Category Archives: Libertarian

Leland Jenson recently wrote a letter insulting his political opponents and spewing leftist buzzwords. He jumps all over the place trying to connect unrelated topics from completely different political camps. For example, he said, Our national democratic institutions are being undermined by Tea Party extremists (Vanilla Isis), trying to lump the Tea Party movement in with the January 6th capital riot. To understand how stupid this is, one must first understand what the Tea Party movement was.

Despite what the media would have you believe, Republicans and Libertarians dont actually get along very well. The Tea Party movement was an attempt to form a coalition between Libertarians and Republicans to focus on one single issue: government spending. The movement did manage to get a few hardline fiscal hawks elected to Congress, but it failed to give Ron Paul (now retired) the presidency.

For those who dont know, Ron Paul can be thought of as the libertarian version of Bernie Sanders. His son, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is one of the last remaining remnants of the Tea Party. The movement that got Trump elected in 2016 was completely different and unrelated. That movement was all about national populism, not government spending.

The Tea Party movement was very short lived and it functionally died after the 2012 election. The modern Republican party today arguably does not care about the national debt and how much of the annual budget goes to simply paying interest.

Secondly, Im at a loss for words at Jenson calling the tea party vanilla isis. ISIS is a theocratic movement whose goal is to create a Sunni Islamic state. The Shia muslims were treated just as badly as non-muslims, sometimes worse; they could either convert or be killed. The Sunni muslims under ISIS control were forced to follow the strictest Islamic protocols (sharia law), such as men not shaving their beards and women being forced to cover themselves; thats putting it lightly. Failure to comply could result in barbaric thousand-year-old styles of executions such as crucifixions and stoning, including women and children.

Jenson is concerned about bigotry, misogyny and equality or whatever. When the Tea Party was active, the gay marriage debate was in full swing; the Supreme Court did not settle that discussion until 2015, long after the Tea Party ended. Libertarians are generally supportive of gay marriage, Republicans were not. The coalition required them to put their differences aside. Similarly, Libertarians are generally far less religious than Republicans; even the ones that are religious arent authoritarian about it. You wouldnt find the Tea Party pushing for prayer in schools or the Ten Commandments in front of courthouses. Comparing the Tea Party to ISIS doesnt even make sense, not even as a vanilla version. The Tea Party was less theocratic than Republicans in general at the time.

In conclusion, Jenson doesnt know what hes talking about. The Tea Party was not conservative republican extremism.

P. S. Trickle-down economics is not a real thing. The only time you hear those words are when Democrats are attacking a strawman. You wont find academic proponents of it.

William Smith lives in Fargo.

This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.

More here:

Letter: Writer doesn't know what the Tea Party was - INFORUM

There are virtually no defenders of capitalism in the world, yours truly and a handful of others being the rare exceptions. Capitalism endures because it works and its basic principles accurately describe the physical universe, not because of any significant cultural pressure to believe in it. Nonetheless, you hear claims that market fundamentalists abound, as if the world is full of maniacs consistently bashing government and praising property rights.

Even I shouldnt properly be called a market fundamentalist, if that slur is meant to imply an allegiance to an overall pattern of market activity for its own sake regardless of the consequences for the human participants involveda position that may be held by no one. At a fundamental level, in fact, Im a utilitarian, wanting the greatest possible happiness for the greatest possible number over the lifetime of the universe. I dont really understand what else would or should morally motivate anyone. And I think the greatest happiness is made possible by secure property rights.

Unfortunately, as Lenin wisely predicted, most practicing capitalistsbusinesspeoplefeel so little loyalty to the principles underlying the system that created them that theyll sell us the rope with which we will hang them.

The billionaire investor vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, Charlie Munger, for example, praises the power and decisiveness of the Chinese Communist Party, currently the worlds most influential engine of non-capitalist central planning, and says he wishes the U.S. were as tough in crushing its business mavericks as China has been in slapping down Jack Mas ideas for more free-market-oriented banking options.

The commies arent capitalisms only adversaries these days, though, not by a long shot. This month brings a conference in Alexandria, Virginia that shows how useless the long arc of conservative thinking has proven to be in making the case for capitalism.

Populist-leaning figures including Sen. Marco Rubio (now de-emphasizing his long history of sugar industry subsidies), Senate candidate and author J.D. Vance (now rapidly deleting his old anti-Trump, pro-Evan McMullin tweets), and new National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru, under the auspices of the Catholic-inclined Intercollegiate Studies Institute, will talk about topics such as capitalism being anti-family and the need for economic thought to be transformed in the wake of (largely imaginary) decades of social devastation wrought by global markets. This may at least help clarify some of the grievous miscommunications between libertarians and conservatives over the past decade.

Before people of any political stripe wish for the taming of purportedly heartless market institutions, its worth noting that those institutions are often at their worst when they are least market-like. It seems like only yesterdaythe 1990sthat increasingly customized, personalized services were the direction markets were headed. Our biggest complaints about them now seem to be generated by the handful of aberrant, still somewhat novel, large companies that presume to behave like governments.

Big Tech and the Trump Organization alike have their critics, but isnt each adjacent to government, and prone to behave like government, to a degree that few of the worlds millions of other companies are? more commercial and less governmentalless authoritarianbehavior is needed, even within the private sector. Do you really want either Big Tech or the Trump Organization becoming more entangled with the actual government, constantly mingling with regulators? Enforcing simple laws that ensure Big Tech and the like do not become Big Fraud would be enough to keep capitalism coloring inside the lines.

Instead, each political faction in its own way seems lately to flee from entrepreneurs and into the arms of regulators. The right now wants God or populist government to smash chaotic markets. The left always disliked capitalism. The liberals want every inch of it regulated and its participants guilt-tripped any time they interact with each other (and then liberals want to be rewarded for their vandalism with praise for their tolerance and compassion). Even many libertarians, though pro-capitalist in principle, find economics confusing or embarrassing and would rather talk about something ostensibly separate and more popular: sex, radar scanners, constitutional law, medicinal marijuana, you name it, anything that keeps them from sounding like stock-trading fuddy-duddies.

Give capitalism a chance, thoughnot just in the world but within your own perceptions. Even when you see some ostensibly non-governmental civil society institutions screw up, note the high frequency with which the screw-up ensued from a brush with government or mimicry of government. Its sad the Boy Scouts just had to pay $1 billion in settlements for overlooking child molestation incidents, but before you try pinning that one on predatory capitalism, notice the Boy Scouts, always a bit paramilitary in tone, have in recent decades had both a past CIA director and a future Secretary of State as their president. Maybe if Boy Scouts spent more time buying and selling and less time following leaders orders in darkened woods like good soldiers, theyd be a billion richer right now.

A libertarian architect friend of minealso a solid family man and pillar of his community, rest assuredpoints out to me the release this week of Anthony Fontenots book Non-Design: Architecture, Liberalism, and the Market, an argument that the best things in architecture and urban design in recent decades have happened when planners were held at bay and the spontaneous order of the marketplace was allowed to play out. Such observations were growing more common back in the 1990s, in the wake of Communisms catastrophic failure and the reduced perceived necessity for the U.S.s own military-industrial complex, not to mention the welfare state.

Lets rekindle the playful courage to see what markets can do, and this time lets be more explicit about it. Non-libertarian political thinkers constantly claim they have the courage to do whats necessaryalways meaning the courage to use force against their various enemies (or at least recommend someone else use force on their behalf). We should respond by summoning the courage to teach economics and argue openly for defending individual rights. No more hiding behind the latest popular environmental, military, anti-racist, electoral, or aesthetic cause and pretending that Us too! is a powerful enough slogan to carry the day for liberty.

Have the guts to tell the next market-basher and property-rights-violator you encounter hes wrong, whether hes conservative, communist, corporate CEO, or even craven libertarian thinktank staffer.

Todd Seavey is the author of Libertarianism for Beginners and is on Twitter at @ToddSeavey

See more here:

With Capitalists Like These - Splice Today

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether Maine may exclude religious schools that offer sectarian education from a state tuition program.

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, is broadly similar to one from Montana decided by the court last year. In that case, the court ruled that states must allow religious schools to participate in programs that provide scholarships to students attending private schools.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, No. 18-1195, said a provision of Montanas Constitution banning aid to schools run by churches ran afoul of the federal Constitutions protection of the free exercise of religion by discriminating against religious people and schools.

A state need not subsidize private education, he wrote. But once a state decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.

But the Montana decision turned on the schools religious status rather than their curriculums. There may be a difference, Chief Justice Roberts said, between an institutions religious identity and its conduct.

We acknowledge the point, he wrote, but need not examine it here.

In urging the Supreme Court to hear the case from Maine, two families that send or want to send their children to religious schools, represented by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian group, asked the justices to resolve the open question and do away with the distinction.

Such a state of affairs in which a state cannot deny a benefit to a student because she wishes to attend a school that is religious, but can deny it because the school does religious things is unstable and untenable, the families brief said.

Maine requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with schools elsewhere, or they can pay tuition at public or private schools chosen by parents so long as they are, in the words of state law, a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

In opposing Supreme Court review, officials in Maine argued that the schools students attend under the program should mirror the teaching offered at public schools.

The purpose of the program is to engage private schools willing to deliver a specific service: an education that is substantively akin to that which a student would receive if their community operated a public school, the states lawyers wrote. A religious organization that is willing to provide the service sought is treated no differently than any other organization.

The Supreme Court has long held that states may choose to provide aid to religious schools along with other private schools. The question in the cases from Montana and Maine was the opposite one: May states refuse to provide such aid if it is made available to other private schools?

More:

Supreme Court to Hear Case on Government Aid to Religious Schools - The New York Times

Congressman Mike Kelly is joining a bill that aims to end non-profit contributions to election offices.

Its called the End Zuckerbucks Act which stems from Facebook providing direct funding to election offices this past year.

Kelly says moves like this are necessary in order to restore trust in the election process.

I dont care if youre Republican, a Democrat, an independent, a libertarian. Thats not the issue. The issue is the faith and trust and confidence you have in the way we elect people. If we lose that, then weve lost everything, Kelly said at a press conference.

A report found that 23 counties in Pennsylvania took money from the Facebook fund. However, county officials have said they needed the money because they werent sufficiently funded to coordinate elections.

Kelly filed a lawsuit last year seeking to render mail-in ballots as unconstitutional that was ultimately rejected by a number of state courts.

Link:

Rep. Kelly Sponsors Bill Seeking To End Non-Profits Funding Election Offices - ButlerRadio.com - Butler, PA - butlerradio.com

Washington, D.C. - Today, U.S. Representative Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) joined members of the House Election Integrity Caucus to announce the introduction theEnd Zuckerbucks Act, a bill that would ban 501(c)3 organizations from donating to official government elections administrators.

Kelly, alongside Representatives Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.), Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), Dan Bishop (R- N.C.), Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Barry Moore (R-Ala.), and Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.), held a press conference this morning in the House Triangle to talk about the bill and why it's crucial to improve the integrity of our elections.

Watch Rep. Kelly's Remarks at the Press Conference

Key Excerpts

"It's not debatable that the American people have lost confidence in the way we elect people. What is debatable, is what are we going to do about it?"

"I don't care if you're Republican, a Democrat, an independent, a libertarian. That's not theissue. The issue is the faith and trust and confidenceyou have in the way we elect people. If we lose that, then we've lost everything."

"It's not about a party. It's about a process."

"People are questioning for the right reasons why this happened and why nobody's done anything about it going forward."

"No president, no party, should ever go through what this country went through and what all our candidates went through last November third."

Background

During the 2020 election, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gave $350 million in grants to local boards of elections in 49 states through the left leaning nonprofit organization Center for Tech and Civic Life, 92% of which went to elections boards in areas that lean heavily toward Democrats.The stated purpose of the donations was to help create COVID-safe voting sites, but much of the funding was instead used to increase turnout in these liberal precincts. The purpose of the End Zuckerbucks Act is to prevent Big Tech from putting its thumb on the scales of future U.S. elections.

#####

View original post here:

Rep. Kelly, Members of the House Election Integrity Caucus Unveil Legislation to Keep Big Tech from Thumbing the Scales in US Elections - Mike Kelly

Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie tackle a suddenly-pervasive topic: critical race theory. Plus, tune in for the fine details of a debate brewing within the Libertarian Party (L.P.). All that and more on this Monday's Reason Roundtable.

Discussed in the show:

1:54: Some condolences are in order.

7:46: Breakdown and assessment of why critical race theory dominates headlines.

35:31: Weekly Listener Question: What are your thoughts on the ongoing civil war within the L.P. between pragmatists and the Mises Caucus, following the crackup at the New Hampshire L.P. and the resulting fallout? Do you think a Mises Caucusled L.P. would bring new voters into the party or just alienate everyone who isn't an edgelord?

50:21: Media recommendations for the week.

This week's links:

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsors:

Audio production by Ian KeyserAssistant production by Regan TaylorMusic: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

Read the rest here:

How the Critical Race Theory Debate Misses the Mark - Reason

Susan Gore of Cheyenne founded the Wyoming Liberty Group and Republic Free Choice. (Courtesy Wyoming Liberty Group)

June 26, 2021byNick Reynolds, WyoFile

Wealthy conservative donor Susan Gore was a key financier of a years-longeffort to spy on Wyoming Democrats and Republicans, an article published Friday by the New York Times revealed, shining a light on the lengths to which the Gore-Tex heiress and Wyoming Liberty Group founder has gone to influence the states politics.

Thereportalleges Gore helped finance the infiltration of numerous political organizations in the state by a pair of spies tied to the right-wing group Project Veritas. Their targets were varied, according to the investigation, ranging from liberal advocacy group Better Wyoming and advocates of medical marijuana. Democrats and moderate Republicans within the Wyoming Legislature were also singled out, as well as the executive leadership of the Wyoming Democratic Party.

Article continues below...

The activity even reached the office of Republican Gov. Mark Gordon, the New York Times reports.

The Gordon Administration is conservative and transparent, Gordons office said in response to the news. The Governors actions have demonstrated his commitment to fiscal conservatism, life, the Second Amendment, patriotism and always putting Wyoming first. The allegations, if corroborated, of the deceptive behavior of a few politically motivated individuals contained in the New York Times story reflect a sad situation and have no place in Wyoming.

The spies, a man and woman with alleged ties to Blackwater founder Erik Prince, along with Project Veritas, were largely unsuccessful in their efforts, according to several of the victims interviewed by WyoFile. However, observers say the botched incursion into the highest circles of Wyoming politics symbolize Gores escalating role as a puppeteer in Wyomings politics, and her role in the populist rights newfound traction in Cheyenne.

I think this was the logical progression, former Gov. Dave Freudenthal, a Democrat, said. People like Susan arrive with all this outside money that suddenly shows up, funded by people whose ties to the state are usually its tax climate. I dont know if theyre concerned at all about the agricultural community or coal miners, or the schools or any of the things that were traditionally issues that people in Wyoming tried to work on.

Wyoming Liberty Group did not respond to a request for comment.

Shock and confusion

News of the espionage operation stunned many in Wyoming politics, not only for the nature of the operation, but for its chief targets: The Wyoming Democratic Party, the high-powered liberal donor Liz Storer and the progressive advocacy group Better Wyoming and its director, Nate Martin. (Note: The Storer Foundation is a major donor to WyoFile.)

I dont really understand why you would try and infiltrate the Democrats, said Sen. Cale Case (R-Lander), a longtime acquaintance of Gore and a former board member for her advocacy organization, the Wyoming Liberty Group. Theyre not driving the bus in this state, you know.

Others believe it was not the liberal groups activities that drew the interlopers attention, but a false perception of their influence by conservative groups that have grown to believe Wyomings Republican Party is rife with liberal politicians backed by special interest groups.

In 2018, one of the infiltrators, Sophia LaRocca, traveled to Cheyenne to meet with LGBTQ activist Sara Burlingame, then a Democratic candidate for the Wyoming House of Representatives. Burlingame told WyoFile LaRocca pitched her on the concept for an advocacy organization intended to flip Wyoming blue, an idea Burlingame told her was unrealistic.

Burlingame detected red flags about the woman, she said. LaRocca told Burlingame she wanted to spy on Republicans, Burlingame said. LaRocca had few ties to the state and hadnt resided here long. She also lacked a working understanding of Wyomings politics, Burlingame said.

The things that they themselves were guilty of, they projected onto us, and assumed that we would also be guilty of, Burlingame said. But every person they talked to agreed that not only was [spying] unethical, but it was also not strategic.

Living in the least-populated state in the union, you just couldnt afford to do that, Burlingame continued. You burn through all your bridges too rapidly. But I think they had an assumption that behind a closed door, wed drop the mask.

Members of the Wyoming Democratic Party encountered similar red flags, noticing an overeager quality from LaRocca and inconsistent details about her life, communications director Nina Hebert said. While the party offered LaRocca training, Hebert said she and the partys digital director limited her access to party infrastructure, leaving the party largely unexposed to her infiltration attempts.

LaRocca and her partner, Beau Maier, made inroads elsewhere, befriending Better Wyomings Martin and his wife, Wyoming Rep. Karlee Provenza (D-Laramie) through activist trainings. LaRocca even attempted to join Provenzas campaign, the lawmaker said in an interview, only to be rejected.

Through their relationship to Martin and Provenza, Meier and LaRocca became connected to individuals who were part of a multi-partisan coalition to lobby for the legalization of medical cannabis. Gore has been a vocal opponent. Several lawmakers said they believe the effort was intended to gather intelligence on Republican lawmakers who supported legalization.

I now look back on these conversations through a lens of rage, Provenza wrote in a letter to her legislative colleagues sent Friday morning. Rage because I now know that they came into my home under false pretenses to target me and my family. Rage because they attempted to bait me and my husband into saying or doing something shameful so they could use it to hurt us. Rage because they used the same tactics against some of our most honorable colleagues here in the Legislature.

The motivation behind the sting, some believe, stemmed from Gore.

I met with some people from the Liberty Group before running the [cannabis] bill. And what was really fascinating was that almost every person that I talked to who was previously affiliated or with the group all personally took a stance for the decriminalization of medical marijuana, consistent with what I would view as a libertarian position, said Rep. Jared Olsen (R-Cheyenne), the chairman of the Joint Judiciary Committee and the main sponsor of last sessions marijuana legalization bill. But they all said the same thing to me, which was that Susan Gore personally has such an issue with marijuana that the Liberty Group would not be taking a position on it.

Gore traveled to the Capitol to testify against the bill, which ultimately failed.

From Libertarian influencer to espionage

Some, like Freudenthal, believe Gores alleged activity was inevitable.

Gores ties to Wyomingdate back to the mid-1990s, when she first moved to Jackson after more than a decade living in a transcendental meditation community in Iowa. In 2008, Gore entered Wyomings political scene with the founding of the Libertarian-leaning Wyoming Liberty Group.

The mission, according to a former staffer who declined to be named, was smaller government, school choice and low taxes. As the group grew in influence, Freudenthal then in the final years of his second term began to take notice of Gores activities, he said. Freudenthal said he grew concerned over the influence a single, wealthy individual could have on Wyomings politics.

Gore eventually cemented a place amid Wyomings political class. She donated large sums of money over the years to the Wyoming Republican Party, according to campaign finance documents reviewed by WyoFile. After rebooting its image in 2015, the Liberty Groupgained influence. In its growing sway in the Legislature and with the public, Freudenthal said, Gores personal influence grew as well, with candidates eventually tailoring their messages to match her politics.

She played a role in the defeat of House Speaker heir apparent Rosie Bergerin the 2016 primary elections. In 2018, she donated handsomely to Republican gubernatorial candidate Sam Galeotos. Gore was instrumental in a populist wave in the 2020 Republican primaries, donatingtens of thousands of dollarsto hardline conservatives. Many of those candidates went on to win their elections.

What was transpiring was simply a matter of how do we gain power at any cost? Freudenthal said. And unfortunately, theyve been largely successful.

In 2019, then-Wyoming Liberty Group board member Case realized his political philosophy was no longer compatible with Gores, he said, due to his stance on social issues and taxation.

I was always trying to steer the Liberty Group more toward the Libertarian area in issues about economic reform and economic development issues, Case said. But I could never get a lot of traction on the big social issues.

He left the board in 2019.

In recent years, Case has watched Gore funnel thousands of dollars to defeat Democrats as well as conservatives he sees himself aligned with. He wonders when he will be targeted, Case said, particularly as donors like Gore seem bent on purging moderate Republicans in Name Only, or RINOs, from the party ranks.

Paranoia, Rep. Cyrus Western (R-Sheridan), said of the trend. Go figure.

Burlingame considers the rise of Gores influence culminating in espionage inevitable considering current trends, she said.

In a post-Trump world, you have all these hyper-wealthy donors who have been radicalized into a paranoia about the Deep State, Burlingame said. And you also have this small army of con artists who are just out looking for someone to fund them. And theyre a perfect match.

This article was originally published byWyoFileand is republished here with permission.WyoFileis an independent nonprofit news organization focused on Wyoming people, places and policy.

Related Stories from Oil City News:

Read the original post:

Stun and dismay follow Wyoming political espionage revelations - Oil City News

Based on relationship

Last month, I suggested that personal identity has shifted from relationship-based to market-based notions of success and that this shift contributes significantly to our political strife. Today I suggest that this shift has been driven by the political right.

Libertarianism with its emphasis on extreme personal freedom and rugged individualism within the marketplace--raw capitalism, let's call it--has taken over the GOP. This value system leads many to feel undervalued or left out. The schism within the GOP between libertarian/capitalist values and traditional conservatism with its focus on family and community relationships has led directly to Trumpism, which attempts to fill the void by emphasizing class or race as a basis for identity.

Democratic ideals have changed little from those well-articulated by Mario Cuomo in the mid-1990s when he likened society to an extended family stating that we should provide for the education, clothing, feeding, health care and housing of members of our family. One can argue about whether large-scale social programs are effective, but few would argue with the principle of helping others. We used to agree on helping each other and differ on the means to achieve this.

Our biggest threat is not socialism, but elevation of libertarian capitalism to a moral rather than an economic system. This criticism is not anti-capitalist because capitalism thrives best in a society based on traditional moral values of caring.

Religion is not the remedy because those parts of the country with the highest degree of religiosity are those with the highest rate of "deaths of despair": suicide, and deaths from substance abuse, specifically more rural areas. Let's all recommit to relationships and social responsibility as the bedrock of society. These values transcend party.

KATHY CURTIN

Fayetteville

Solve issues together

It seems Republicans have always been opposed to entitlements, yet our governor has stopped the added monthly unemployment benefits to those who need it the most. All in an effort to force people to go back to work for starvation wages so someone can own a hamburger stand, all this when maybe only 30 percent of the people are fully vaccinated.

This is on the governor. This is the very definition of entitlement. What about helping with child care, which is almost impossible to find, or help with transportation, health care, etc.? Work with small-business owners and potential employees. Let's solve these issues together. What would it hurt? I was in the staffing business for 30 years and it's just not this hard.

J.E. JACKSON

Hot Springs Village

See the rest here:

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Based on relationship | Solve issues together - Arkansas Online

Getting down to the specifics of these bills, they range from bad to ugly, said Patrick Hedger, vice president of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, which is funded in part by groups connected to the Kochs. Americans for Prosperity, a Koch group, called the antitrust package a jumble of legislative proposals [that] targets American companies [and] treats them as guilty until proven innocent.

The critics are arguing, in part, that the bills are antithetical to GOP values, which traditionally emphasize the free market and oppose regulatory intervention.

These bills represent a huge intervention into the U.S. economy, said Jessica Melugin, director of the Competitive Enterprise Institutes Center for Technology and Innovation, which has received tens of thousands of dollars from Koch foundations in recent years as well as funding from the major tech companies. This is not on-brand for Republicans.

The Houses top Republican, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, weighed in against the legislation on Wednesday, saying it only gives Democrats in the federal government more power to tip the scales. McCarthy, a California lawmaker, has received tens of thousands of dollars from Google, Amazon and Facebook, as well as the Koch Industries PAC, in recent years.

But traditional Republican aversion to meddling in big business saw serious erosion under Trump, whose Justice Department filed a major antitrust suit against Google. The antitrust bills right-leaning supporters say the Koch groups are simply out of touch with a populist GOP base that feels censored and silenced by the tech giants.

The Koch group and all of these pro-big tech people on the right, they do have an advantage, which is inertia, said Jon Schweppe, the director of policy and government affairs at the populist American Principles Project, which has received money from the Mercer family. The Republican Party for a long time has been a party opposed to any antitrust or concern about concentrated power. But the divide here is that the base definitely wants to break up Big Tech.

One sign of the anti-tech messages growing appeal among the GOP caucus: Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado, the top Republican on the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, co-sponsored all five of the antitrust bills, along with North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn and Texas Rep. Lance Gooden.

Buck said he believes that the legislative efforts are an extension of his outreach to blue collar voters.

When I go back to my district, I hear a lot of people talk about the fact that what Big Tech doing is wrong, he said. They dont necessarily know they cheated this particular company in this way, but they have this gut feeling that these companies are too big and theyre cheating. So I do think that we will reach out to a broad spectrum [with these bills].

Democrats behind the legislation have welcomed the support from Republicans, seeking to ride the populist wave to garner lasting support for their agenda.

Ultimately, its a fight for the future of the Republican party Trump-style populism vs. traditional conservatism and the Koch network isnt going down without a fight. As soon as the bills were introduced last week, Koch-backed groups including Americans for Prosperity, the American Enterprise Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, the Open Competition Center, TechFreedom and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation came out with statements and campaigns condemning the legislation.

Aside from the tech companies themselves, the Koch groups and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have been some of the loudest voices blanketing Capitol Hill urging Republican lawmakers to oppose the legislation, according to two aides familiar with the conversations who asked to remain anonymous in order to discuss private conversations. (Many of the groups that receive Koch funding also receive money from Facebook, Google or Amazon.)

I dont think Koch is out on their own on this, said Zach Graves, head of policy at the Lincoln Network, a right-of-center tech advocacy group. I think they have a lot of alignment with relatively powerful industry groups not just tech, but also just general Chamber of Commerce types who dont want to see massive expansion of the antitrust regime and giving big new powers to the [Federal Trade Commission] and DOJ.

Each of the bills has at least one Republican co-sponsor, but the legislation will need more GOP support to push through the Senate. Thats left undecided Republicans in the middle of a tense debate.

For instance, the Heritage Foundation, which is building out its tech policy apparatus, has chosen to stay out of the public conversation for now as it weighs how to thread the needle between taking on Big Tech and maintaining a hands-off approach to government regulation.

As with any other meaningful policy debate, Heritage is carefully looking at the issues inherent to the Big Tech debate in order to come up with policy recommendations that address legitimate concerns about censorship and the growing influence of Big Tech platforms, said John Cooper, the Heritage Foundations associate director for institute communications. To argue that these are issues that dont require some sort of action is simply unrealistic at this point, though its important policymakers act in a way that doesnt give the federal government undue authority that Americans will regret giving to bureaucrats down the road.

Another crucial dynamic is the fact that the Koch network and the Chamber of Commerce, once two of the most important forces in the Republican Party, fell increasingly out of favor with GOP backers during the Trump era. The Koch network alienated a huge swath of formerly devoted Republican followers as its political arm expressed new openness last year to backing Democrats, and the Chamber drew fire for backing several Democrats as well.

The Koch network and Chamber crowd have zero influence right now, said one House Republican aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to speak candidly. Most of the House Judiciary members and their staff couldnt pick out their people from a police lineup.

But on the other side of the schism, many traditional conservatives and libertarians feel theyre defending the core of their party against Trumps influence. That includes growing GOP calls for a government crackdown on social media companies that they accuse of censoring conservatives, a theme that Trump pressed repeatedly during his time in the White House.

I reject the premise that this is the right is divided, said Berin Szoka, president of the tech- and Koch-funded think tank TechFreedom. People accusing tech companies of censorship, he added, are seeking to compel social media sites to host the most despicable people and content imaginable.

The Democratic-led bills H.R. 3816 (117), H.R. 3825 (117), H.R. 3826 (117), H.R. 3843 (117) and H.R. 3849 (117) dont include prominent anti-tech proposals that Trump and other Republicans had championed, such as stripping or reducing the online industrys protections against lawsuits over user-posted content. But anti-tech activists on the right have made it clear that they support the House antitrust bills in part to punish the major tech companies alleged censorship.

Conservatives are being canceled by Big Tech, we are being kicked off these platforms, we are being silenced and censored, said Mike Davis, founder and president of the right-wing Internet Accountability Project, which receives some funding from Oracle. Conservatives need to pick a side theyre either with everyday Americans or theyre with these Big Tech monopolists and their D.C. lobbyists.

Both sides agree that theres nowhere near as robust of an apparatus on the right for supporting antitrust changes. Whereas a swath of academics and groups on the left have taken up trust-busting as a priority policy area, only a few groups and figures are devoted to the issue on the right.

I think its going to take a new generation of folks, said the House Republican aide.

So far, most Republicans in Congress have not weighed in publicly on the legislation. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the pro-Trump ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee with a more libertarian bent, has been actively whipping against the bills, targeting their Democratic roots.

On the other side, lobbyists for News Corp. and fellow Murdoch-owned company Fox have been working Republican lawmakers to vote in favor, according to two people familiar with the dynamics. And the tech giants themselves some of the biggest lobbying spenders in Washington are caught in the middle.

There is going to continue to be a battle on this, and it parallels the realignment, Schweppe said. The Kochs have always been this more libertarian wing. I dont think thats the main thrust of the party anymore.

Read the original post:

How the Houses Silicon Valley smackdown is dividing conservatives - POLITICO

SACRAMENTO, Calif., June 17, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Louis Marinelli, an American political activistand California governor candidate, released a short filmexploring the issue of Vrbetice explosions in the light of the first Biden - Putin meeting.

The film was made in collaboration with Adam Kokesh, a libertarian activist who ran for USA presidency in 2020 and was aimed to present a perspective that is not widespread in the media today and discuss an alternative vision of the explosions in Czech Republic, sanctions against Russia and the current state of international relations prior to Putin - Biden meeting.

In 2014, a series of explosions destroyed an arms depot in the Czech Republic, causing two deaths. At the time, Czech authorities blamed the explosions on human error. But now, in the months leading up to the Biden-Putin meeting set for Geneva, the explosions have resurfaced as a topic of international concern - except now NATO allies and EU members are blaming Russia - and placing sanctions on Russia as a result, even though they lack any direct evidence of Russian involvement.

Louis Marinelli unravels the story and presents an alternative theory - is Europe's renewed interest in the 2014 explosions in Vrbetice really just a pretext to place sanctions on Russia and tarnish Russia's reputation before Putin's meeting with Biden? Or maybe the explosions are simply the result of a rivalry between two arms dealers - Emelian Gebrev, and Boyko Borissov, who, until recently, was also the Prime Minister of Bulgaria?

Additional information:

Louis J. Marinelli(born March 28, 1986) is an Americanpolitical activistof theCalifornia independencemovement organized under theYes CaliforniaIndependence Campaign, an umbrella organization representing the coalition of parties and organizations supporting the proposed California independence referendum. Marinelli is the former president of Yes California and the former interim chairman of theCalifornia National Party, under which he also ran forCalifornia State AssemblyinCalifornia's 80th State Assembly districtrepresenting southSan Diego,National City,Chula Vista,San Ysidro, and the surrounding communities.

Adam Charles Kokesh(born February 1, 1982) is anAmericanlibertarianpoliticalactivist, radio host, and author. Kokesh was a U.S.2020 Libertarian presidential candidaterunning on thesingle-issueplatform of an "orderly dissolution of thefederal government."

Kokesh is a formerU.S. Marine Corpssergeant, serving in theIraq Warin 2004. Upon his return from Iraq, he became ananti-waractivist and an advocate forIraq Veterans Against the War.

Media contact:Louis Marinelli[emailprotected]+79859426240

SOURCE Louis Marinelli

Read the rest here:

Louis Marinelli: Is Europe's interest in the 2014 Vrbetice Explosions driven by the Biden-Putin meeting? - PRNewswire