I saw this from Michael Smith and there is truth in his words, I have spoken with a lot of "young people" and they really expect the 6 figure jobs and the corner offices right out of college, and they expect their parents standards of living...NOW.  I had told my son repeatedly, that when his mom and I got married 31 years ago, we had nothing, but debt and a work ethic. Nobody had told us how to prepare for life, and how to handle money.  I told him tongue in cheek that we made church mice look rich.  It took time and a lot of work to get to where we are now, there is no generational wealth for us.  I didn't get any from my side of the family and my wife didn't get anything from her side of the family, we built it on our own.  Yeah some people get money from their folks, but we were not one of them. 

     I do get the resentment to a degree, the kids today were sold a bill of good from the educational industrial complex to go to college, get a degree in what makes you feel good, and the world is your oyster, and by the way here is all this student loans you can use to finance it....and don't worry about the payments.....you got this.   And they be young and trusting...get fvcked. by their councilors and the colleges and universities and yes the kids have to own it also, because some of the kids parents probably tried to warn them and were told"I'm gonna live my own life"...well they are now. And other parents didn't give a damm and well we have this present generation that are the perfect breeding ground of resentment and envy that the democratic socialist promise with the siren song of "its not your fault, its the patriarchy, it's the boomers, its your parents, its capitalism, its Elon Musk...or whatever other bogeyman they insert to stir up the hate and get them to the polls to have them pull the lever for the Rose with promise of "Free shit".

   I do know that a lot of kids have seen the writing on the wall have gone into the trades, and are making bank rather than racking up student loan debt.  One day I'll do a post into the gender and demographic shift of who is going to college and who is going into the Trades.  It will surprise a lot of people.

BTW my to favorite stations on my Sirius/XM are the 80's channel and the Patriot channel, 

Here is the song from "Mike and the Mechanics"   The Living Years"   The Living Years Spite has taken over America’s youth and the only solution they can see is more communism. Michael Smith Aug 2 I hopped in my truck last week to fill up and grab some gas for my mower. As usual, the radio was tuned to SiriusXM’s “80s on 8,” and just as I pulled out of the driveway, The Living Years by Mike and the Mechanics began playing. The opening lyrics struck me as relevant: Every generation Blames the one before And all of their frustrations Come beating on your door... This is going to sound like a detour, but stay with me. I promise I’ll bring it back around. One of America’s unwritten social conventions is queuing. To maintain order at public events, we instinctively stand in line—and we don’t tolerate line cutters. From our earliest childhood we are taught that waiting for your turn is good and cutting the line is wrong. Before there was an “online,” if you wanted good seats at a movie, you arrived early and bought your ticket. If you showed up after the previews had started, you accepted that your choices would be limited—or that you might not get in at all. That same principle once applied to adulthood. My wife and I started with essentially nothing. After college, we hit reset, just like nearly everyone we knew. Our parents helped us through school, not by taking on debt for us, but by sacrificing for us. Once we graduated, however, we were expected to take care of our own business and take our place in line. My first professional job paid $9,800 a year, about $4.90 an hour. My wife’s first teaching job paid $12,000 annually, roughly six dollars an hour. We pinched pennies for years to save a down payment on a house, then paid the privilege of borrowing at 14 percent mortgage interest. We owned one car while working in two different cities before finally buying a second one at a loan rate of 9.15 percent. We began repaying our student loans almost immediately. We owned one television—a 19-inch color set from J.C. Penney. We lived in a rural area because housing was cheaper. We didn’t finance lavish vacations or luxury purchases. We wanted children, so preparing for that future became our priority. None of that was remarkable. It wasn’t heroic, it was simply how life worked. Our friends were doing the same things. Looking back, adulthood resembled standing in line. We weren’t starting where our parents had started because the line had moved forward during the years they worked and sacrificed. Every generation steps into a world that is already farther along than the one before it. But everyone still had to get in line. As older generations moved into the theater and took their seats, younger generations gradually moved toward the front. It was the historical order of things. Naturally, adults in their peak earning years stood closer to the front of the line, and wealthy families always enjoyed advantages. That has always been true and almost certainly always will be. I hate to break it to the new communists, but party officials, senior bureaucrats, and their children enjoy exactly the same advantages under collectivist systems. Human nature doesn’t disappear because the economic system changes. We understood that someone ahead of us had usually spent years getting there, so we didn’t obsess over it. I know every generation believes it has things harder than the last, and today’s young adults may have legitimate reasons for feeling that way. Housing costs have risen dramatically. Student debt has become far more burdensome than it was for my generation. They are not imagining every obstacle. But something else changed that receives far less attention. Beginning in the early 1980s, Americans increasingly substituted borrowing for earning. From 1980 through 2007, household debt nearly doubled relative to GDP, eventually reaching almost 98 percent. For nearly three decades, families financed rising standards of living with mortgages, home-equity loans, credit cards, auto loans, and easy credit. Federal debt also grew, but household leverage expanded even faster. The result was an unprecedented period of consumption. Many of today’s young adults grew up in households that enjoyed larger homes, newer cars, vacations, overseas travel, organized sports, private schools, and a standard of living their parents often financed with borrowed money. Compared to previous generations, childhood became far more comfortable – until the mortgage bubble burst. The financial crisis of 2008 forced something of a reset. Household finances have actually become healthier than many assume, with household debt relative to disposable income falling substantially from its pre-crisis peak. But that improvement came with an important caveat. As families reduced their borrowing, Washington dramatically increased its own. Public debt has climbed from roughly one-third of GDP before the financial crisis to around or above 100 percent today, making federal borrowing the primary driver of America’s overall debt burden. The economic environment changed, but he cultural response changed even more. Kids today...am I right? There is an enormous amount of spite in our culture. It simply disguises itself as righteousness and altruism, but beneath the slogans, it is still spite. I’ve spent a great deal of time trying to understand why growing numbers of people seem willing to embrace policies that will damage themselves if those same policies also punish people they dislike. Looking for the right word, I kept coming back to one simple definition. Spite is intentionally doing something to hurt someone because you’re angry, resentful, or seeking revenge—even if you suffer in the process. That definition explains far more of modern politics than many people realize. I recently watched interviews with young New Yorkers who sincerely believed they had a right to live in some of the city’s most expensive neighborhoods because that was the lifestyle their parents had enjoyed. Since they couldn’t afford it on an entry-level salary, they concluded that someone else must be preventing them from receiving what they deserved, most likely it is Elon Musk. Notice the underlying assumption. They aren’t asking how to move forward in the line, they are demanding permission to skip it. That, I believe, is one of the emotional foundations beneath today’s resurgence of collectivism, particularly among younger adults raised in affluent or upper-middle-class households. Their politics often reflect less a coherent economic philosophy than resentment toward the generation they believe diminished their future. Their preferred remedy is not to wait their turn or build what their parents built, rather it is to move everyone else backward so they can move themselves forward. There have always been people who wanted to skip the line. What’s different today is that many no longer pretend they simply want a better place in it. Increasingly, they seem willing to tear down the entire line if it means those ahead of them lose their seats. To me, that’s the real siren song the Democratic Socialists of America are selling.

"What I saw and Learned in the Gulag System"

 

I have blogged a lot about the Kulaks as a description of the middle class, and as a warning of our political "betters" that believe that the middle class is a disruption of their attempts for political power.  Poor people that are dependent on the government for survival will do whatever they have to to keep themselves there including giving up their freedoms for the illusions of safety and security.

I was following a link and ran across the "What I learned in the Gulag system", and decided to add some information about the gulag system and some information about a couple of the more famous people in the system. Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn and Varlam Shalamov.   I have in the past had made comments as have many others during the time of the Obama administration about the modern day Gulags A.K.A "FEMA Camps", we have commented many times that we are on some .gov watchlist and we would be collected when the purges started and shipped off when the Obama Administration or the Clinton Administration Part II went after all the "Bitter Clingers".    This started as a history post and morphed into a Political warning post or was it vice versa..... And if the Democratic Socialist get into power, the Modern day "Gulag" system will be used again.  Remember all those cops they wanted to get rid of...Yeah right...they will be repurposed as "Internal Security agents"  to guarantee that the new socialist paradise will be full of equity, free from hate(Unless its to the people on the right side of the aisle...;Oh wait, they will be in the  Reeducation camps er the socialist workers fun day camps to be taught the errors of our way and only through "Relaxation and meditation" will utopia finally arrive.

The GULAG was an administration body that watched over the camps; eventually its name would be used for these camps retrospectively. After Lenin's death in 1924, Stalin was able to take control of the government, and began to form the gulag system. On June 27, 1929 the Politburo created a system of self-supporting camps that would eventually replace the existing prisons around the country. These prisons were meant to receive inmates that received a prison sentence that exceeded three years. Prisoners that had a shorter prison sentence than three years were to remain in the prison system that was still under the purview of the NKVD. The purpose of these new camps was to colonize the remote and inhospitable environments throughout the Soviet Union. These changes took place around the same time that Stalin started to institute collectivization and rapid industrial development. Collectivization resulted in a large scale purge of peasants and so-called Kulaks. The Kulaks were supposedly wealthy (comparatively to other Soviet peasants) and were considered to be capitalists by the state, and by extension enemies of socialism. By late 1929 Stalin started a program known as "dekulakization". Stalin demanded that the kulak class be completely wiped out. This resulted in the imprisonment and execution of Soviet peasants. The term "Kulak" would also become associated with anyone who opposed or even seem unsatisfied with the Soviet government. This resulted in 60,000 people being sent to the camps and another 154,000 exiled in a mere four months. This was only the beginning of the dekulakization process. In 1931 alone 1,803,392 people were exiled. Although these massive relocation processes were successful in getting a large potential free forced labor work force where they needed to be, that is about all it was successful at doing. The "special settlers", as the Soviet government referred to them, all lived on starvation level rations, and many people starved to death in the camps, and anyone who was healthy enough to escape tried to do just that. This resulted in the government having to give rations to a group of people they were getting hardly any use out of, and was just costing the Soviet government money. The Unified State Political Administration (OGPU) quickly realized the problem, and began to reform the dekulakization process. To help prevent the mass escapes the OGPU started to recruit people within the colony to help stop people who attempted to leave, and set up ambushes around known popular escape routes. The OGPU also attempted to raise the living conditions in these camps that would not encourage people to actively try and escape, and Kulaks were promised that they would regain their rights after five years. Even these revisions ultimately failed to resolve the problem, and the dekulakization process was a failure in providing the government with a steady forced labor force. These prisoners were also lucky to be in the gulag in the early 1930s. Prisoners were relatively well off compared to what the prisoners would have to go through in the final years of the gulag.

The Gulag (/ˈɡuːlæɡˌ -ɑːɡ/; Russian: ГУЛАГ, IPA: [ɡʊˈlak] ( listen); acronym of Glavnoye Upravleniye Lagerej, "Main Camps' Administration" or "Chief Administration of [Corrective Labor] Camps") was the government agency in charge of the Soviet forced labor camp system that was created under Vladimir Lenin and reached its peak during Joseph Stalin's rule from the 1930s to the 1950s. The term is also commonly used in English language to refer to any forced-labor camp in the Soviet Union, including camps that existed in post-Stalin times. The camps housed a wide range of convicts, from petty criminals to political prisoners. Large numbers were convicted by simplified procedures, such as NKVD troikas and other instruments of extrajudicial punishment. The Gulag is recognized as a major instrument of political repression in the Soviet Union.
The agency's full name was the Main Administration of Corrective Labor Camps and Settlements (Glavnoye upravleniye ispravityelno-trudovykh lagerey i koloniy). It was administered first by the State Political Administration (GPU), later by the NKVD and in the final years by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). The Solovki prison camp, the first corrective labor camp constructed after the revolution, was established in 1918 and legalized by a decree "On the creation of the forced-labor camps" on April 15, 1919. The internment system grew rapidly, reaching a population of 100,000 in the 1920s. According to Nicolas Werth, author of The Black Book of Communism, the yearly mortality rate in the Soviet concentration camps strongly varied reaching 5% (1933) and 20% (1942–1943) while dropping considerably in the post-war years at about 1–3% per year at the beginning of the 1950s.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature, who survived eight years of Gulag incarceration, gave the term its international repute with the publication of The Gulag Archipelago in 1973. The author likened the scattered camps to "a chain of islands" and as an eyewitness he described the Gulag as a system where people were worked to death. Some scholars support this view, though this claim is controversial, given that the vast majority of people who entered the Gulag came out alive, with the exception of the war years. Although one writer, citing pre-1991 materials, claims that most prisoners in the gulag were killed, Natalya Reshetovskaya, the wife of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, said in her memoirs that The Gulag Archipelago was based on "campfire folklore" as opposed to objective facts. Similarly, historian Stephen G. Wheatcroft asserts that it is essentially a "literary and political work". Numerous other accounts from survivors state otherwise and the Mitrokhin Archive claimed that these memoirs were part of a KGB campaign, orchestrated by Yuri Andropov in 1974, to discredit Solzhenitsyn.However, this archive itself has its veracity in doubt; among other, more practical issues, by the same token with which Vasili Mitrokhin claimed the Soviet government would obviously be interested in discrediting Solzhenitsyn, Western governments would have as much interest in lending him credence.
In March 1940, there were 53 Gulag camp directorates (colloquially referred to as simply "camps") and 423 labor colonies in the Soviet Union. Today's major industrial cities of the Russian Arctic, such as Norilsk, Vorkuta and Magadan, were originally camps built by prisoners and run by ex prisoners.


What I Saw and Learned in the Kolyma Camps
     Varlam Shalamov
1. The extraordinary fragility of human nature, of civilization. A human being would turn into a beast after three weeks of hard work, cold, starvation and beatings.
2. The cold was the principal means of corrupting the soul; in the Central Asian camps people must have held out longer — it was warmer there.
3. I learned that friendship and solidarity never arise in difficult, truly severe conditions — when life is at stake. Friendship arises in difficult but bearable conditions (in the hospital, but not in the mine).
4. I learned that spite is the last human emotion to survive. A starving man has only enough flesh to feel spite — he is indifferent to everything else.
5. I learned the difference between prison, which strengthens character, and work camps, which corrupt the human soul.
6. I learned that Stalin's «triumphs» were possible because he slew innocent people: had there been an organized movement, even one-tenth in number, but organized, it would have swept Stalin away in two days.
7. I learned that humans became human because they are physically stronger, tougher than any animal — no horse endures work in the Far North.
8. I saw that the only group that retained a bit of their humanity, despite the starvation and abuse, were the religious, the sectarians, almost all of them — and the majority of the priests.
9. The first ones to be corrupted, the most susceptible, are the party members and military men.
10. I saw what a forcible argument a simple slap could be for an intellectual.
11. That people distinguish between camp chiefs according to the power of their punches, to their enthusiasm for beatings.
12. A beating is almost irresistible as an argument («Method number three»).
13. I learned the truth about the preparations for the cryptic trials[1] from masters of the craft.
14. I learned why in prison you get political news (arrests, etc.) sooner than on the outside.
15. That prison (and camp) rumours[2] always turn out to be anything but slop.
16. I learned that one can live on spite alone.
17. I learned that one can live on indifference.
18. I learned why a man lives neither on hope — there are no hopes at all, nor on will — what will?, but only on the instinct of self-preservation, the same as a tree, a rock, an animal.
19. I'm proud that at the very beginning, back in 1937, I decided to never become a foreman if my decision could lead to another man's death, if my will would be forced to serve the authorities oppressing other people, prisoners like myself.
20. My body and spirit proved to be stronger in this great trial than I thought, and I am proud to have betrayed no one, to have sent no one to death nor to the camp, to have denounced no one.
21. I'm proud to have made no requests until 1955[3].
22. I saw the so called «Beria amnesty» there and then — it was something to see.
23. I saw that women are more honest and selfless than men — there was not a single husband at Kolyma who came after his wife. But wives did come; many did (Faina Rabinovitch, Krivoshey's wife)[4].
24. I saw the amazing northerner families (civilians, former prisoners) with their letters to their «lawful husbands and wives» etc.
25. I saw «the first Soviet Rockefellers», underground millionaires, and heard their confessions.
26. I saw the hard laborers, and also the large E and B contingents, the Berlag camp.
27. I learned that one can achieve a lot (a hospital, a work transfer), but at the risk of life — at the cost of a beating and the isolation cell cold.
28. I saw an isolation cell carved out in rock, and spent one night in it myself.
29. The lust for power, for unpunished murder is great — from big shots down to regular police operatives with rifles (Seroshapka[5] and his ilk).
30. I learned the unrestrained Russian lust to denounce, to complain.
31. I learned that world should be divided not into good and bad people but into cowards and non-cowards. 95% of cowards are capable of any meanness, lethal meanness, after light threatening.
32. I am convinced: the camp is a negative experience — entirely. If one spent but an hour there — it would be an hour of moral corruption. The camp has never given anything to anyone — and never could. Everyone, both prisoners and civilians, are corrupted by the camp.
33. In every region there was a work camp, there was one at every major construction site. Millions, tens of millions of prisoners.
34. Repressions touched not only the ruling elite but all levels of society — in every village, at every plant, in every family either relatives or friends were repressed.
35. I consider the best time of my life to be the months spent in the cell of Butyrki prison, where I managed to strengthen the spirit of those who were weak and where everyone spoke freely.
36. I learned to «plan» one day ahead, no further.
37. I learned that kingpins are not human.
38. That there are no criminals at the camp, there are your present (and future) neighbors caught behind the line of the law and not those who crossed it.
39. I learned how terrible the ego of a boy, of a youth is: better steal than ask. This and their boasting throws youth to the bottom.
40. Women didn't play a big role in my life — camp is the reason.
41. The discernment of character is a useless ability — I am unable to change my ways for any scum that comes along.
42. The last in the row, which are hated by everyone — by guards and inmates alike — are those dropping behind, the sick, the weak, those incapable of running in the cold.
43. I learned what power is and what a man with a gun means.
44. That the scale is shifted, and this is what is most typical in a work camp.
45. That passing from a prisoner condition to civilian is very hard, and nearly impossible without a long adaptation period.
46. That a writer must be a stranger — in the subjects he describes. And if he knows the matter well — he will write in such a way that no one would understand him.

Translated by Dmitry Subbotin and Robert Denis.

Monday Music*YAY*! Goodbye To You by Scandal

 I was busy with "Real Life" and was unable to post like I wanted to. "My Bad"

I decided to do a "Monday Music" today, been a bit since I have done one of those.  For some reason since Easter This song was gnawing on the background as an excellent choice for a "Monday Music", so since my muse has been dormant lately, but is starting to stir again, I figured I would listen.

     I remember this song making big airplay on MTV, y'all remember MTV? they used to play music videos instead of all those insipid reality shows. well this song was in heavy rotation and I liked the song and face it, Patty Smyth was cute as a button in the video and I was 16 years old back in 1982..Priorities you know, LOL   Even now, sure it is a bit campy like a lot of the 80's songs are but it reminds me of a time I call "Reagans America" where a President loved America and believed that we are this shining light on the hill and he made everyone else believe it also.  To me the 80's were a good decade.

Scandal is a self-titled debut EP by American rock band Scandal, released in 1982 by Columbia Records. Although the EP was never released on CD, all five of the EP's songs along with the "Goodbye to You" B-side "All My Life" are found on the VH1 Scandal compilation album We Are the '80s (2006).^[2] An alternate photo from the same photoshoot of the EP was used for the VH1 compilation cover as well as Playlist: The Very Best of Scandal (2008), with the track listing for Playlist being identical to We Are the '80s.^[3] All five of the EP's songs can also be found on the remastered and expanded 2014 Rock Candy Records version of Scandal's 1984 album Warrior.

The song "Win Some, Lose Some" was written in 1979 and first recorded by Bryan Adams on his 1980 self-titled debut album.

The song was written by band member Zack Smith. It appeared on Scandal's 1982 Scandal EP. It hit #5 on Billboard's Album Rock play list. The song was also released as a single, and reached #65 on the Billboard Hot 100.

The video shows Patty Smyth in a bright red dress singing the lyrics to various members of the band as they perform the song. Scandal keyboardist Benjy King is shown playing a rare Digital Keyboards Synergy synthesizer, which provided the main 8th note foundation of the track; though he is not shown in the video, the song features Late Show with David Letterman's bandleader and sidekick Paul Shaffer playing a solo—based on Del Shannon's "Runaway" on an Oberheim OB-Xa.

 

I was reading this post by Michael Smith and I was thinking about the Donk platform, and I remember when I was a Union Rep at the Ford plant and I was the only Republican that held union office.  I was really good at it so I got reelected and I had people ask me, "Why don't I support the Democrats?" and I replied, "Well there are some things about the Democrats I do like,(Remember this was the early 2000's), they tend to be a bit protectionist whereas the GOP is the CHamber of Commerce types I.E. Cheap Labor.  We need to keep our industry here in the United States, not outsource it.  The Democrats talk a better game on border security then the GOP(Remember this was the early 2000's).  But they are weak on crime, anti 2nd amendment, have started going along with the global warming crazies(Remember Al Gore?) which isn't good for our industrial base.  If we could find a candidate that combines both the platforms of both parties, I would be ecstatic.  Then my job got outsourced, our replacement car(The Fusion, went to Mexico, and my plant got shut down, and now I am in the aviation industry,   Years later a candidate came along that encompassed what I believed was the best of both worlds...Trump.  Something that was sorely needed.   That is why he has the support of so many from middle America.

     I shamelessly cribbed this from "Michael Smith" off his substack.

Despicable Me It seems my constant and consistent opposition to all things progressive and Democrat makes me a bad guy. Oh, well... Michael Smith Jul 28   I recently received a DM from someone taking me to task for always being against anything Democrats say or do - and telling me, in some detail, why that makes me a terrible person who doesn’t like people, is not compassionate, but is selfish and generally an all-around bad guy. Well, OK then. I do agree with one thing, though. I am always against things Democrats say and do – and I do so for one major reason. They are frauds. Simple as that. Dems are as fake as Hillary’s Southern accent, Hakeem Jeffries’ intellect, Chuck Schumer’s legendary grilling skills, and Graham Platner’s “oysterman” persona. Their entire ideology of progressivism is fraudulent because the true goals always must be kept hidden until they can’t be – and thanks to the Democratic Socialists of America (the Id of the greater Democrat Party), we know what that endgame looks like because they are now openly telling us. It is fun to watch the Dem Party leadership and mouthpieces having their “Oh, shit!” moment now that the DSA are saying the quiet part out loud. Schumer and the Old Guard are sort of in but sort of out with them proves they never had the courage of their convictions in the first place. There is a pattern. It becomes obvious once you stop pretending the rhetoric matches the results. Take the border. For years, the same people who lecture the country about “compassion” and “humanity” treated open borders as a moral imperative—until cameras showed the chaos they created: the caravans moving north, the fentanyl deaths, overwhelmed cities, and human trafficking. Then, almost overnight, when it was apparent it was a losing issue for Biden, the language shifted to “secure the border” and “humane enforcement,” as if a decade of deliberate non-enforcement had been a clerical error. Sanctuary cities continue to protect illegal aliens at the expense of their legal citizens. The fraud is the original claim that the policy was ever about compassion rather than political power and future voters. Or consider crime. Soft-on-crime district attorneys and “reimagine policing” advocates sold the public a story of systemic racism and root causes while violent crime spiked in the cities they governed. They haven’t figured this one out yet. The body count is still rising as the value of prosecution and order is ignored. None of this was ever about justice; it was about ideology dressed up as empathy. The people living with the consequences (mostly in the neighborhoods the theorists never visit), are still paying the price while the theorists kept their grants and their prestige. Climate change rhetoric is offset by private jets, beachfront mansions, and multi-home lifestyles for the loudest advocates as they demand ordinary families sacrifice heating, driving, and economic mobility. The “science” is invoked selectively: catastrophic models justify central planning, but the same models’ failures to predict the last twenty years of mild outcomes are ignored. The real goal is state control over energy, industry, and individual behavior. Economic policy follows the identical script. Minimum-wage hikes, rent control, and wealth taxes are sold as tools to help the working class. The predictable outcomes—fewer entry-level jobs, housing shortages, capital flight—are then blamed on “greed” rather than on the policies themselves. Meanwhile the same politicians who denounce inequality preside over the most unequal cities in the country, protected by union contracts, regulatory capture, and donor networks. The rhetoric is redistribution; the result is protection of the insider class. Education must be on the list, too. For decades the party of “the children” defended failing urban school systems, opposed parental choice, and treated teachers’ unions as sacred. When test scores collapsed and parents noticed the ideological content replacing actual literacy, the response was not reform but accusations of bigotry. The fraud is the claim that the system exists to educate; the evidence shows it exists to employ adults and transmit a political worldview. The DSA wing now openly celebrates the capture of curriculum; the Old Guard still pretends it is about “equity.” But perhaps the greatest example is how they ignore massive waste and failures in the programs they have pushed through. USAID has been conclusively proven to be a generational grift, the State Department estimating something like 12% of allocated funds reaching the intended uses, most being siphoned off through a chain of overlapping NGOs headquartered in Alexandra. Think about that – 88% of billions of taxpayer dollars rarely gets far past the Beltway. And if one considers the massive fraud and waste in other programs like blue state SomaliBucks from Medicare/Medicaid or programs that should never exist (like hundreds of millions for illegal immigrants), it becomes clear that money for social programs and failing schools is already there – but they don’t appear to care enough to stop the leakage, leaving one to logically assume they are benefitting from the status quo. Even their language of compassion is fraudulent. The same people who demand infinite empathy for selected victim categories show none for the truck driver who loses his livelihood to regulation, the small-business owner crushed by Covid era lockdowns while big-box stores stayed open, or the Asian student whose academic record is discounted in the name of diversity. Selective compassion is not compassion; it is the real-life version of the sorting hat of the Harry Potter movies. The DSA has simply stopped pretending. It is all in their platform. The goal is not the goal, the goal is revolution. Better schools, safer streets, or a cleaner environment? Fuhgeddaboudit. The goal is the dismantling of market allocation, national borders, traditional family structures, and constitutional limits on power. State control over the means of production is the new hotness. Now that the Democrat Id is speaking in its own voice, the Super-Ego looks ridiculous trying to claim it never really meant it. That is why I oppose them consistently. Not because I hate people or lack compassion, but because I refuse to treat transparent fraud as good-faith governance. When the stated purpose and the actual purpose diverge systematically across so many domains, and over so many decades, the rational response is permanent skepticism. The email writer can call that cruelty if it makes them feel better. I call it pattern recognition.