It is certainly obscure, even mysterious, why a wealthy oligarch like George Soros would expend his fortune on the election of socialist, soft-on-crime District and States’ Attorneys. He has had an outsized impact on not only crime rates and, automatically, the victims of criminal acts, but also on the reduction in trust of government, police and justice, itself. Still, there must be a plan.
It doesn’t seem that Soros’ purpose stems from a love of crime or even any particular sympathy for the weak-minded dopes who commit crimes. He doesn’t appear to be an advocate for all things anti-White or pro-Black. But, there must be a plan and, considering his actions Prudently, the shape of the plan can be discerned. It is quite simple.
Soros is a socialist – a virulent one. He doesn’t seem to trust Communists, which is a mark of intelligence, but, like most political socialists, believes that socialism can be controlled and manipulated to fit the goals of oligarchs and one-worlders. By employing a process that breaks down civil order and public safety, Soros makes clear his contempt for the “proletariat,” which is most of us. He has always seemed offended, as it were, by the Constitutional limits that underpin the United States, the belief in “unalienable rights” that they guarantee, and, even more, the basically Christian love of freedom and personal sovereignty. Soros hates the power and influence of the United States of America, and of Americans.
So, it seems clear that the purpose of destroying cities through increasing crime and lack of trust in authority, is designed to force Americans to accept authoritarian forms of government… so as to “clean up” the crime, drug, homelessness and other problems that make normal citizens unsafe. It’s simple, really, and it won’t take long. There is already a significant political party/movement that is pushing for exactly the solutions Soros wants: Democrats. Their experience in promoting and excusing multi-city rioting and destruction, weakening of police departments and removal of the only populist president in our lifetimes, in 2020, and the ability to control almost everyone, including stripping many of their “unalienable rights” by building up the Covid-19 scare of 2020 – 2021 and beyond, encourages Democrats to attack the Constitution directly. They, and Soros, have won some victories.
Are any students, anywhere in America, learning why what Soros has been doing with his money is evil and anti-American? By the same token, are any learning about the Constitution, itself?
It seems Prudent to pray. Humans have an urge to worship, whether unto a deity of the personal perception of each supplicant, or to a set of deities connected to important natural phenomena like trees, rains, sunlight, moonlight, stars, winds, lightning, high and low temperatures… and more.
If not truly worshipped, natural aspects of locales are generally respected with some attribution of supernatural importance, power or influence. Caves, mountains, bodies of water, great forests and vital rivers are considered more than just natural by populations on whose lives they have life-giving or life-threatening influence. Whether the Holy Spirit or the Great Spirit of native tribes, life’s continuous foibles, phenomena, fertility, feelings, fears and finality cause humans in every kind of society to come to terms with what can’t be controlled through forms of spirituality or religious faith.
What does it mean to all of those who claim to have no
attachment to any church, religion or spiritual belief structure? There are many and the number grows as
government schools and liberal-leftist guided private schools divest themselves
of morality and other quasi-biblical philosophies. Only “science” can satisfy agnostics and
atheists, those so declared tell anyone who’ll listen. Religions are “mumbo-jumbo.” So certain of their cold, scientific facts
are many atheists, that they feel compelled to prevent any expression of
religion or faith or spirituality. The
Prudent observer might think that they protest too much. Their innate need to worship something is simply
satisfied in a different way.
An argument can be made that Socialism is the secular faith, as it were. Those who believe in this “ism,” must take
its tenets on faith, since there is no empirical evidence that Socialism has
worked anywhere. Yet they work tirelessly to impose socialism
so that individuality and human nature are replaced with the collectivist
ethos, and innate capitalism is replaced with Utopian premises of “from each
according to his ability, to each according to his need.” A lot of faith is required to believe such
ideas in the face of utter failure in every example.
Inevitably, Socialism devolves into tyranny. In place of “guided honesty” of free
individuals, Socialism is required to impose rules for correct behavior, and
they inevitably become very granular.
The logical concerns we have about the American administrative state are
genuine fears about a Socialist bureaucracy that is charged with imposing a
statist conformity on large populations.
Although a modern socialist state might refrain from police-state
status, today’s technology empowers social engineers to gather voluminous data
that help identify non-conforming citizens, whose lack of adherence to rules
threatens, or are perceived to threaten, the health and safety of the
group/collective for whom the state exists and is dedicated.
Power, ultimately, and before very long, concentrates in the hands of the higher echelons of bureaucracies.
Also logically, politics within socialist systems can’t be
allowed to offer significant opposition to the functioning bureaucracy. There is a certain necessity to promoting,
educating about, proving and re-proving a high level of infallibility of the
state. The benign nature of the system
that all benefit from and must support, has no room for serious opposition to
its own quality. Calling socialist
leadership into question is simply anathema to the established rules of
conformity. Freedom and socialism are
essentially antithetical. There is no
need for freedom when “everybody” already benefits from the state.
The reactions to freedom and independent sovereignty can be seen in the United States today. Wherever the premises of socialism/atheism are challenged by Christians, in particular, the socialist response is most often anger: the public face of hatred. If any question of this set of observations remains, just consider the nature of angry reaction to Trump and to any of his supporters. Hatred.
For every form of governance and social cohesion, there is a
beginning and some sort of end-game.
Given the ubiquitous factor of human nature, which is fundamentally,
personally, independent and capitalistic, in the sense of retaining the
products of one’s labor – the whole “private property” thing – the founding of the
United States did the best job yet in history, to craft a Constitution and the
original institutions that, in the hands of both faithful and honest officials,
judges and democratically elected representatives, might survive the tyrannical
tendencies it was designed to oppose.
From the beginning, the desires of some for power over
others, for self aggrandizement and for monopoly economic advantage, have been
trying to erode the bases of liberty. As
the philosophies of tyranny also matured, the description of socialism as the utopian supplantation
of capitalism, and thereby of individual freedom, caught the interest of those
who already hated the chaos of freedom as much as they distrusted the unity of
thought that resulted from religious faith.
Any system of human organization that did not need the guidance of the
state, was/is to be discredited and destroyed.
And so it has gone since at least the (second) Civil War. Never let a crisis go to waste.
The blind faith in socialism is not so dissimilar to
religious faith: life-changing belief in something that can’t be seen, and acceptance
of various scriptures. On the other
hand, but in the same way, erstwhile conservatives show blind faith in
unregulated capitalism, as if human nature were fulfilled by monopoly,
government-protected wealth concentration, and as if the super-rich billionaire
class were going to become benign rich uncles to us, all. There is foolishness aplenty to go around…
the world.
Rather than thinking with our human-nature selfishness, a
little statesmanship is the better prescription. We need, first, to recognize that these,
again, are the times that try men’s souls.
At the founding of the independence struggle, those who signed the
Declaration of Independence were placing their support for what was a civil war, not truly a revolution, out in the public eye,
making themselves primary targets for the British military fighting to hold the
American part of the British Kingdom tightly to England. It took phenomenal courage, as they pledged
their “… lives, fortunes and sacred honor.”
Where is sacred honor, today, as we face the United States’
greatest enemy: the failure of belief in the American Dream? Where are the statesmen and women who will
risk everything to restore America’s path?
There is no question that stepping back from the brink of tyranny – from
the brink of unfathomable debt – will be quite unpleasant, uncomfortable,
unpredictable and will require a continuity of leadership we have not seen
since Lincoln and Washington. It will
not be possible for Americans to work 30 and 35-hour weeks, take multiple
vacations each year, and waste as much income on frivolous, games, goodies or
fattening foods. Everyone will have to
sacrifice.
Especially governments.
The federal budget must be rendered $1 Trillion
smaller. Sounds easy when the number is
so even and simply stated. A trillion… a
thousand billion dollars. In none of our
lifetimes have we seen a congress cut – as in spend less money this year than
was spent last fiscal year – ANY federal office or program, without spending
much more elsewhere.
Local governments would have to assume the absolutely
essential social services, and forego multiple other demands… demands like
raises, fancy equipment, landscaping that isn’t done voluntarily, new school
buildings and numerous non-essential municipal jobs. States will find cutting even more difficult,
since all those unionized state employees are the same people whose families
donate to and work for campaigns. Plus,
there’s all that graft on enormous public works. No more $750,000 state university presidents
in those days, either.
None of these politically unlikely changes will happen, of
course, until a far greater hurdle is crossed: making everyone, both parties,
and everyone else, public and private, believe
that eliminating debt-based government is more important than all of everyone’s
private concerns. More than during any
war-time mobilization, Americans will have to agree to the importance of
national sacrifice… to the importance of living within our means,
Constitutionally, and with added sacrifice to pay off all of our loans.
There is no other path to financial freedom and
strength. Every dollar of debt is a loss
of independence; every dollar in taxes is a loss of freedom. Can we strike the correct balance going
forward? – the balance between
independence, freedom and responsibility?
– the balance envisioned in our founding that relied upon morality and
personal responsibility?
Or shall we succumb to the blandishments of socialist, identity politics, and hollow promises of greater freedom through national controls? Shall we continue down a path that promises the slow loss of all we hold dear in America… slow, until one day we lose everything that’s left, abruptly, cataclysmically, destructively, unrecoverably? We hope we know when that will be, but we don’t. We hope we can pull back from the brink before all is lost, based on some arcane calculations that, literally, no one knows how to make.
Will the path to sanity commence before the next
election? Not bloody likely. What about after the next election? Well, not until all the other spending
promises are fulfilled, and by then it will be mid-term elections and there’s
no way in Hell those congressional giants are going to bear the brunt of
mismanagement long before THEY were first elected.
Prudence has successfully resisted the temptation to counter the many ignorant statements uttered by the impressively ignorant Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, of late an elected representative in the U. S. House of Representatives. She has a college degree… in economics.
One recent evening she purported to explain – obviously only
to those more ignorant than herself – what “capitalism” is. In the process she confused it with “free-market
economy,” and then jumped to explaining how one might have a “mixed” economy
where the “state” doesn’t own the means of production but “workers’
cooperatives” do. Neither the origins of
the means of production that workers’ cooperatives will “own,” nor the means of
managing their cooperative labor, were revealed during her explanation.
To the likes of Ms. Cortez the Marxist concept of capitalism
is not a solution to the human condition, but the cause of suffering and
injustice. Unfortunately, modern
capitalists are proving many of Marx’s theories. Thanks to the vapid connivance of ostensibly
democratically elected governments (crony-capitalism), international banks
virtually direct public policy and national economic decision-making. Most “workers” – wage-earners, are relatively
comfortable and not about to revolt against anonymous masters, but not
all. The obscene concentrations of
economic and productive power run the risk of collapsing the edifices of international
capitalism. There’s plenty for social
justice warriors to despise.
On the other hand… socialism cannot destroy debt – only productive
surplus does and can do that. It is not
possible, at least human nature will not allow, a financially complex society
to grow without practical amounts of debt.
Not to be pejorative, “debt” is merely paying for a product or “good”
over time. No, that sounds too
simple. “Debt” is only true and
practical when a financing agent has judged a borrower likely to pay back the
loaned cash with interest, oftentimes with the financier holding a chattel
interest in the good for which it has loaned the purchase price, because of two
factors: 1) The financed “good,” or product or house or car or medical
procedure has sufficient desirability, utility or comfort value for the
borrower as to make its value or worth obvious (and its potential loss
undesirable enough) and valued by the borrower; and 2) The borrower or
beneficiary of the good’s utility or comfort is, by test of available income
over time, able to make periodic payments on a timely, contracted (promised)
basis.
In the ideal case, then, debt is simply a tool that is “rented,”
as it were, the value of which is clear enough to cause timely,
interest-bearing, repayment. The manufacturer
of the good (debt properly employed should always, as in every single time, be
employed to facilitate the transfer of a “hard, or manufactured, good” and not
a temporary expense) obtains immediate payment, enabling additional future
manufacture, while the customer of the good obtains the use and facility of the
good immediately upon need when it may be too costly to afford a single cash
exchange for it.
Much is misunderstood about “productive surplus.” It’s “margin,” which is to say, revenue that
exceeds the cost of manufacture. “Oh,
well, that’s profit for a capitalist,”
some will say, “and you shouldn’t “overcharge” poorer customers or else you
should share it with your exploited workers.”
But margin isn’t simply “profit,” and the “exploited” workers are paid
according to their productive capacity and value to the production of the goods
the manufacturer makes and sells. Margin
provides “working capital;” what does it actually do?
Working capital means cash in the bank, and it serves to
improve efficiency within the manufacturer’s operations by enabling investment
in better manufacturing equipment, often by being committed to pay off
equipment acquisition debt, which shifts that portion of margin to
cost-of-goods but which can reduce the costs elsewhere with more productive
equipment (which is also a good result for the people who make that new
equipment). Working capital enables the
company to train its workers to higher skill levels and greater productivity,
yielding higher pay. It also enables the
company to hire more employees as production increases and, let’s hope, quality
and sales also increase.
Productive surplus destroys debt; it’s the only engine that
can. In the presence of productive
surplus, debt is a useful and valuable tool for growth and for improving
overall living standards. But what
happens to “profits?”
Profits belong to shareholders, who are, in fact, the owners
of the company. Socialists feel as
though no one person or small group should “own” a means of production, but
that it should automatically “belong to” or be controlled by, the workers, to
whom all the profits should be distributed.
History, the bane of socialists’ existence, teaches that humans are good
at some things, bad at others, and one of those “others” is collective
decision-making or, the corollary, collective self-leadership, an oxymoron that
socialists insist on believing in. Let’s
start at the beginning.
A person has an idea for a widget/product/thingy that other
people will want to have because it makes, ummm… it makes baking cakes, breads
and muffins easier and more efficient with fewer bad results. The person has no factory but he (let’s say
it’s a he) learned in trade school (paid for from taxes that derive from
profits) how to work with metal as well as how to apply himself to a problem
and how to concentrate and to research the things he doesn’t know. First he figures that being able to have a
baking oven that has even, steady heat would lead to uniformly baked goods, so
he tries various kinds of pipes and shapes and pressures to provide even gas
flames that won’t make hot spots within the oven. Aha!
He gets it and finds a way to generate even heat, cobbles together a
metal stove and burns his first cake to a crisp, as the whole oven became a hot-spot. Hmmmnn.
Our inventor/entrepreneur realizes he must regulate the heat
to achieve one temperature and hold it there within very narrow limits… The process goes on for weeks and months,
absorbing every spare hour and weekend until he has a metal box of a specific
shape with special gas burners, elaborate temperature sensors and controls,
insulation and directions for installation, use and cleaning. But he has just the one. If he sells it for more than it costs to make
he’ll have a brief profit but it takes so long for him to make just one that he’ll
go hungry before he can get the next pulse of “profits” from selling the second
one, assuming that he quits his 9 to 5 job and works on the oven business full
time.
He has some savings that he has been slowly accumulating to
provide for his family if something happened to him, and he’s been careful to leave
them intact. His idea is good and he’s
proven that it’s the best oven design potentially on the market. How to get it there? He needs capital, of which he has only a
little. He and his wife decide to take
the risk, pledging their savings and their house(!) to secure a loan that will
allow for several key things needed for producing 10 ovens per week, and
selling them, at a margin that will allow for repaying the loan with interest
(which employs people at the bank), insuring against the risks and liabilities
manufacturers face, making payroll (and benefits!) for the 5 people they must
hire to make and market the ovens (including payroll for himself, the
owner/inventor, and to invest in an inventory of parts and gizmos needed to
assemble ovens such that orders for ovens can be filled promptly. And, oh, yes, they have to lease some
suitable – or nearly suitable – space for manufacturing and testing, on which
there is a large deposit. Everything is
at stake.
With much struggle and worried nights things get done. The first 10 ovens are produced, tested and
packaged for shipping. The sales “department”
of one former kitchenware sales rep, has secured an order for 4 of them, one of
which is to a small mom-and-pop bakery not far away. The owner/inventor goes to their small shop,
attached to their house, to oversee installation by the plumber/gas-fitter, and
personally teaches the operation to the new owners, who took a risk of buying
an expensive new oven based on its description and manufacturer’s test
results. They agree to let the
inventor/capitalist advertise their success with it – for a fee. It performs as advertised and they start to do
more business thanks to the creative new pastries their new oven bakes to
perfection (damn those wood-fired stone ovens).
Well, the advertising kicks in and the sales department
manages to sell the rest of the first ten and the next ten and things start
humming at the “Great Perfection Oven Company.”
Soon, a major catalog sales company makes an offer to carry the oven at
a discount to them which, if they can prepay for a certain number and sell at
least 10 a month, the harried owner/inventor agrees to provide, even though he’ll
make less margin per oven. The advantage
is that with that new revenue he can afford two more production employees and
more leased space and increased advertising.
And on it goes…
Within a couple of years he and his wife celebrate the
pay-off of the first loan that had put their house and savings at risk. The business has grown to employ 40 employees
and a large commercial bakery has approached them with a request for a
production-size version of the “Perfection Oven” with its now-patented gas
burners (patenting cost over $30,000) and the inventor/owner commences to
design just such an oven which will require more manufacturing equipment and
changes to one of their production lines… and so on.
Ms. Ocasio-Socialist, do you think he doesn’t “own” this
business? He and his wife are the only
share-holders. Do you know what else “margin”
dollars must do? They have to provide
long-term benefits like pension contributions to trusted, valued employees: the
ones who help the company succeed and be profitable. They have to create a reserve fund in case
other threats to the company materialize, cutting into profits, challenging its
patents, creating knock-offs and look-alike ovens that sap Perfection Oven
sales and margins, as well as changes in tax laws or state-mandated benefits,
paid leave laws and new health-care coverages… not to mention changes in OSHA
and EPA regulations that could hamper production or require costly new changes
to production facilities, unionization, higher fuel costs for delivery of both
raw materials and finished goods (ovens).
Lots of future risks that must be insured against, sometimes with simple
cash reserves. THEN there are profits.
Ms. Cortez, do you, with your costly economics degree, understand
any of this?
Every one of us is a “capitalist.” This, in the sense that we all strive to obtain as much safety, comfort, material goods and security for old age, as we possibly can for the least amount of effort necessary. It doesn’t matter for whom we vote. Many of us simply want to be free TO acquire what we need; others wish to be free OF the need to acquire. In both philosophies we are attempting to gain with minimum effort.
But that’s not the whole story, is it?
Every person is motivated to act differently. We all have our own “profits” that cause us to expend MORE than minimal effort necessary to take care of ourselves and our family. Some are motivated to gain as much as possible in terms of material goods and “wealth.” Some want to be charitable and will work more than necessary so as to give to others. Some are motivated by artistic expression, drama, music or writing. Some by the gaining of power over others, one way or the other. Many profits.
The invention of money both simplified and complicated capitalism. For some, in twisted ways, the accumulation of money, itself, became their “profit.” Such people are able to “buy” the necessities for which others strive, but they are also consumed by numbers and the quantities of money they represent. They have different fears and joys than “regular” people. Unfortunately, they come to realize that they can also “buy” power – influencing government-types to protect their accumulated wealth.
Government types come from those for whom “profit” means power over others, over “public policy” and over taxation and, unfortunately, over “public” budgeting. Tapping into the “profits” of others, familial, financial and charitable, provides the most ways to acquire at minimal effort for those so motivated. They concentrate in governments. Almost inevitably and partly because much of their effort is arcane, they come to believe in their own mental superiority over “regular” people whose concerns are familial, local and unobtrusive.
Meanwhile, capitalism, which in the U. S., OUGHT TO MEAN the right to own private property, and by extension, the right to own the fruits of one’s labors, carries on, inherent in every person. It is human nature.
Some aspects of human nature can, if unchecked by society and hence by government, cause damage and destruction to that society. Many control-worthy human aspects are checked by “agreement.” That is, members of society “agree” that murder, rape, theft, fraud and other forms of false witness, greed, sloth and envy, are to be controlled through various codified sanctions. Lately the list has grown to include littering of various degrees, like pollution, and, in an extraordinary reversal, discrimination against sexual oddities, a change that has led to “intolerance” becoming a worse social transgression than some actual crimes. Western societies must now “tolerate,” if not celebrate, anti-capitalist “lifestyles” that include essentially welfare careers. These things actually threaten the social order and every other right protected by the Constitution, our fundamental social agreement.
A tremendous strength in American capitalism has been the high integrity of our contracts, both with one another and with our governments. This phenomenon makes modern trade possible as well as the millions of debt contracts that describe modern economics. But today, we ignorantly embrace a new form of socialism based on twisted concepts of “social justice,” which intends, fundamentally, to cause guilt-ridden government types to alter the underlying concepts of private property, and to discard natural human capitalism. This need not be an inevitable slide toward the only economic future possible.
It is a slide the basis of which is ignorance, willful and otherwise. It is a slide that attempts, as all socialist plans inevitably do, to replace human nature with a government-directed one. While there may exist the technical possibility of directing every person’s life and economic decisions, governance based thereon cannot prevail. It devolves into tyranny or revolution, perhaps to a new tyranny or, once in a great, great while, into a new form of governance based on self-discipline and personal sovereignty, one in which the governed grant their governors limited powers, and where the tyranny of the majority is carefully sanctioned and where tyranny of the minority is unheard of.
Inherent in a government based on individual freedom and personal responsibility are the concepts of private property and ownership of the fruits of one’s labor: essential free-enterprise.
Capitalism gets fully mucked up when it is politicized, which is to say when limited governments attempt to create economic “fairness.” It seems that no “free” economic and democratic system can refrain from favoring certain industries in return for maintaining power for those who are already “in” government. Much of the favoring is done to “make things fair” or to “level the playing field,” but almost without exception, the net effects are to limit competition for those industries and to limit competition for those in power. These are tendencies that a wise and educated citizenry would create institutions in society and government to carefully limit, if not make impossible. In our growing ignorance we are failing at this essential part of citizenship.
A great strength of capitalism is that it doesn’t reward failure… it replaces it with something that can succeed, success measured in profitability and ability to destroy debt. In this is a lesson for all with eyes to see and ears to hear. Among our people, however, those who get the message are now considered hateful while those who refuse to see or hear are empowered, or re-elected. Ours is fast becoming a system hobbled by the removal of the pillars of individual freedom and personal responsibility. We are rewarding failure.
Immediately this statement will be attacked with charges of cruelty, but this stems from ignorance, which is to say, it’s a charge leveled by those who, for whatever personal profit, IGNORE the distinction between those who are capable and willfully refusing to take responsibility for themselves, and those who are incapable and needful of charity and public support.
The greatest value of capitalist profitability is the creation of surplus – productive surplus – of which a portion may be used to care for those who cannot care for themselves. The greatest flaw in capitalism’s opponents is their creation of and acceptance of a thousand reasons why individuals may be grouped among those who cannot care for themselves. They unfortunately become codified and form a malevolent inhibitor of success. And here we are.
The administrations of the last 3 presidents, possibly last 7 presidents – basically every presidency during which Edward M. Kennedy was a senator and declared “socialist,” has failed to varying degrees in terms of securing the borders of this nation. None has failed to the extent of the Obama administration. The misfeasance of Homeland Security, Interior, Department of Justice and the Department of State, since 2009, is mind-boggling.
If you aren’t sure what boggling is when applied to minds, try to imagine growing up in a nation of fifty states, each of which knows its own borders and limits. Overlaying these states is a single, external border – a construct of national identity that stands for the PRIMARY covenant the federal government has with the citizens of all 50 states – and with the states, themselves. That covenant is to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Inherent in that defense is the inviolability of our national border… by definition.
Some might consider that this is a problem for “border” states, but, since the inception of air travel, every state that has an airport is a “border” state. By secretively shuttling illegal entrants all over the country, the Obama traitors have driven this point home to every state.
Inherent in that inviolability is control of who can cross that border – anywhere – whether entering or exiting. Put another way, one could say that failure to control the border at any point, in either direction, is the same as having no border. More seriously, conscious or intentional failure to control the border would be abrogation of the most fundamental contract the federal government has with every citizen. It is the clearest expression of treason, by definition. Those whose office requires swearing to defend the Constitution of the United States, cannot support that document – that covenant between U. S. citizens and the federal government they and their respective states created – and fail to respect and defend the collective border with other nations.
The past several years have been an organized travesty. Thousands – tens of thousands – of “children” up to ages of 35 or more, have been welcomed at the border, loosely organized and delivered to their illegal-entrant cousins or supposed guardians – all self-declared – in dozens of cities across the country. It is a pattern totally indefensible, except by those who adopt a strange, growing way of thinking.
These are they who believe that the United States is less legitimate than other nations for a number of reasons. One is that it was founded and formed by Christians. Christianity has two failings in their eyes: 1) It imposes moral values upon non-believers, who perceive themselves as free of moral judgments since they are not Christians; and, 2) It is a religion of White people, some of whom owned slaves 150 years ago. Since slavery, or “racism” is ineradicable, even if invisible, nothing those old dead white people believed, including the principles of America’s founding, and the Constitution, in particular, is legitimate or worth defending. These mental errors justify open borders in their minds. One of these dopes is now president. God save us.
