.[104] Following a 2011 change in government, a property tax was introduced instead.

After decades of a modest LVT, New Zealand abolished it in 1990. Discussions continue as to whether or not to bring it back. Earlier Georgist politicians included Patrick O'Regan and Tom Paul (who was Vice-President of the New Zealand Land Values League).

In September 1908, Chancellor of the Exchequer David Lloyd George instructed McKenna, the First Lord of the Admiralty, to build more Dreadnoughts. The ships were to be financed by an LVT. Lloyd George believed that relating national defence to land tax would both provoke the opposition of the House of Lords and rally the people round a simple emotive issue. The Lords, composed of wealthy land owners, rejected the Budget in November 1909, leading to a constitutional crisis.[105]

LVT was on the UK statute books briefly in 1931, introduced by Philip Snowden's 1931 budget, strongly supported by prominent LVT campaigner Andrew MacLaren MP. MacLaren lost his seat at the next election (1931) and the act was repealed, MacLaren tried again with a private member's bill in 1937; it was rejected 141 to 118.[106]

Labour Land Campaign advocates within the Labour Party and the broader labour movement for "a more equitable distribution of the Land Values that are created by the whole community" through LVT. Its membership includes members of the British Labour Party, Trade Unions and Cooperatives and individuals.[107] The Liberal Democrats' ALTER (Action for Land Taxation and Economic Reform) aims

to improve the understanding of and support for Land Value Taxation amongst members of the Liberal Democrats; to encourage all Liberal Democrats to promote and campaign for this policy as part of a more sustainable and just resource based economic system in which no one is enslaved by poverty; and to cooperate with other bodies, both inside and outside the Liberal Democrat Party, who share these objectives.[108]

The Green Party "favour moving to a system of Land Value Tax, where the level of taxation depends on the rental value of the land concerned."[109]

A course in "Economics with Justice"[110] with a strong foundation in LVT are offered at the School of Economic Science, which was founded by Andrew MacLaren MP and has historical links with the Henry George Foundation.[111][112][106]

In February 1998, the Scottish Office of the British Government launched a public consultation process on land reform.[113] A survey of the public response found that: "excluding the responses of the lairds and their agents, reckoned as likely prejudiced against the measure, 20% of all responses favoured the land tax" (12% in grand total, without the exclusions).[114] The government responded by announcing "a comprehensive economic evaluation of the possible impact of moving to a land value taxation basis".[115] However, no measure was adopted.[116]

In 2000 the Parliament's Local Government Committee's[117] inquiry into local government finance explicitly included LVT,[118] but the final report omitted any mention.[119]

In 2003 the Scottish Parliament passed a resolution: "That the Parliament notes recent studies by the Scottish Executive and is interested in building on them by considering and investigating the contribution that land value taxation could make to the cultural, economic, environmental and democratic renaissance of Scotland."[120]

In 2004 a letter of support was sent from members of the Scottish Parliament to the organisers and delegates of the IU's 24th international conferenceincluding members of the Scottish Greens, the Scottish Socialist Party and the Scottish National Party.[121]

The policy was considered in the 2006 Scottish Local Government Finance Review whose 2007 Report[122] concluded that "although land value taxation meets a number of our criteria, we question whether the public would accept the upheaval involved in radical reform of this nature, unless they could clearly understand the nature of the change and the benefits involved.... We considered at length the many positive features of a land value tax which are consistent with our recommended local property tax [LPT], particularly its progressive nature." However, "[h]aving considered both rateable value and land value as the basis for taxation, we concur with Layfield (UK Committee of Inquiry, 1976) who recommended that any local property tax should be based on capital values."[123]

In 2009, Glasgow City Council resolved to introduce LVT by saying "the idea could become the blueprint for Scotland's future local taxation".[124] The Council agreed to[125] a "long term move to a local property tax / land value tax hybrid tax". Its Local Taxation Working Group stated that simple [non-hybrid] land value taxation should itself "not be discounted as an option for local taxation reform: it potentially holds many benefits and addresses many existing concerns".[126]

In Zimbabwe, government coalition partners the Movement for Democratic Change adopted LVT.[127]

Bernard Clerfayt called for the overhaul of the property tax in the Brussels region, with a higher tax for land values than for buildings.[128]

Excerpt from:

Land value tax - Wikipedia

Teens caught smoking or vaping at Dearborn Public Schools will face zero tolerance from district, police – Dearborn Press and Guide

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Teens caught smoking or vaping at Dearborn Public Schools will face zero tolerance from district, police Dearborn Press and Guide

Here is the original post:

Teens caught smoking or vaping at Dearborn Public Schools will face zero tolerance from district, police - Dearborn Press and Guide

Mars Colony Builder on Steam

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1440340/Cannon_Foundry_Simulator/Create futuristic cities, develop the infrastructure, make discoveries, explore and expand simply put, be the first one to build a settlement on the surface of Mars!

Have you ever thought of having a rover for a neighbor, red desert outside the window and Earth shining above you in the sky? Well, its high time you did! Welcome to the city of the future. We have a great public transport, efficient solar panels, fully automated homes and unlimited living space. Food is cheap, technology advanced, and people (along with robots) amiable. Mars town is a moonshot project (or should we say marshoot?) that will change the world!

The only thing left to do is to build it! And you have been chosen to start this process.

Develop the land and build roads, so that the city can expand further. You have an army of rovers and droids at your command, so youd better make good use of it! Erect the necessary buildings and then focus on what matters to you most technology, entertainment, terraforming, or discoveries? Enhance the quality of life on Mars and make everything in your power to make the city thrive.

There is a world beyond the domes of the town and nothing can stop you from exploring it! Hire people or program droids, and head out into the unknown! Fill in the blank spots on the maps travel across the land and find places that could be just right for erecting new cities. Remember about a supply chain, since you will need it to provide the outpost with food and resources.

To become self-sufficient, you need to gain resources. The simplest way to achieve that is to find a deposit and then start mining it this process requires a specialized team and a proper equipment. Make no mistake it only looks easy, but the most important part is to actually make it work. The Martian surface is extremely hostile for life, and you will need all the manpower that you can get.

Find a balance between stability and exploration. Acquire financial support to boost the colony, expand the settlement, and make people feel like at home under the great domes. But beware, no one knows what you may find during the process of the colonizationLets settle down and see what happens!

Universal basic income – Pros and cons – Economics Help

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

A citizens income, basic wage or Universal basic Income (UBI) is a concept of paying everyone in society a universal benefit regardless of income and circumstances.

The main advantage is that ensures a minimum standard of income for everyone without any costs and bureaucracy of means-tested benefits. Also, it avoids the disincentive to work that can occur with means-tested benefits. In times of crisis, a UBI can also provide a social safety net with minimum admin costs.

The disadvantage is that is an expensive undertaking to pay everyone in society a universal benefit and there is a concern it may encourage some to live on benefits without contributing anything useful to society.

A citizens income or universal basic income would primarily be paid for out of general taxation, though in some models it could involve redistributing profits from publicly owned industries.

Under the proposals of Citizens Trust income, benefits should be distributed according to age.0-24 year olds would receive 56.25 per week, 25-64 year olds would receive 71 per week and those 65 and over would receive 142.70 per week.

The citizens income would replace all benefits except disability and housing benefit. The total cost for 2012/13 would be 276n close to the existing annual welfare budget.

It would replace child benefit, income support, JSA, NI and state pensions. It also estimates savings of 10bn from administration of pensions and tax credits.

The interesting thing about a citizens income is that it gains support from both the left and right. The left supports its aim to create a more egalitarian society. There is support from the right who dislike the disincentives and bureaucracy of means tested benefits.

From a personal view, I like it because my lodger is on a zero-hour contract he often doesnt have money to pay rent, but he is not eligible for any benefits. A citizens income would be good to provide a minimum income guarantee.

External links

Here is the original post:

Universal basic income - Pros and cons - Economics Help

White Christian Nationalists: Who Are They? What Do They Want? Why …

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

The treasonous mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6 included a large cohort that hoisted Confederate battle flags and Trump banners. But mixed among those standards were other signs, ones bearing crosses and references to Christ. Its clear that for some of the insurrectionists, the attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election was a holy crusade.

These people soon attracted the attention of political commentators. In the wake of the failed coup, a spate of columns appeared in The New York Times, Rolling Stone, The Washington Post and other media outlets focusing on the role Christian nationalists played in the riot. A column in The Times by Thomas B. Edsell carried the blunt headline: The Capitol Insurrection Was As Christian Nationalist As It Gets.

Increasingly, members of the media, academics, Americans United and others are using the term Christian nationalism and often white Christian nationalism to describe a political movement that seeks to topple church-state separation and declare America a Christian nation with Christian in this case being far to the right and supremely fundamentalist.

While theyre sometimes openly aligned with racist movements, their ultimate goal is seen as a branch of white supremacy because it would result in a society governed by conservative white Christian men who would make decisions for everyone else.

The terminology is new, but the movement is not. Since the late 1970s, Americans United has been warning Americans about the machinations of the Religious Right, a religio-political force of extreme Christian fundamentalists who seek to tear down the church-state wall, Christianize public schools and other government institutions, roll back womens rights, strip LGBTQ Americans of basic freedoms and impose a theocratic state on the country.

Are Christian nationalists and the Religious Right just two different terms to describe the same movement? Some researchers say yes, while others feel there are important differences.

Sarah Posner, a freelance reporter who has tracked white Christian nationalists for decades, finds them to be one and the same; while Katherine Stewart, a researcher whose most recent book is The Power Worshippers: Inside the Rise of Religious Nationalism, said she uses the terms Religious Right and Christian nationalists but gravitates toward the latter as more descriptive.

Although I make use of both terms depending on context, I often think Christian nationalism is a more accurate term, Stewart said in an interview with Church & State. The term Religious Right suggests to mea social movement arising from the ground up, motivated by a narrow set of cultural and symbolic concerns, and operating within the norms and traditions of pluralistic, democratic politics in America. Christian nationalism makes clear that the thing that matters here is really a political movement, and that its politics are profoundly hostile to pluralism and democracy.

I also think that there is something not quite accurate about the right in Religious Right, Stewart continued. It suggests that this is a conservative movement. But it isnt. Christian nationalism is a radical movement, and as the Trump era made blindingly clear, it sometimes supports policies and practices that have little to do with traditional conservatism.

Scholar Andrew L. Whitehead, who, along with Samuel L. Perry, wrote the recent book Taking Back America for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States, notes the overlap between the two terms but sees important differences, too.

I think what we are identifying is the cultural framework that is broadly accepted by those who identify as part of the Religious Right, Whitehead said. Using data from 2007, 65% of those who say the Religious Right describes their religious identity very well are ambassadors of Christian nationalism, meaning those Americans who most strongly embrace Christian nationalism.

Added Whitehead, I see the Religious Right as more of a social movement made up of networks of religious leaders, politicians, congregations and organizations. Christian nationalism is the political theology that this social movement largely embraces in order to baptize their political ends with the support of the transcendent.

The researchers all agree that there is an important racial element to Christian nationalism.

Posner, whose most recent book is Unholy: Why White Evangelicals Worship at the Altar of Donald Trump, says it is appropriate to include white before Christian nationalism even though, obviously, most white Americans dont support the movement or the groups that back it.

The American version of Christian nationalism grew out of a backlash to changes that took place over the course of the second half of the 20th century school desegregation and civil rights, increasing secularization and the Supreme Courts bolstering of church-state separation and the rise of feminism and LGBTQ rights, Posner told Church & State. All of these factors played a role, but its crucial to recognize how grievances driving the backlash were deeply rooted in the white supremacy many evangelicals and fundamentalists were taught to find in their Bibles. That in turn shaped their conception of America as a Christian nation that is, a white Christian nation.

Added Posner, Of course, over time the Religious Right sought to temper its reputation with efforts to engage in racial reconciliation and bring more minority worshippers into their churches and minority activists into their political organizations. But the movements decision to tether itself to Trump all the while still claiming it had many Black and Latino believers in its ranks laid bare the superficiality of those claims.

Indeed, the Trump presidency forced the issue of race front and center. For many years, white Christian nationalist groups could claim to be anti-racist, and during their conferences they would often highlight the handful of far-right Black, Latinx and Asian-American figures who back them. But Trump, whose racism was always thinly veiled at best, was a kind of test one these groups failed.

Early in 2018, Trump famously called Haiti, El Salvador and several African nations sh*thole countries and said he would like to see more immigration from Norway, a country that is 93 percent white. The remark led CNN anchor Don Lemon to begin his broadcast reporting this shameful presidential declaration with the words, This is CNN Tonight, Im Don Lemon. The president of the United States is racist. A lot of us already knew that.

Anderson Cooper, also a CNN anchor, followed up by saying, Not racial. Not racially charged. Racist. Lets not kid ourselves or dance around it. The sentiment the president expressed today is a racist sentiment.

Trump was also known for his attacks on Mexico and his claim during the 2016 campaign that Mexican men were prone to be rapists. His Muslim ban, which affected primarily nations from Africa and the Middle East, and his defense of Confederate monuments were seen as more evidence of his racism, as was his calling COVID-19 the China virus or even Kung Flu.

Through it all, white Christian nationalist groups either remained silent or came to Trumps defense.

In their book, Whitehead and Perry, who are sociology professors at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis and the University of Oklahoma respectively, define Christian nationalism as an ideology that idealizes and advocates a fusion of American civic life with a particular type of Christian identity and culture.

They also write that Christian nationalism includes assumptions of nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism. It is as ethnic and political as it is religious.

Whitehead told Church & State that he finds it useful to stress the whiteness of Christian nationalism.

Yes, I do think qualifying Christian nationalism white is important, he said. For many of the relationships we look at in the first two chapters of our book, there are times when Black Americans who embrace Christian nationalism are different from white Americans who embrace it. But for questions about gender and sexuality, Christian nationalism operates the same way for Black and white Americans. So for the most part, I think much of what were studying truly is white Christian nationalism.

Robert P. Jones, CEO of Public Religion Research Institute, found it significant that the crowd that assailed the Capitol on Jan. 6 was overwhelmingly white.

In a column published by Religion News Service on Jan. 7, Jones observed, This seditious mob was motivated not just by loyalty to Trump, but by an unholy amalgamation of white supremacy and Christianity that has plagued our nation since its inception and is still with us today. As I show in my book White Too Long: The Legacy of White Supremacy in American Christianity, there remains a disturbingly strong link between holding racist attitudes and identifying as a white Christian. (For instance, MSNBC commentator Lawrence ODonnell, in his news hour entitled The Last Word, once displayed a photo of an all-white Southern lynch mob and commented that every man in that mob would undoubtedly have called himself a Christian.)

Stewart, however, said she uses the qualifier white only in certain contexts.

There is no question that the Christian nationalist movement is deeply rooted in racism, but the relationship is complex, Stewart said. Christian nationalism does indeedpromotehighly racialized narratives about American heritage and culture. It has also thoroughly identified itself with a political party that has adopted race-based gerrymandering and voter suppression as a strategic imperative.

At the same time, added Stewart, there is a small but growing segment of the movement that is not white, including a subsection of leadership.Americas Christian nationalists also form alliances with religious nationalists in other parts of the world. While there is some overlap in people and purposes between Christian nationalist groups and white supremacist groups, I think it is still useful to distinguish between them.

The word Christian has also proved to be a flashpoint. Some on the far right, such as William Donohue of the Catholic League, have penned columns implying that groups like Americans United and others are smearing all Christians by using terms like white Christian nationalism. In fact, it should be pretty clear that just as not all white people embrace white Christian nationalism, nor do most Christians.

In fact, many Christian clergy and laypeople have assailed Christian nationalism as a corruption of their faith; and in light of recent events, their voices are getting louder. The Christian-based counteroffensive against white Christian nationalism got started in earnest in 2019 when the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty launched Christians Against Christian Nationalism, an effort to highlight faith voices opposed to the injudicious mixing of church and state, one that also singled out white Christian nationalisms racist undertones.

The groups statement reads in part, Christian nationalism seeks to merge Christian and American identities, distorting both the Christian faith and Americas constitutional democracy. Christian nationalism demands Christianity be privileged by the State and implies that to be a good American, one must be Christian. It often overlaps with and provides cover for white supremacy and racial subjugation. We reject this damaging political ideology and invite our Christian brothers and sisters to join us in opposing this threat to our faith and to our nation.

So far, more than 21,000 Christians have endorsed the statement.

Amanda Tyler, executive director of the BJC, told Church & State that the organization was motivated to act because many Christians view [Christian nationalism] as a distortion and perversion of Christianity and as anurgent threat to the health and vitality of the religion going forward.

Remarked Tyler, We believe that it is our responsibility as Christians to raise awareness of Christian nationalism, to understand how it operates in our communities and to work to root it out. From a theological perspective, Christian nationalism is idolatrous because it conflates God and country and leads to the suppression of theological convictions that conflict with political power.

More recently, a separate group of evangelicals issued an open letter condemning the role of Christian nationalism in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, which they labeled a violent, racist, anti-American insurrection.

Just as many Muslim leaders have felt the need to denounce distorted, violent versions of their faith, we feel the urgent need to denounce this violent mutation of our faith, the statement, which was released in late February, reads. What we saw manifest itself in the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, is a threat to our democracy, but it is also a threat to orthodox Christian faith. The word Christian means Christ-like. As leaders in the Church, we do not agree on everything, but we can agree on this Christians should live in a way that honors Jesus, and reminds the world of Him.

Stewart points out that white Christian nationalism has more to do with ideology than religion.

Christian nationalism is not a religion, it is a political ideology, she said. There are two ways to make this point clear: One is to assert that the object of our concern is with the political agendas of Christian nationalism above all, its assault on pluralistic democracy and not with the religious ideas that it invokes to justify its positions. The other is to draw attention to the fact that many, if not most, American Christians take a very different view of both their religion and its alleged political imperatives. At least half of American Catholics, a fifth or so of white evangelicals, and the vast majority of black evangelicals were opposed to the movements favored political candidate in this last national election cycle.

As an organization that has monitored and responded to religious extremists for decades, Americans United has a special interest in the heightened attention white Christian nationalism is receiving.

On the day of the assault on the Capitol, Americans United President and CEO Rachel Laser issued a statement that didnt hesitate to call out the perpetrators.

Make no mistake: These rioters threaten every freedom we claim, including religious freedom, Laser said. The noose hung on the West Lawn of our Capitol and the signs calling on Jesus only re-emphasize the unholy alliance of this president with white Christian nationalists. The same people who profaned Black churches in Washington, D.C., three weeks ago are responsible for todays abhorrent actions with the blatant backing of the president they support.

Will the current moment lead Americans to finally come to grips with the anti-democratic extremists in our midst who yearn to merge their narrow interpretation of Christianity with government?

Whitehead said the ideology of Christian nationalism isnt going to fade away any time soon.

Its always tough to predict the future, he said. I am completely confident saying that Christian nationalism will be with us for decades to come and will continue to be a force in American politics. It will only be more salient to those Americans who embrace it, especially if they feel that they are becoming even more of a minority.

Added Whitehead, I sincerely hope that we are at a moment where people of faith, especially white Christians, begin to wrestle with Christian nationalism and the way it perverts democracy, as well as the global Christian faith. But this is an uphill battle because Christian nationalism is so widely embraced by religious Americans.

Posner echoed that view, but held out hope that the Trump years may have served as a wake-up call.

The Religious Right for many decades was variously portrayed as a political power broker, defender of sexual purity and unborn babies, promoter of Christianity or traditionalists with a legitimate gripe about having been left behind by massive social, legal and political change to protect the rights of previously marginalized groups, Posner said.

I think the failure to recognize how dangerous it is was driven in part by a complacency that because the movement represents a minority view in the United States, it would not be able to impose its beliefs because our democracy would hold, she added. The Trump era not only proved that our democracy held only by the barest of threads, but that white Christian nationalists were Trumps dedicated partners in his anti-democracy project.

See the rest here:

White Christian Nationalists: Who Are They? What Do They Want? Why ...

Christian nationalism – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Christianity-affiliated religious nationalism

Christian nationalism is Christianity-affiliated religious nationalism.[1] Christian nationalists primarily focus on internal politics, such as passing laws that reflect their view of Christianity and its role in political and social life. In countries with a state Church, Christian nationalists, in seeking to preserve the status of a Christian state, uphold an antidisestablishmentarian position.[2][3][4]

Christian nationalists support the presence of Christian symbols and statuary in the public square, as well as state patronage for the display of religion, such as school prayer and the exhibition of nativity scenes during Christmastide or the Christian Cross on Good Friday.[5][6]

Christian nationalists draw support from the broader Christian right.[7]

The COVID-19 pandemic saw a rise in Christian nationalist activity with many groups using anti-lockdown sentiments to expand their reach to more people.[8] The group Liberty Coalition Canada has garnered support from many elected politicians across Canada.[9] In their founding documents they argue that "it is only in Christianized nations that religious freedom has ever flourished."[10] This group has garnered support from various groups, including supporters of far-right hate groups. Their rallies have attracted supporters of Alex Jones and Canada First, a spin-off of Nick Fuentes' group America First.[11] Many of Liberty Coalition Canada's leaders are pastors that have racked up millions in potential fines for violating COVID protocols and some of them express ultra-conservative views.[12]

The Lapua Movement and the Patriotic People's Movement (IKL) in Finland led by the Lutherans (krtti) Vihtori Kosola and Vilho Annala respectively. Pastor Elias Simojoki led the IKL's youth organization the Blue-and-Blacks.[13] Current Blue-and-Black Movement and Power Belongs to the People are far-right Christian nationalist parties active in Finland. The latter is connected to Russian neo-Nazi and Christian fundamentalist Russian Imperial Movement.[14][15][16][17][18]

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has been described as a global leader of the Christian nationalist and Christian right movements.[19][20] As President, Putin has increased the power of the Russian Orthodox Church and proclaimed his staunch belief in Eastern Orthodoxy,[21] as well as maintaining close contacts with Patriarchs of Moscow and all Rus' Alexy II and Kirill.

The Russian Imperial Movement is a prominent neo-Nazi Christian nationalist group that trains militants all over Europe and has recruited thousands of fighters for its paramilitary group, the Imperial Legion, which is participating in the war on Ukraine. The group also works with the Atomwaffen Division in order to network with and recruit extremists from the United States.[22][23]

In Scotland UK, the Scottish Family Party has been described as Christian nationalist. The party was formed as a push back movement, based on a rejection of LGBT+ topics being taught in schools, with the political party claiming it to be an overly sexualized topic and ideology. They believe it to be an attack on traditional Christian family values, promoted by the current Scottish government.[citation needed]

The Christian Liberty Party is a political party that sees the United States as a Christian country.[24]

Christian nationalists believe that the US is meant to be a Christian nation and want to "take back" the US for God.[25] Experts say that Christian-associated support for right-wing politicians and social policies, such as legislation which is related to immigration, gun control and poverty is best understood as Christian nationalism, rather than evangelicalism per se.[25][26] Some studies of white evangelicals show that, among people who self-identify as evangelical Christians, the more they attend church, the more they pray, and the more they read the Bible, the less support they have for nationalist (though not socially conservative) policies.[26] Non-nationalistic evangelicals ideologically agree with Christian nationalists in areas such as patriarchal policies, gender roles, and sexuality.[26]

A study which was conducted in May 2022 showed that the strongest base of support for Christian nationalism comes from Republicans who identify as Evangelical or born again Christians.[27][28] Of this demographic group, 78% are in favor of formally declaring the United States a Christian nation, versus only 48% of Republicans overall. Age is also a factor, with over 70% of Republicans from the Baby Boomer and Silent Generations in support of the United States officially becoming a Christian nation. According to Politico, the polling also found that sentiments of white grievance are highly correlated with Christian nationalism: "White respondents who say that members of their race have faced more discrimination than others are most likely to embrace a Christian America. Roughly 59% of all Americans who say white people have been discriminated against ... favor declaring the U.S. a Christian nation, compared to 38% of all Americans."[27][29]

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has referred to herself as a Christian nationalist. Fellow congresswomen Lauren Boebert and Mary Miller have also expressed support for Christian nationalism.[30][31] Kris Kobach has described himself as a Christian nationalist. White nationalist Nick Fuentes has expressed support for Christian nationalism.[32] Florida governor Ron DeSantis has repeatedly invoked Christian nationalist talking points and rhetoric during speeches.[33][27] According to the Tampa Bay Times, DeSantis has also promoted a civics course for educators, which emphasized that "the nation's founders did not desire a strict separation of state and church"; the teacher training program also "pushed a judicial theory, favored by legal conservatives like DeSantis, that requires people to interpret the Constitution as the framers intended it, not as a living, evolving document".[34][35][36][28] Politician Doug Mastriano is a prominent figure in the fundamentalist Christian nationalist movement, and has called the separation of church and state a myth.[37][38] Andrew Torba, CEO of alt-tech platform Gab, supported Mastriano's failed 2022 bid for office,[39] in order to build a grass-roots Christian nationalist political movement to help "take back" government power for "the glory of god"; he has argued that "unapologetic Christian Nationalism is what will save the United States of America".[40][41] Torba is also a proponent of the great replacement conspiracy theory, and has said that "The best way to stop White genocide and White replacement, both of which are demonstrably and undeniably happening, is to get married to a White woman and have a lot of White babies".[40]

In the wake of the January 6 attack on the Capitol, the term "Christian nationalism" has become synonymous with white Christian identity politics, a belief system that asserts itself as an integral part of American identity overall.[40][42] The New York Times notes that historically, "Christian nationalism in America has ... encompassed extremist ideologies".[40][43] Critics have argued that Christian nationalism promotes racist tendencies, male violence, anti-democratic sentiment, and revisionist history.[44][45] Christian nationalism in the United States is also linked to political opposition to gun control laws and strong cultural support for the Second Amendment which protects the right to keep and bear arms.[46] Some Christian nationalists also engage in spiritual warfare and militarized forms of prayer to defend and advance their beliefs and political agenda.[47]

Political analyst Jared Yates Sexton has said: "Republicans recognize that QAnon and Christian nationalism are invaluable tools" and that these belief systems "legitimize antidemocratic actions, political violence, and widespread oppression", which he calls an "incredible threat" that extends beyond Trumpism.[48]

Responding to media analysis about the effects of Christian Trumpism and Christian nationalism following the 2020 presidential election, Professor Daniel Strand, writing for The American Conservative, said that there was a "superficially Christian presence at the January 6 protest" and he criticized claims that Christian nationalism played a central role in the attack on the Capitol. He cited a University of Chicago study which found that "those arrested on January 6 were motivated by the belief that the election was stolen and [influenced by] what they call 'the great replacement'" theory. Strand says the study failed to mention "any explicit religious motivation, let alone theological beliefs about America being a Christian nation".[49][50]

The fascist Yugoslav National Movement (193545) has been described as a Christian nationalist movement.[51][52]

Read the original post:

Christian nationalism - Wikipedia

White Nationalist | Southern Poverty Law Center

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Top takeaways

The number of white nationalist groups continues to decline after their numbers peaked at 155 in 2019. Many nationwide networks have contracted or entirely fallen apart, marking a movement away from sprawling membership organizations to highly centralized ones. The founders of the podcast platform The Right Stuff, for example, once organized dozens of pool party groups around the country, but now focus their energy on the National Justice Party, a racist and antisemitic political party.

Many of the most prominent leaders in todays white nationalist movement define their primary goal as challenging what they call Conservatism, Inc. Such figures as Nick Fuentes, a livestreamer who was present outside the U.S. Capitol at the Jan. 6 insurrection, are trying to harness the grievances of Trump supporters into an openly ethnonationalist political movement one they hope will become the core of the Republican Party. Fuentes has made allies within the political mainstream, including Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., who spoke at Fuentes annual America First Political Action Conference in February 2021.

Overall, the movements energy has shifted into more mainstream spaces in the aftermath of Jan. 6. Ideas once confined to the organized white power movement are now openly discussed within the broader political right, disintegrating the boundary between them. The white supremacist great replacement conspiracy, which claims that white people are being systematically replaced across the Western world by multiculturalists and Jews, is now cited as a reality by some elected officials and cable news pundits, for example.

White nationalist Nick Fuentes livestreamed from outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, where he was surrounded by members of his America First movement. One rioter entered the Capitol draped in an America First flag. Less than two months later, Rep. Paul Gosar spoke at Fuentes America First Political Action Conference. In March, Fuentes announces he was forming the America First Foundation, devoted to finish[ing] what President Trump started in 2016.

The National Justice Party convened several meetings this year where white nationalist groups including Patriot Front, Media2Rise and Antelope Hill met to network. The largest of which, held in November, attracted roughly 150 participants. Patriot Front held its own demonstrations throughout the year, including ones in Chicago, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. Despite their disciplined public image, activists have continually penetrated the organization and leaked its internal communications. As a result, identities of many Patriot Front members have been made public.

In a major rebuke to racist right, the jury in Sines v. Kessler found that some of the most prominent figureheads and groups in the white nationalist movement conspired to intimidate, harass or commit harm during the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. In total, the jury awarded $26 million in damages.

While an accelerationist wing one singularly focused on bringing a fascist state into existence through violence continues to organize on places like Telegram, members of the white nationalist movement are placing much of their energy into harnessing the anger and resentment of Trump supporters into a broad authoritarian movement. They hope to convince white Americans that they are persecuted by anti-white ideas and policies, including the adoption of inclusive education in schools. This movement could cause further disruption and violence, especially as the country heads closer to the next election cycle.

The movement will also continue to focus on building a parallel society of white nationalist institutions, companies and online platforms a move that is, in part, a response to social media and tech companies efforts to deplatform extremists. Nick Fuentes now has his own platform that allows himself and other racist livestreamers to monetize their content. Andrew Torba, the Gab CEO who has partnered with Fuentes, is at the forefront of the push to create what he calls the parallel Christian economy. Torba is investing the companys resources into building a platform where white nationalists and antisemites will not only be able to make posts, but also monetize content, advertise goods and services, and process payments.

Adherents of white nationalistgroupsbelieve that white identity should be the organizing principle of the countries that make up Western civilization. White nationalists advocate for policies to reverse changing demographics and the loss of an absolute, white majority. Ending non-white immigration, both legal and illegal, is an urgent priority frequently elevated over other racist projects, such as ending multiculturalism and miscegenation for white nationalists seeking to preserve white, racial hegemony.

White nationalists seek to return to an America that predates the implementation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Both landmark pieces of legislation are cited as the harbingers of white dispossession and the so-called white genocide or great replacement the idea that whites in the United States are being systematically replaced and destroyed.

These racist aspirations are most commonly articulated as the desire to form a white ethnostate a calculated idiom white nationalists favor in order to obscure the inherent violence of such a radical project. Appeals for the white ethnostate are often disingenuously couched in proclamations of love for members of their own race, rather than hatred for others.

This platitude collapses under scrutiny. Two favorite animating myths of white nationalists are the victimhood narrative of black-on-white crime the idea that the dominant white majority is under assault by supposedly violent people of color and the deceptively titled human biodiversity, the pseudo-scientific ascription of human behaviors, in this case along racial lines, to non-negligible genetic difference among humans. Appeals to the empirical science of human biodiversity are frequently coupled with thinly veiled nods to white, racial superiority.

In addition to their obsession with declining white birth rates, these themes inspire some of the most powerful propaganda that animates and drives the white nationalist movement.

Adherents frequently citePat Buchanans2001 book,The Death of the West, which argues that these declining white birth rates and an immigrant invasion will transform the United States into a third world nation by 2050, as the text responsible for their awakening, or red pill.

White nationalists also frequently citeAmerican Renaissance,a pseudo-academic organization dedicated to spreading the myth of black criminality, scientific racism and eugenic theories. Its annual conference, a multi-day symposium with a suit-and-tie dress code, is a typical early stop for new white nationalists.

Antisemitism is deeply woven into the modern-day white nationalist movement, whose adherents use Jews as scapegoats for their perceived cultural and political grievances. White nationalists often argue that Jews are orchestrating the great replacement making people of color, who they believe to be less intelligent and more easy manipulated, into the numerical majority of Western countries in a bid to secure complete political control. Kevin MacDonald, the author ofThe Culture of Critique a trilogy of books alleging a Jewish control of culture and politics with evolutionary psychology has been cited by innumerable white nationalists as the person who introduced them to the idea of a Jewish conspiracy.

White nationalists also commonly pass throughpaleoconservatism an anti-interventionist strand of libertarianism that seeks to limit government, restrict immigration, reverse multicultural programs and deconstruct social welfare programs. Some of the most prominent voices in the movements recent history, includingRichard Spencer,Jared Taylor andPeter Brimelow,did stints atTakis Magazine, the most prominent paleoconservative journal.

Strategies for pursuing the white ethnostate fall into two major categories: mainstreaming and vanguardism. Mainstreamers believe that infiltrating and subverting the existing political institutions is the only realistic path to power. They aspire to convert disaffected normies to their politics and advocate for white nationalists to seek esteemed and influential positions in society where they can access resources otherwise unavailable to avowed racists.This path often requires white nationalists to disguise their politics and compromise on their most extreme positions. Mainstreaming allows those sympathetic to white nationalism to pursue or enact policies furthering white nationalist priorities. These policies arent always exclusive to white nationalism, such as immigration restriction or the elimination of social welfare programs.

Vanguardists believe that revolution is the only viable path toward a white ethnostate. They believe that reforming the system is impossible and therefore refuse to soften their rhetoric. They typically seek to reform what they believe to be an anti-white establishment through radical action and often openly advocate for the use of violence against the state and people they perceive to be their political enemies. Though acts of violence, they believe, they can further polarize politics and accelerate what they view as the inevitable collapse of America.

The racist so-called alt-right was the most prominent strand of the white nationalist movement during the 2016 presidential campaign and the first half of the Trump presidency a political moment that allowed activists to temporarily paint over cracks that have historically divided the movement. Composed of a broad coalition of far-right activists and groups, the alt-right hoped to push ethnonationalism into the political mainstream. But after the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, alliances faded into infighting when the movement came under intense public and legal scrutiny, including a civil suit that ultimately found many of the most prominent leaders and groups in the alt-right liable for $26 million in damages.

Growing disillusioned with trying to achieve their political goals through mainstream channels such as electoral politics and mass organizing, an accelerationist wing, focused on bringing about the collapse of society, has gained a prominent place within the movement. This violence-obsessed subset predominantly congregates on the messaging platform Telegram, as well as other alt-tech platforms that do not moderate users content. But, especially in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection, a large part of the white nationalist movement remains focused on bending the mainstream right toward open ethnonationalism. These actors want to build alliances with Republican elected officials, create their own political parties and institutions, and, especially, cultivate a cohort of young, radical activists within the GOP.

Groupslisted in a variety of other categories Ku Klux Klan,neo-Confederate,neo-Nazi,racist skinheadandChristian Identity can also be fairly described as white nationalist. As organizational loyalty has dwindled and the internet has become white nationalisms organizing principle, however, the ideology is best understood as a loose coalition of social networks orbiting online propaganda hubs and forums.

View all groups bystateand byideology.*Asterisk denotes headquarters.

Affirmative RightAtlanta, GA*

America First FoundationWestern Springs, IL*Saint Petersburg, FL

American Freedom NewsHampton Twp, PA*

American Freedom PartyLos Angeles, CA*New York, New York

American Patriots USADahlonega, GA*

American Renaissance/New Century FoundationOakton, VA

Antelope Hill PublishingQuakertown, PA*

Arktos MediaNew York, NY*

Bay State Active ClubMassachusetts

Blood River RadioBartlett, TN*

Christ the King Reformed ChurchCharlotte, MI*

Colchester Collection, TheMachias, ME*

Council of Conservative CitizensBlackwell, MO*

Counter-Currents PublishingSan Francisco, CA*

Cursus Honorum FoundationAustin, TX

Dominion Active ClubVirginia*

EvergreenBedford, PA*

Exodus/AmericanusFloyds Knobs, IN*

Fight White GenocideColumbia, SC*

Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation, TheVienna, VA*

Front Range Active ClubColorado

Full HausPurgitsville, WV*

Indiana Active ClubIndiana*

International Conservative MovementMassachusetts*Koschertified?San Marcos, CA*MannerbundNorwalk, CT*

National Justice PartyButler, PA*

National Reformation PartyCalifornia*

New Jersey European Heritage AssociationNew Jersey*

Northwest FrontSeattle, WA*

Occidental DissentEufaula, AL*

Occidental ObserverMedford, OR*

Patriot FrontTexas*ArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareWashingtonFloridaGeorgiaIdahoIllinoisIndianaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMissouriNebraskaNevadaNew JerseyNew YorkNorth CarolinaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming

Patriotic FlagsSummerville, SC*

Political Cesspool, TheBartlett, TN*

Racial Nationalist party of AmericaLockport, NY*

Radix JournalAlexandria, VA*

Red IceHarrisonburg, VA*

Renaissance HorizonSummerville, SC*

Revolt Through TraditionMassachusetts*

School of the WestPage, AZ*

Scott-Townsend PublishersWashington, DC*

Shieldwall NetworkMountain View, AR*

StormfrontWest Palm Beach, FL*

The BaseWashington*IndianaWisconsin

The Right StuffPennsylvania*

VDARE FoundationBerkeley Springs, WV*

White Rabbit RadioDearborn Heights, MI*

Will2RiseLakeland, FL*

Here is the original post:

White Nationalist | Southern Poverty Law Center

AOC: Vast Majority of Domestic Terror Comes From White Nationalism …

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

According to Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the vast majority domestic terror incidents comes from so-called white nationalism because American apartheid has never fully healed.

AOC made the comments on MSNBCs All In while discussing the attack on Nancy Pelosis husband at his San Francisco home early Friday morning.

You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

Ocasio-Cortez said, Yeah, I think, you know, I think it is important to acknowledge the point that you said that political violence can come from all different parts of the political spectrum while also really having to acknowledge a very central fact that reporting from the FBI, and even in terms of Homeland Security, Jamie and I sit, and he is the chair, and Im the vice chair of the House Oversight Subcommittee on civil rights, and civil liberties.

Klaus Schwab and George Soros Declare China Must Lead New World Order

November 26, 2022 9:14 pm

Klaus Schwab: God Is Dead and the WEF is Acquiring Divine Powers

November 24, 2022 10:35 pm

Passion of the Christ Star Claims Hollywood Elite Are Trafficking Children For Adrenochrome

November 22, 2022 11:39 pm

Bill Gates Tells World Leaders Death Panels Will Soon Be Required

November 21, 2022 8:00 pm

Justin Bieber: Facial Paralysis Is Punishment For Exposing Illuminati Pedophilia

November 18, 2022 7:29 pm

Spanish Royalty Expose Who Really Killed Princess Diana

November 16, 2022 1:43 pm

Controlled Opposition: Dave Chappelles Family Say He Was Killed and Cloned by the Illuminati

November 14, 2022 11:53 pm

Michael Jackson Was Murdered for Saying SAME Things As Kanye 13 Years Ago

November 13, 2022 1:34 am

CIA Agent We Pay Mainstream Media To Spread Fake News, Shocking Expos

November 11, 2022 10:32 pm

She continued:

We have held hearings on this, and there is absolutely no doubt that the data shows that the vast majority of incidents of domestic terror come from white nationalismAnd that we are really, truly facing the environment of fascism. And in the United States of America, this type of intimidation at the polls brings us to Jim Crow.

It brings us back and harkens back to a very unique form of American apartheid that is not that long passed ago, and we have never fully healed from that. And those wounds threatened to rip back open if we do not strongly defend democracy in the United States of America.

Read the rest here:

AOC: Vast Majority of Domestic Terror Comes From White Nationalism ...

Black nationalism – Wikipedia

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Danzig

Ideology that seeks to develop a black national identity

Black nationalism is a type of racial nationalism or pan-nationalism which espouses the belief that black people are a race, and which seeks to develop and maintain a black racial and national identity.[1][2] Black nationalist activism revolves around the social, political, and economic empowerment of black communities and people, especially to resist their assimilation into white culture (through integration or otherwise), and maintain a distinct black identity.[1]

Black nationalists often promote black separatism, which posits that black people should form territorially separate nation-states. Without achieving this goal, some black separatists employ a "nation within a nation" approach, advocating for various degrees of localized separation. Pan-African black nationalists variously advocate for continental African unity (aiming to eventually transition away from racial nationalism) or cultural unity among the African diaspora, which entails either a return to Africa or a sustained connection between African and American black nations. Rejecting black separatism, some US-based black nationalists conceive the black nation in cultural terms as part of American pluralism.[3][4] Some black nationalists promote black supremacy, which envisions black superiority over other racial groups. Black nationalists often reject the term and comparisons with white supremacists, characterizing their movement as an anti-racist reaction to white supremacy and colorblind white liberalism as racist.[5] Critics of black nationalism argue that it promotes violence, racial hostility, and other forms of discrimination.[6][7]

The movement arose within the African American community in the United States. In the early 20th century, Garveyism, which was promoted by the U.S.-based Marcus Garvey, furthered black nationalist ideas. Black nationalist ideas also proved to be an influence on the Black Islam movement, particularly on groups like the Nation of Islam, which was founded by Wallace Fard Muhammad. During the 1960s, black nationalism influenced the Black Panther Party and the broader Black Power movement.

Martin Delany (18121885), an African American abolitionist, was arguably the first proponent of black nationalism.[8][9] Delany is credited with the Pan-African slogan of "Africa for Africans."[10]

Inspired by the success of the Haitian Revolution, the origins of black and indigenous African nationalism in political thought lie in the 19th and early 20th centuries with people such as Marcus Garvey, Benjamin "Pap" Singleton, Henry McNeal Turner, Martin Delany, Henry Highland Garnet, Edward Wilmot Blyden, Paul Cuffe, and others. The repatriation of African-American slaves to Liberia or Sierra Leone was a common black nationalist theme in the 19th century. Marcus Garvey's Universal Negro Improvement Association of the 1910s and 1920s was the most powerful black nationalist movement to date, claiming millions of members. Garvey's movement was opposed by mainline black leaders, and crushed by government action. However, its many alumni remembered its inspiring rhetoric.[11]

According to Wilson Jeremiah Moses, black nationalism as a philosophy can be examined from three different periods, giving rise to various ideological perspectives for what we can today consider black nationalism.[12]

The first period of pre-classical black nationalism began when the first Africans were brought to the Americas as slaves through the American Revolutionary period.[13]

The second period of black nationalism began after the Revolutionary War. This period refers to the time when a sizeable number of educated Africans within the colonies (specifically within New England and Pennsylvania) had become disgusted with the social conditions that arose out of the Enlightenment's ideas.[clarification needed] From this way of thinking came the rise of individuals within the black community who sought to create organizations that would unite black people. The intention of these organizations was to group black people together so they could voice their concerns, and help their own community advance itself. This form of thinking can be found in historical personalities such as; Prince Hall, Richard Allen and Absalom Jones, James Forten, Cyrus Bustill, William Gray through their need to become founders of certain organizations such as African Masonic lodges, the Free African Society, and Church Institutions such as the African Episcopal Church of St. Thomas. These institutions served as early foundations to developing independent and separate organizations for their own people. The goal was to create groups to include those who so many times had been excluded from exclusively white communities and government-funded organizations.[14]

The third period of black nationalism arose during the post-Reconstruction era, particularly among various African-American clergy circles. Separated circles were already established and accepted because African-Americans had long endured the oppression of slavery and Jim Crowism in the United States since its inception. The clerical phenomenon led to the birth of a modern form of black nationalism that stressed the need to separate blacks from non-blacks and build separate communities that would promote racial pride and collectivize resources. The new ideology became the philosophy of groups like the Moorish Science Temple and the Nation of Islam. By 1930, Wallace Fard Muhammad had founded the Nation of Islam. His method to spread information about the Nation of Islam used unconventional tactics to recruit individuals in Detroit, Michigan. Later on, Elijah Muhammad would lead the Nation of Islam and become a mentor to people like Malcolm X.[15] Although the 1960s brought a period of heightened religious, cultural and political nationalism, it was black nationalism that would lead the promotion of Afrocentrism.

Prince Hall was an important social leader of Boston following the Revolutionary War. He is well known for his contribution as the founder of Black Freemasonry. His life and past are unclear, but he is believed to have been a former slave freed after twenty one years of slavehood. In 1775 fifteen other black men along with Hall joined a freemason lodge of British soldiers, after the departure of the soldiers they created their own lodge African Lodge #1 and were granted full stature in 1784. Despite their stature other white freemason lodges in America did not treat them equal and so Hall began to help other black Masonic lodges across the country to help their own cause - to progress as a community together despite any difficulties brought to them by racists. Hall was best recognized for his contribution to the black community along with his petitions (many denied) in the name of black nationalism. In 1787 he unsuccessfully petitioned to the Massachusetts legislature to send blacks back to Africa (to obtain "complete" freedom from white supremacy). In 1788, Hall was a well known contributor to the passing of the legislation of the outlawing of the slave-trade and those involved. Hall continued his efforts to help his community, and in 1796 his petition for Boston to approve funding for black schools. Hall and other Black Bostonians wanted separate schools to distance themselves from White supremacy and create well-educated Black citizens.[16] Despite the city's inability to provide a building, Hall lent his building for the school to run from. Until his death in 1807, Hall continued to work for black rights in issues of abolition, civil rights and the advancement of the community overall.[17]

In 1787 Richard Allen and Absalom Jones, black ministers of Pennsylvania, formed the Free African Society of Pennsylvania. The goal of this organization was to create a church that was free of restrictions of only one form of religion, and to pave the way for the creation of a house of worship exclusive to their community. They were successful in doing this when they created the St. Thomas African Episcopal Church in 1793. The community included many members who were notably abolitionist men and former slaves. Allen, following his own beliefs that worship should be out loud and outspoken, left the organization two years later. He later received an opportunity to become the pastor of the church, but rejected the offer, leaving it to Jones. The society itself was a memorable charitable organization that allowed its members to socialize and network with other business partners, in an attempt to better their community. Its activity and open doors served as a motivational growth for the city, inspiring many other black mutual aid societies in the city to pop up. Additionally the society is well known for their aid during the yellow fever epidemic in 1793.[18]

The African Church or the African Episcopal Church of St. Thomas Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was founded in 1792 for those of African descent, as a foster church for the community with the goal to be interdenominational. In the beginning of the church's establishment its masses were held in homes and local schools. One of the founders of the Free African Society was also the first Episcopal priest of African American descent, Absalom Jones. The original church house was constructed at 5th and Adelphi Streets in Philadelphia, now St. James Place, and it was dedicated on July 17, 1794; other locations of the church included: 12th Street near Walnut, 57th and Pearl Streets, 52nd and Parrish Streets, and the current location, Overbrook and Lancaster Avenue in Philadelphia's historic Overbrook Farms neighborhood. The church is mostly African-American. The church and its members have played a key role in the abolition/anti-slavery and equal rights movement of the 1800s.[19]

"Since 1960 St. Thomas has been involved in the local and national civil rights movement through its work with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Union of Black Episcopalians, the Opportunities Industrialization Center (OIC), Philadelphia Interfaith Action, and The Episcopal Church Women. Most importantly, it has been in the forefront of the movement to uphold the knowledge and value of the black presence in the Episcopal Church. Today, that tradition continues with a still-growing membership through a host of ministries such as Christian Formation, the Chancel Choir, Gospel Choir, Jazz Ensemble, Mens Fellowship, Young Adult and Youth Ministries, a Church School, Health Ministry, Caring Ministry, and a Shepherding Program."[17]

Marcus Garvey encouraged African people around the world to be proud of their race and see beauty in their own kind. This form of black nationalism later became known as Garveyism. A central idea to Garveyism was that African people in every part of the world were one people and they would never advance if they did not put aside their cultural and ethnic differences and unite under their own shared history. He was heavily influenced by the earlier works of Booker T. Washington, Martin Delany, and Henry McNeal Turner.[20] Garvey used his own personal magnetism and the understanding of black psychology and the psychology of confrontation to create a movement that challenged bourgeois blacks for the minds and souls of African Americans. Marcus Garvey's return to America had to do with his desire to meet with the man who inspired him most, Booker T. Washington, however Garvey did not return in time to meet Washington. Despite this, Garvey moved forward with his efforts and two years later, a year after Washington's death, Garvey established a similar organization in America known as the United Negro Improvement Association otherwise known as the UNIA.[21] Garvey's beliefs are articulated in The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey as well as Message To The People: The Course of African Philosophy.

Wallace D. Fard founded the Nation of Islam in the 1930s. Fard took as his student Elijah (Poole) Muhammad, who later became the leader of the organization. The basis of the group was the belief that Christianity was exclusively a white man's religion forced on black people during slavery, preaching that Islam is the original religion of black people. Deviating from mainstream Islam, Elijah Muhammad taught that Fard was a Messiah and that he himself was sent by God to prepare black people for global supremacy and destruction of "the white devil."[22] The Nation of Islam promoted economic self-sufficiency for black people, seeking to establish a separate black nation in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.[23]

The members of the Nation of Islam are known as Black Muslims. As the group became more and more prominent with public figures such as Malcolm X as its orators, it received increasing attention from outsiders. In 1959 the group was the subject of a documentary named The Hate that Hate Produced, drawing negative media attention.[citation needed] When Elijah Muhammad died, his son Warith succeeded him as the organization's leader. Influenced by Malcolm X's departure, he converted the Nation of Islam to orthodox Sunni Islam, renaming the organization as the World Community of al-Islam in the West and later the American Muslim Mission, eventually abandoning black nationalism and the Fard's cult of personality. In 1985, Mohammed formally resigned and dissolved the American Muslim Mission, leading his followers into mainstream Muslim organizations. Several former members of the Nation of Islam, including Silias Muhammad and Elijah Muhammad's brother John Muhammad, rejected the conversion to orthodoxy, forming two new organizations that retained the Nation of Islam's original name and teachings of Elijah Muhammad.[23][24]

Succeeding Malcolm X as leader of the New York Temple, Louis Farrakhan became the Nation of Islam's most prominent spokesperson, founding a third Nation of Islam in 1978. Beginning his organization with thousands of adherents, Farrakhan re-established its national prominence, eventually purchasing Elijah Muhammad's former mosque in Chicago to refurbish it as the organization's headquarters. Farrakhan expanded the organization internationally, opening chapters in England, France, Ghana, and the Caribbean islands, cultivating relations with foreign Muslim countries, and establishing a relationship with Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi. He bolstered his prominence by supporting Jesse Jackson's 1988 US presidential campaign, sponsoring the Million Man March in 1995, and promoting social reform in African-American communities. After a near-death experience in 2000, Farrakhan sought to strengthen relationships with other US racial minority groups and Warith Muhammed, eventually reducing his role within the Nation of Islam and embracing Dianetics, a practice of Scientology.[23][24]

The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies the Nation of Islam as a hate group, stating: "Its theology of innate black superiority over whites and the deeply racist, antisemitic and anti-LGBT rhetoric of its leaders have earned the NOI a prominent position in the ranks of organized hate."[25]

Between 1953 and 1964, while most African leaders worked in the civil rights movement to integrate African-American people into mainstream American life, Malcolm X was an avid advocate of black independence and the reclaiming of black pride and masculinity.[26] He maintained that there was hypocrisy in the purported values of Western culture from its Judeo-Christian religious traditions to American political and economic institutions and its inherently racist actions. He maintained that separatism and control of politics, and economics within its own community would serve blacks better than the tactics of civil rights leader Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and mainstream civil rights groups such as the SCLC, SNCC, NAACP, and CORE. MalcolmX declared that nonviolence was the "philosophy of the fool,"[27] and that to achieve anything, African Americans would have to reclaim their national identity, embrace the rights covered by the Second Amendment, and defend themselves from white hegemony and extrajudicial violence. In response to Rev. King's famous "I Have a Dream" speech, MalcolmX quipped, "While King was having a dream, the rest of us Negroes are having a nightmare."[28]

Prior to his pilgrimage to Mecca, Malcolm X believed that African Americans must develop their own society and ethical values, including the self-help, community-based enterprises, that the black Muslims supported. He also thought that African Americans should reject integration or cooperation with whites until they could achieve internal cooperation and unity. He prophetically believed that there "would be bloodshed" if the racism problem in America remained ignored, and he renounced "compromise" with whites. In April 1964, Malcolm X participated in a Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca); Malcolm found himself restructuring his views and recanted several extremist opinions during his shift to mainstream Islam.[29]

Malcolm X returned from Mecca with moderate views that included an abandonment of his commitment to racial separatism. However, he still supported black nationalism and advocated that African Americans in the United States act proactively in their campaign for equal human rights, instead of relying on Caucasian citizens to change the laws that govern society. The tenets of Malcolm X's new philosophy are articulated in the charter of his Organization of Afro-American Unity (a secular Pan-Africanist group patterned after the Organization of African Unity), and he inspired some aspects of the future Black Panther movement.[30]

In 1965, Malcolm X expressed reservations about black nationalism, saying, I was alienating people who were true revolutionaries dedicated to overturning the system of exploitation that exists on this earth by any means necessary. So I had to do a lot of thinking and reappraising of my definition of black nationalism. Can we sum up the solution to the problems confronting our people as black nationalism? And if you notice, I havent been using the expression for several months."[31]

In the 1967 Black Power, Stokely Carmichael introduces black nationalism. He illustrates the prosperity of the black race in the United States as being dependent on the implementation of black sovereignty. Under his theory, black nationalism in the United States would allow Blacks to socially, economically and politically be empowered in a manner that has never been plausible in American history. A Black nation would work to reverse the exploitation of the Black race in America, as Blacks would intrinsically work to benefit their own state of affairs. African Americans would function in an environment of running their own businesses, banks, government, media, and so on. Black nationalism is the opposite of integration, and Carmichael contended integration is harmful to the black population. As blacks integrate to white communities they are perpetuating a system in which blacks are inferior to whites. Blacks would continue to function in an environment of being second class citizens, he believes, never reaching equity to white citizens. Carmichael therefore uses the concept of black nationalism to promote an equality that would begin to dismantle institutional racism.

While in France, Frantz Fanon wrote his first book, Black Skin, White Masks, an analysis of the impact of colonial subjugation on the African psyche. This book was a very personal account of Fanon's experience being black: as a man, an intellectual, and a party to a French education. Although Fanon wrote the book while still in France, most of his other work was written while in North Africa (in particular Algeria). It was during this time that he produced The Wretched of the Earth where Fanon analyzes the role of class, race, national culture and violence in the struggle for decolonization. In this work, Fanon expounded his views on the liberating role of violence for the colonized, as well as the general necessity of violence in the anti-colonial struggle. Both books established Fanon in the eyes of much of the Third World as one of the leading anti-colonial thinkers of the 20th century. In 1959 he compiled his essays on Algeria in a book called L'An Cinq: De la Rvolution Algrienne.[32]

Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, has called for racial reparations in the form of "financial restitution, land redistribution, political self-determination, culturally relevant education programs, language recuperation, and the right to return (or repatriation)" and cited Frantz Fanon's work for "understanding the current global context for Black individuals on the African continent and in our multiple diasporas."[33]

The Not Fucking Around Coalition (NFAC) is a black nationalist organization in the United States. The group advocates for black liberation and separatism. It has been described by news outlets as a Black militia.[34][35] The NFAC gained prominence during the 20202021 United States racial unrest, making its first reported appearance at a May 12, 2020, protest near Brunswick, Georgia, over the February murder of Ahmaud Arbery,[36] though they were identified by local media as "Black Panthers".[37] Thomas Mockaitis, professor of history at DePaul University noted that "In one sense it (NFAC) echoes the Black Panthers but they are more heavily armed and more disciplined... So far, they've coordinated with police and avoided engaging with violence."[38]

John Fitzgerald Johnson, also known as Grand Master Jay and John Jay Fitzgerald Johnson, claims leadership of the group[38][39] and has stated that it is composed of "ex military shooters."[36] In 2019 Grand Master Jay told the Atlanta Black Star that the organization was formed to prevent another Greensboro Massacre.[40][41] Johnson expressed Black Nationalist views, putting forth the view that the United States should either hand the state of Texas over to African-Americans so that they may form an independent country, or allow African-Americans to depart the United States to another country that would provide land upon which to form an independent nation.[42][43]

In 2016, an investigation into the online activities of Micah Johnson, perpetrator of the 2016 shooting of Dallas police officers, uncovered his interest in Black nationalist groups.[44] The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and news outlets reported that Johnson "liked" the Facebook pages of Black nationalist organizations such as the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), Nation of Islam, and Black Riders Liberation Army, three groups which are listed by the SPLC as hate groups.[45]

In 2022, Frank James, suspect of the 2022 New York City Subway attack beliefs have been linked to black nationalism.[46][47]

Revolutionary Black nationalism is an ideology that combines cultural nationalism with scientific socialism in order to achieve Black self-determination. Proponents of the ideology argue that revolutionary Black nationalism is a movement that rejects all forms of oppression, including class based exploitation under capitalism.[48] Revolutionary Black nationalist organizations such as the Black Panther Party and the Revolutionary Action Movement also adopted a set of anti-colonialist politics inspired by the writings of notable revolutionary theorists including Frantz Fanon, Mao Zedong, and Kwame Nkrumah.[49] In the words of Ahmad Muhammad (formerly known as Max Stanford) the national field chairman of the Revolutionary Action Movement:

We are revolutionary black nationalist[s], not based on ideas of national superiority, but striving for justice and liberation of all the oppressed peoples of the world. . . . There can be no liberty as long as black people are oppressed and the peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America are oppressed by Yankee imperialism and neo-colonialism. After four hundred years of oppression, we realize that slavery, racism and imperialism are all interrelated and that liberty and justice for all cannot exist peacefully with imperialism.[50]

Professor and author Harold Cruse saw revolutionary Black nationalism as a necessary and logical progression from other leftist ideologies, as he believed that non-Black leftists could not properly assess the particular material conditions of the Black community and other colonized people:

Revolutionary nationalism has not waited for Western Marxian thought to catch up with the realities of the "underdeveloped" world...The liberation of the colonies before the socialist revolution in the West is not orthodox Marxism (although it might be called Maoism or Castroism). As long as American Marxists cannot deal with the implications of revolutionary nationalism, both abroad and at home, they will continue to play the role of revolutionaries by proxy."[51]

Some African countries encode race in their nationality and citizenship laws. Liberia and Sierra Leone afford birthright citizenship exclusively to black people. Circa 1992, Malawi required birth to a Malawian citizen "of African race" for birthright citizenship. Similarly, Mali used to attribute birthright nationality only to children with a parent "of African origin" born in the country.[52] Ghana provides the right of return for people of African descent. Ghana is the first African state to have enacted this policy, done via the Immigration Act 573 of 2000 in response to African-American immigrant lobbying.[53] Some private Afrocentric travel and genetic ancestry tracing companies have collaborated with the governments of Ghana and Sierra Leone to promote African diasporic toursim and immigration there.[54][55]

Robert Mugabe, former President and Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, encouraged the violent seizure of white-owned farmland, commenting that "[t]he white man is not indigenous to Africa. Africa is for Africans, Zimbabwe is for Zimbabweans."[56]

In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. characterized black nationalism with "hatred and despair," writing that support for black nationalism "would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare."[7]

Norm R. Allen Jr., former director of African Americans for Humanism, calls black nationalism a "strange mixture of profound thought and patent nonsense".

On the one hand, Reactionary Black Nationalists (RBNs) advocate self-love, self-respect, self-acceptance, self-help, pride, unity, and so forth - much like the right-wingers who promote "traditional family values." But - also like the holier-than-thou right-wingers - RBNs promote bigotry, intolerance, hatred, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, pseudo-science, irrationality, dogmatic historical revisionism, violence, and so forth.[57]

Tunde Adeleke, Nigerian-born professor of History and Director of the African American Studies program at the University of Montana, argues in his book UnAfrican Americans: Nineteenth-Century Black Nationalists and the Civilizing Mission that 19th-century African-American nationalism embodied the racist and paternalistic values of Euro-American culture and that black nationalist plans were not designed for the immediate benefit of Africans but to enhance their own fortunes.[58]

Black feminists in the U.S., such as Barbara Smith, Toni Cade Bambara, and Frances Beal, have also lodged sustained criticism of certain strands of black nationalism, particularly the political programs advocated by cultural nationalists. Black cultural nationalists envisioned black women only in the traditional heteronormative role of the idealized wife-mother figure. Patricia Hill Collins criticizes the limited imagining of black women in cultural nationalist projects, writing that black women "assumed a particular place in Black cultural nationalist efforts to reconstruct authentic Black culture, reconstitute Black identity, foster racial solidarity, and institute an ethic of service to the Black community."[59] A major example of black women as only the heterosexual wife and mother can be found in the philosophy and practice called Kawaida exercised by the Us Organization. Maulana Karenga established the political philosophy of Kawaida in 1965. Its doctrine prescribed distinct roles between black men and women. Specifically, the role of the black woman as "African Woman" was to "inspire her man, educate her children, and participate in social development."[60] Historian of black women's history and radical politics Ashley Farmer records a more comprehensive history of black women's resistance to sexism and patriarchy within black nationalist organizations, leading many Black Power era associations to support gender equality.[61]

Black nationalism - Wikipedia