Difference between revisions of "War on Freedom"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Growth in bureaucracy)
(Socialism and environmentalism)
(30 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The '''War on Freedom''' refers to the decline in the level of individual [[freedom]], respect for [[natural law]] and [[unalienable rights]], and [[self-governance]] in [[The West|Western countries]]. This decline is advocated by [[liberal]]s,<ref>Gesiotto, Morgan (August 19, 2019). [https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/457957-democrats-want-to-chip-away-our-cherished-freedoms-and-liberties Democrats want to chip away our cherished freedoms and liberties]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.</ref> who instead advocate for [[socialism]], [[bureaucracy]], and the [[Nanny State]]. In some cases, the liberals also misdefine "freedom" to mean "anarchy", often pointing to the French Revolution and several lawless events during that time Reign of Terror as well as the September Massacres as focal points to what they defined as a "free society", advocating for that as well.
+
The '''War on Freedom''' refers to the decline in the level of individual [[freedom]], respect for [[natural law]] and [[unalienable rights]], and [[self-governance]] in [[The West|Western countries]]. This decline is advocated by [[liberal]]s,<ref>Gesiotto, Morgan (August 19, 2019). [https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/457957-democrats-want-to-chip-away-our-cherished-freedoms-and-liberties Democrats want to chip away our cherished freedoms and liberties]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.</ref> who instead advocate for [[socialism]], [[bureaucracy]], and the [[Nanny State]]. In some cases, the liberals also misdefine "freedom" to mean "anarchy", often pointing to the French Revolution and several lawless events during that time of the Reign of Terror as well as the September Massacres as focal points to what they defined as a "free society", advocating for that as well.
  
 
==Natural law, unalienable rights, and the U.S. founding fathers==
 
==Natural law, unalienable rights, and the U.S. founding fathers==
Line 14: Line 14:
  
 
The Founding Fathers' philosophy led to the creation of one of the strongest countries in history, with a very high level of individual freedom while still maintaining law and order.
 
The Founding Fathers' philosophy led to the creation of one of the strongest countries in history, with a very high level of individual freedom while still maintaining law and order.
 +
 +
==War on Freedom in the 21st century==
 +
The War on Freedom in the 21st century takes many forms. In [[Western]] societies, it can be painfully apparent in rhetoric of a climate apocalypse.  Thomas D. Williams of ''[[Breitbart]]'', in commenting on the use of [[pseudoscience]] to promote an [[authoritarian]] [[cultural Marxist]] social agenda and shrill cries for action, observes:
 +
{{quotebox|“Any movement toward a more just and civil society can now be considered a meaningful climate action,” asserts a new essay in the ''[[New Yorker]]'', which links [[gun control]], [[immigration]], and [[climate change]].
 +
 +
“Securing fair elections is a climate action. Combating extreme wealth inequality is a climate action. Shutting down the hate machines on [[social media]] is a climate action,” insists ''New Yorker'' writer Jonathan Franzen in his lengthy September 8 [2019] essay.
 +
 +
“Instituting humane immigration policy, advocating for racial and gender equality, promoting respect for laws and their enforcement, supporting a free and independent press, ridding the country of assault weapons—these are all meaningful climate actions,” he writes.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (September 9, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/09/new-yorker-proposes-ridding-country-assault-weapons-fight-climate-change/ The New Yorker Proposes ‘Ridding the Country of Assault Weapons’ to Fight Climate Change]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref>}}
  
 
==Examples of the War on Freedom==
 
==Examples of the War on Freedom==
Line 21: Line 29:
 
Liberals, who oppose theologically conservative Christianity and other conservative religious traditions because of their philosophical and policy implications, are increasingly pushing for restrictions on the freedom to practice one's religious beliefs.<ref>Anderson, Troy (June 4, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/print-magazine/item/32393-the-war-to-destroy-christianity-in-america The War to Destroy Christianity in America]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 4, 2019.</ref><ref>Byas, Steve (March 18, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/31774-horowitz-american-left-is-at-war-with-christianity Horowitz: American Left Is at War With Christianity]. ''The New American''. Retrieved March 18, 2019.</ref>
 
Liberals, who oppose theologically conservative Christianity and other conservative religious traditions because of their philosophical and policy implications, are increasingly pushing for restrictions on the freedom to practice one's religious beliefs.<ref>Anderson, Troy (June 4, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/print-magazine/item/32393-the-war-to-destroy-christianity-in-america The War to Destroy Christianity in America]. ''The New American''. Retrieved June 4, 2019.</ref><ref>Byas, Steve (March 18, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/31774-horowitz-american-left-is-at-war-with-christianity Horowitz: American Left Is at War With Christianity]. ''The New American''. Retrieved March 18, 2019.</ref>
  
Illustrating this growing shift, in 2019, the [[Democratic Party]] adopted a resolution at their summer convention hostile to religious freedom and in support of the Marxist axiom that "religion is the opiate of the masses."<ref>https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/democrats-pass-resolution-applauding-nonreligious-americans-criticizing-churchgoers.html</ref>
+
Illustrating this growing shift, in 2019, the [[Democratic Party|Democrat Party]] adopted a resolution at their summer convention hostile to religious freedom and in support of the [[Marxist]] axiom that "religion is the opiate of the masses."<ref>Foust, Michael (August 28, 2019). [https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/democrats-pass-resolution-applauding-nonreligious-americans-criticizing-churchgoers.html Democrats Pass Resolution Applauding ‘Nonreligious Americans,’ Criticizing Churchgoers]. ''Christian Headlines''. Retrieved September 6, 2019.</ref><ref>Freiburger, Calvin (September 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/democrats-endorse-nonreligious-values-reject-religious-liberty-in-new-resolution Democrats endorse ‘nonreligious’ values, reject religious liberty in new resolution]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved September 3, 2019.</ref> The California legislature passed a similar resolution that attacked religious freedom.<ref>Cai, Cynthia (September 12, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/california-legislature-pass-resolution-attacking-religious-liberty_3079010.html California Legislature Pass Resolution Attacking Religious Liberty]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved September 12, 2019.</ref>
  
 
===Free speech===
 
===Free speech===
 
:''Main article: [[Free speech#Examples of restrictions and/or censorship of free speech in the West]]''
 
:''Main article: [[Free speech#Examples of restrictions and/or censorship of free speech in the West]]''
The [[totalitarian]] [[Left]] is [[Liberal intolerance|intolerant of criticism]]. In the West, countries are increasingly restricting forms of speech that those in power disagree with or consider "hateful," even if said speech is not used in any hateful way.  Big Tech, along with prominent Democrats such Rep. [[Ted Lieu]] and [[2020 presidential candidate]] [[Andrew Yang]] have openly called for [[censorship]] of voices they disagree with.
+
The [[totalitarian]] [[Left]] is [[Liberal intolerance|intolerant of criticism]] against it and against the beliefs and ideologies it supports. In the West, countries are increasingly restricting forms of speech that those in power disagree with or consider "hateful," even if said speech is not used in any hateful way.  Big Tech, along with prominent Democrats such Rep. [[Ted Lieu]] and [[2020 presidential candidate]] [[Andrew Yang]] have openly called for [[censorship]] of voices they disagree with.
  
 
===Self-defense===
 
===Self-defense===
 
{{See also|Gun control}}
 
{{See also|Gun control}}
Restrictions limiting and even abolishing the ability of citizens to [[Armed self-defense|physically defend themselves]] have significantly increased since the early 20th century. The right to self-defense, considered by the U.S. founding fathers as a core human right that enabled human freedom, has come under greater threat than before.<ref>Roberts, David Thomas (August 14, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/aug/14/second-amendment-imperiled-never/ The Second Amendment is imperiled like never before]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved August 14, 2019.</ref>
+
Restrictions limiting and even abolishing the ability of citizens to [[Armed self-defense|physically defend themselves]] have significantly increased since the early 20th century. The right to self-defense, considered by the U.S. founding fathers as a core human right that enabled human freedom, has come under greater threat from the Left than before.<ref>Roberts, David Thomas (August 14, 2019). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/aug/14/second-amendment-imperiled-never/ The Second Amendment is imperiled like never before]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved August 14, 2019.</ref>
  
 
===Big Tech===
 
===Big Tech===
 
{{See also|Big Tech}}
 
{{See also|Big Tech}}
Big Tech has evolved into a form of [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[corporatism]], asserting more and more control over personal freedoms and privacy.  The technology in the hands of Big Tech – the microchip, the cell phone, GPS tracking – was developed for military use by taxpayers through the [[DARPA]] program.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwnPgscg0vU&t=502s Is There a Global War Coming?], George Friedman at Brain Bar, [[Youtube]], Jul 7, 2017.</ref>  Patents are now held by private [[technocrat]]s who wish to remake the world into their own ideological image by destroying [[Constitutional]] rights – freedom of speech, religion, freedom of association and other basic rights.
+
Under the control of the Left, Big Tech has evolved into a form of [[monopoly|monopolistic]] [[corporatism]], asserting more and more control over personal freedoms and privacy.  The technology in the hands of Big Tech – the microchip, the cell phone, GPS tracking – was developed for military use by taxpayers through the [[DARPA]] program.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwnPgscg0vU&t=502s Is There a Global War Coming?], George Friedman at Brain Bar, [[Youtube]], Jul 7, 2017.</ref>  Patents are now held by private [[technocrat]]s who wish to remake the world into their own leftist ideological image by destroying [[Constitutional]] rights – freedom of speech, religion, freedom of association and other basic rights.
  
 
===Tyranny by judges===
 
===Tyranny by judges===
 
{{See also|Judicial activism}}
 
{{See also|Judicial activism}}
Liberals have traditionally avoided legislation and the consent of the governed to bring about social change, and have focused on ''judicial fiat'' law to impose a [[cultural Marxist]] agenda, abortion and [[same-sex "marriage"]] being only two of dozens of obvious examples.  Liberal judges, under a belief in a "[[Living Constitution]]", feel that they can by-pass elected legislators and "legislate from the bench" or write law themselves.
+
Liberals have traditionally avoided legislation and the consent of the governed to bring about social change, and have focused on ''judicial fiat'' law to impose a [[cultural Marxist]] agenda, [[abortion]] and [[same-sex "marriage"]] being only two of dozens of obvious examples.  Liberal judges, under a belief in a "[[Living Constitution]]", feel that they can by-pass elected legislators and "legislate from the bench" or write law themselves.
 +
 
 +
In 2011 for example, California federal judge Vaughn Walker, who exposed his true liberal colors upon coming out as homosexual and thus ended up in conflict of interest in the matter, illegally overturned a citizen's referendum which passed overwhelmingly amending the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman before he subsequently retired from the bench. California [[Attorney General]] [[Kamala Harris]], for the first time in California history, refused to defend the voter's referendum in Appeals Court, resulting in the "legalization" of gay marriage in California ''against'' the will of the voters and without any action by the legislature.<ref>[https://pjmedia.com/election/6-reasons-to-oppose-nanny-state-tyrant-kamala-harris-in-2020/ 6 Reasons to Oppose Nanny State Tyrant Kamala Harris in 2020], BY TYLER O'NEIL , PJ Media, JANUARY 21, 2019.</ref>
  
 
===Attack on national sovereignty===
 
===Attack on national sovereignty===
Line 49: Line 59:
 
Growth in bureaucracy comes at the cost of individual freedom. The U.S. federal bureaucracy and number of regulations – along with other western countries – has exponentially increased since the beginning of the 20th century.  The permanent institutional bureaucracy, the [[civil service system]], becomes an unelected fourth branch of government whose primary interests are often career advancement, job security, and avoiding responsibility for failure.
 
Growth in bureaucracy comes at the cost of individual freedom. The U.S. federal bureaucracy and number of regulations – along with other western countries – has exponentially increased since the beginning of the 20th century.  The permanent institutional bureaucracy, the [[civil service system]], becomes an unelected fourth branch of government whose primary interests are often career advancement, job security, and avoiding responsibility for failure.
  
Since the founding of the [[Post Office]], campaign promises of "job creation"  by some candidates often means "government job creation," which comes at the expense of taxpayers and the [[private sector]]'s ability to create private sector jobs, and hence more private sector taxpayers to support government.
+
Since the founding of the [[Post Office]], campaign promises of "job creation"  by some candidates often means "government job creation," which comes at the expense of taxpayers and the [[private sector]]'s ability to create private-sector jobs, and hence the ability to create more private-sector taxpayers to support government. This is especially true in economic down cycles when advocates of [[Economic stimulus|stimulus]] and [[deficit spending]] create more government bureaucracies to alleviate hard times that then outlive their usefulness, albeit with more government workers still holding a full range of government pensions and benefits, as more prosperous times return. (See also [[Emergency spending]] and [[New spending]]).<ref>In other words, so-called "emergency" or "[[Temporary spending]]" often becomes [[permanent spending]], enlarging the federal budget and workforce. ''[https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/jimhuntzinger/2019/08/29/keynesian-economics-turns-the-whole-economy-into-a-gigantic-ponzi-scheme-n2552369 Keynesian Economics Turns The Whole Economy Into A Gigantic Ponzi Scheme]'', Jim Huntzinger, Townhall.com, Aug 29, 2019.</ref>  The growth in bureaucracy comes about by the government workforce and budget growing faster, proportionately, over time to the growth in population, which leads to the gradual impoverishment of people, i.e. the taxpaying public who support a top-heavy bureaucracy.<ref>Economist [[Milton Friedman]] famously observed that "nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." https://twitter.com/reason/status/1168572040904941571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref>
 +
 
 +
These newly hired, supposed "non-partisan" civil servants, who owe their permanent jobs to a political party and ideology, then need justification for their continued existence on the government payroll, and turn to [[social experiment|social engineering]] and greater intrusion into ordinary citizen's lives.
  
 
===Socialism and environmentalism===
 
===Socialism and environmentalism===
Line 55: Line 67:
 
[[Socialism]] degrades the human spirit by elevating one of the worst human [[vice]]s – [[envy]] – and making it the basis of [[law]] for society and the model of human [[virtue]].
 
[[Socialism]] degrades the human spirit by elevating one of the worst human [[vice]]s – [[envy]] – and making it the basis of [[law]] for society and the model of human [[virtue]].
  
Socialists [[War on Science|weaponize climate science]] to further their political goals. They argue that the only solution to the alleged "crisis" or human-caused [[global warming]] is the adoption of globalist and socialist social and economic policies.
+
Socialists [[War on Science|weaponize climate science]] to further their political goals. They argue that the only solution to the alleged "crisis" or human-caused [[global warming]] is the adoption of globalist and socialist social and economic policies. For example, environmentalists advocate for higher taxes<ref>Guarascio, Francesco; Maushagen, Peter (September 13, 2019). [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-tax-germany/eu-considers-energy-taxes-to-counter-climate-change-idUSKCN1VY0EL EU considers energy taxes to counter climate change]. ''Reuters''. Retrieved September 13, 2019.</ref> including the [[carbon tax]], globalist treaties such as the [[Paris climate agreement]], and far-left [[Nanny State]] programs such as the [[Green New Deal]].
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==
Line 64: Line 76:
 
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}
 
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}
  
 +
{{Deep State}}
 
[[Category:Socialism]]
 
[[Category:Socialism]]
 
[[Category:Liberalism]]
 
[[Category:Liberalism]]

Revision as of 02:28, September 14, 2019

The War on Freedom refers to the decline in the level of individual freedom, respect for natural law and unalienable rights, and self-governance in Western countries. This decline is advocated by liberals,[1] who instead advocate for socialism, bureaucracy, and the Nanny State. In some cases, the liberals also misdefine "freedom" to mean "anarchy", often pointing to the French Revolution and several lawless events during that time of the Reign of Terror as well as the September Massacres as focal points to what they defined as a "free society", advocating for that as well.

Natural law, unalienable rights, and the U.S. founding fathers

Govt placement chart.png
See also: Natural Law, Unalienable rights, and Self-governance

The high level of individual freedom in the United States under the U.S. Constitution, as desired by the Founding Fathers, was inspired by the philosophy of John Locke, who promoted a limited government based on natural law.[2][3][4] Locke argued that all human beings have natural rights which come from God and thus are unalianable.[4][5] The government had an obligation to protect the people's natural rights, and if it did not, the people had the right to overthrow and replace it.[3][4][5] While distinct from divine law, Locke believed that natural law was consistent with the former.[6] Additionally, while he believed that the legislature was the most important part of the government – Locke advocated for the Separation of Powers to limit government – he still believed that the legislature still had to abide by natural law.[6]

In addition to Locke's ideas, expressed in his Second Treatise of Government, the founding fathers were influenced by documents like the Magna Carta, Petition of Right, and the English Bill of Rights, all of which limited governmental power.[3]

The Declaration of Independence was heavily influenced by the belief in the importance of freedom

The U.S. Founding Fathers themselves strongly supported individual freedom and limited government.[7][8] Their experience with the tyrannical British government made them distrustful of a powerful government, and their resolve to not repeat this experience is reflected in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.[9] For example, the Constitution goes to great lengths to mandate the separation of powers, and the Bill of Rights further limits government power to protect individual rights.[9][10][11][12][13][14] The founders also emphasized the importance of property rights.[7][15] Many of the founding fathers warned Americans to stay vigilant against trends that erode individual freedom, including the growth of bureaucracy, violation of the separation of powers, and judicial supremacy.[16]

Additionally, the Founding Fathers cared deeply about preserving national sovereignty, since a sovereign U.S. government would serve the American people alone and protect their unalienable rights, and let them govern themselves.[17] In fact, they chose to declare independence because Britain was not respecting their right to self-government.[17] For example, in his farewell address in September 1796, George Washington warned his fellow Americans against becoming entangled in international treaties and alliances, as he knew it would end American freedom.[18][19]

The Founding Fathers' philosophy led to the creation of one of the strongest countries in history, with a very high level of individual freedom while still maintaining law and order.

War on Freedom in the 21st century

The War on Freedom in the 21st century takes many forms. In Western societies, it can be painfully apparent in rhetoric of a climate apocalypse. Thomas D. Williams of Breitbart, in commenting on the use of pseudoscience to promote an authoritarian cultural Marxist social agenda and shrill cries for action, observes:

“Any movement toward a more just and civil society can now be considered a meaningful climate action,” asserts a new essay in the New Yorker, which links gun control, immigration, and climate change.

“Securing fair elections is a climate action. Combating extreme wealth inequality is a climate action. Shutting down the hate machines on social media is a climate action,” insists New Yorker writer Jonathan Franzen in his lengthy September 8 [2019] essay.

“Instituting humane immigration policy, advocating for racial and gender equality, promoting respect for laws and their enforcement, supporting a free and independent press, ridding the country of assault weapons—these are all meaningful climate actions,” he writes.[20]

Examples of the War on Freedom

Religious freedom

Main article: Religious freedom#Examples of restrictions on religious freedom in the West

Liberals, who oppose theologically conservative Christianity and other conservative religious traditions because of their philosophical and policy implications, are increasingly pushing for restrictions on the freedom to practice one's religious beliefs.[21][22]

Illustrating this growing shift, in 2019, the Democrat Party adopted a resolution at their summer convention hostile to religious freedom and in support of the Marxist axiom that "religion is the opiate of the masses."[23][24] The California legislature passed a similar resolution that attacked religious freedom.[25]

Free speech

Main article: Free speech#Examples of restrictions and/or censorship of free speech in the West

The totalitarian Left is intolerant of criticism against it and against the beliefs and ideologies it supports. In the West, countries are increasingly restricting forms of speech that those in power disagree with or consider "hateful," even if said speech is not used in any hateful way. Big Tech, along with prominent Democrats such Rep. Ted Lieu and 2020 presidential candidate Andrew Yang have openly called for censorship of voices they disagree with.

Self-defense

See also: Gun control

Restrictions limiting and even abolishing the ability of citizens to physically defend themselves have significantly increased since the early 20th century. The right to self-defense, considered by the U.S. founding fathers as a core human right that enabled human freedom, has come under greater threat from the Left than before.[26]

Big Tech

See also: Big Tech

Under the control of the Left, Big Tech has evolved into a form of monopolistic corporatism, asserting more and more control over personal freedoms and privacy. The technology in the hands of Big Tech – the microchip, the cell phone, GPS tracking – was developed for military use by taxpayers through the DARPA program.[27] Patents are now held by private technocrats who wish to remake the world into their own leftist ideological image by destroying Constitutional rights – freedom of speech, religion, freedom of association and other basic rights.

Tyranny by judges

See also: Judicial activism

Liberals have traditionally avoided legislation and the consent of the governed to bring about social change, and have focused on judicial fiat law to impose a cultural Marxist agenda, abortion and same-sex "marriage" being only two of dozens of obvious examples. Liberal judges, under a belief in a "Living Constitution", feel that they can by-pass elected legislators and "legislate from the bench" or write law themselves.

In 2011 for example, California federal judge Vaughn Walker, who exposed his true liberal colors upon coming out as homosexual and thus ended up in conflict of interest in the matter, illegally overturned a citizen's referendum which passed overwhelmingly amending the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman before he subsequently retired from the bench. California Attorney General Kamala Harris, for the first time in California history, refused to defend the voter's referendum in Appeals Court, resulting in the "legalization" of gay marriage in California against the will of the voters and without any action by the legislature.[28]

Attack on national sovereignty

Main article: War on Sovereignty

National sovereignty and autonomy are the equivalent of limited and accountable government.[29] With national sovereignty, the government is close to the people, who themselves are sovereign, and protects their rights.[29] Nationalism itself is a positive concept, being closely associated with limited government, individual liberty, tolerance, and national cohesion.[30] It recognizes the diversity in the world but avoids the enmity that results from having different cultures living under a single government.[30]

However, liberals and globalists, who support big government, support reducing or abolishing national sovereignty in favor of a global government that is aloof and cannot be held accountable.[29] This is seen in their support for governmental organizations such as, but not limited to, the United Nations, European Union, and the World Trade Organization. Non-governmental organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations also support reducing national sovereignty.

Growth in bureaucracy

See also: Administrative State and Deep State

Growth in bureaucracy comes at the cost of individual freedom. The U.S. federal bureaucracy and number of regulations – along with other western countries – has exponentially increased since the beginning of the 20th century. The permanent institutional bureaucracy, the civil service system, becomes an unelected fourth branch of government whose primary interests are often career advancement, job security, and avoiding responsibility for failure.

Since the founding of the Post Office, campaign promises of "job creation" by some candidates often means "government job creation," which comes at the expense of taxpayers and the private sector's ability to create private-sector jobs, and hence the ability to create more private-sector taxpayers to support government. This is especially true in economic down cycles when advocates of stimulus and deficit spending create more government bureaucracies to alleviate hard times that then outlive their usefulness, albeit with more government workers still holding a full range of government pensions and benefits, as more prosperous times return. (See also Emergency spending and New spending).[31] The growth in bureaucracy comes about by the government workforce and budget growing faster, proportionately, over time to the growth in population, which leads to the gradual impoverishment of people, i.e. the taxpaying public who support a top-heavy bureaucracy.[32]

These newly hired, supposed "non-partisan" civil servants, who owe their permanent jobs to a political party and ideology, then need justification for their continued existence on the government payroll, and turn to social engineering and greater intrusion into ordinary citizen's lives.

Socialism and environmentalism

See also: Green New Deal and Democratic Socialism

Socialism degrades the human spirit by elevating one of the worst human vicesenvy – and making it the basis of law for society and the model of human virtue.

Socialists weaponize climate science to further their political goals. They argue that the only solution to the alleged "crisis" or human-caused global warming is the adoption of globalist and socialist social and economic policies. For example, environmentalists advocate for higher taxes[33] including the carbon tax, globalist treaties such as the Paris climate agreement, and far-left Nanny State programs such as the Green New Deal.

See also

References

  1. Gesiotto, Morgan (August 19, 2019). Democrats want to chip away our cherished freedoms and liberties. The Hill. Retrieved August 19, 2019.
  2. Powell, Jim (August 1, 1996). John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property. Foundation for Economic Education. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 2. Foundations of American Government. USHistory.org. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 The Declaration of Independence and Natural Rights. Constitutional Rights Foundation. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Byas, Steve (July 4, 2018). What Is the Fourth of July Really About? The New American. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  6. 6.0 6.1 Tuckness, Alex (November 9, 2005). Locke’s Political Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  7. 7.0 7.1 Founders’ Quotes on Founding Principles. Bill of Rights Institute. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  8. Bleau, Hannah (July 4, 2019). 13 Patriotic Quotes from America’s Founding Fathers. Breitbart News. Retrieved July 4, 2019.
  9. 9.0 9.1 Best, James D. The Founders Believed in Limited Government. What Would the Founders Think. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  10. Pilon, Roger (July 21, 1995). Founders Intended Only Limited Powers. CATO Institute (from USA Today). Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  11. 3a. The Founders and Federalism. USHistory.org. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  12. Beeman, Richard R. The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government. Constitution Center. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  13. 2c. Creating the Constitution. USHistory.org. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  14. 2d. The Bill of Rights. USHistory.org. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  15. Snowball, Timothy (July 11, 2019). The Founding Fathers of our limited government: George Washington and the importance of property rights. Pacific Legal Foundation. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  16. Strong Warnings from the Founders. National Center for Constitutional Studies. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  17. 17.0 17.1 Groves, Steven (December 3, 2010). Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America? The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved November 27, 2017.
  18. Washington's Farewell Address 1796. The Avalon Project -- Yale Law School. Retrieved November 27, 2017.
  19. Washington's Farewell Address. Government Publishing Office. Retrieved November 27, 2017.
  20. Williams, Thomas D. (September 9, 2019). The New Yorker Proposes ‘Ridding the Country of Assault Weapons’ to Fight Climate Change. Breitbart News. Retrieved September 11, 2019.
  21. Anderson, Troy (June 4, 2019). The War to Destroy Christianity in America. The New American. Retrieved June 4, 2019.
  22. Byas, Steve (March 18, 2019). Horowitz: American Left Is at War With Christianity. The New American. Retrieved March 18, 2019.
  23. Foust, Michael (August 28, 2019). Democrats Pass Resolution Applauding ‘Nonreligious Americans,’ Criticizing Churchgoers. Christian Headlines. Retrieved September 6, 2019.
  24. Freiburger, Calvin (September 3, 2019). Democrats endorse ‘nonreligious’ values, reject religious liberty in new resolution. LifeSiteNews. Retrieved September 3, 2019.
  25. Cai, Cynthia (September 12, 2019). California Legislature Pass Resolution Attacking Religious Liberty. The Epoch Times. Retrieved September 12, 2019.
  26. Roberts, David Thomas (August 14, 2019). The Second Amendment is imperiled like never before. The Washington Times. Retrieved August 14, 2019.
  27. Is There a Global War Coming?, George Friedman at Brain Bar, Youtube, Jul 7, 2017.
  28. 6 Reasons to Oppose Nanny State Tyrant Kamala Harris in 2020, BY TYLER O'NEIL , PJ Media, JANUARY 21, 2019.
  29. 29.0 29.1 29.2 Hayward, John (June 17, 2016). Progressives’ Hatred of Nationalism Pushes US Towards the End of Sovereignty. Breitbart News. Retrieved November 27, 2017.
  30. 30.0 30.1 Hazony, Yoram (August 24, 2018). The Liberty of Nations. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved August 25, 2018.
  31. In other words, so-called "emergency" or "Temporary spending" often becomes permanent spending, enlarging the federal budget and workforce. Keynesian Economics Turns The Whole Economy Into A Gigantic Ponzi Scheme, Jim Huntzinger, Townhall.com, Aug 29, 2019.
  32. Economist Milton Friedman famously observed that "nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." https://twitter.com/reason/status/1168572040904941571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
  33. Guarascio, Francesco; Maushagen, Peter (September 13, 2019). EU considers energy taxes to counter climate change. Reuters. Retrieved September 13, 2019.