Seeking truth, building community, and protecting property rights in Idaho & beyond

Coeur d'Alene, ID
Joined December 2022
Getting super local for a minute here. Kootenai County residents have a confusing question on the ballot about a bus 🚌 system that already exists, and which they are already "responsible" for by way of our County Commissioners. The advisory vote is basically asking, are you cool with the way things are? My answer is yes because I never even knew this very minimal bus system existed, and I've learned that it's funded by federal grants so I almost don't pay for it. (I know, I know... but it's not like it's a big new tax.) There is also no big issue with them that I'm aware of, and no alternative, so even if I was not cool with the existence of the buses now would not be the time to try to fix something that ain't broke. The way this question was written elicits a "no" from every limited government, freedom loving individual. That was my first inclination, and everyone I talk to about this says the same thing. I thought they were going to create a fleet of Seattle-style public transportation and send this town into the dumpster. But that's not what's happening right now. With this being an advisory vote, your answers will likely be used in future discussion surrounding our bus system as evidence of the will of the people. But how can this information be properly interpreted if the question was confusing to begin with? This link will take you to the exact timestamp in the County Commissioner meeting where adding this to the ballot was discussed. It's about 5 minutes long. youtube.com/live/eXTYZctunIk
 What do you think?
22
9
2
47
2,456
Large corporations buying homes does not reduce housing supply. A house doesn’t vanish because ownership changes. It still exists and still houses people. Rentals are not “off the market.” They’re on the rental market. Demand for housing is demand for use, not for a specific ownership title. If converting homes to rentals caused shortages, then cities with more renters would have cheaper housing. The opposite is true. Prices explode where building is restricted. Why do corporations buy homes in the first place? Because zoning laws, permit delays, height limits, rent controls, and environmental reviews make new construction slow, risky, and expensive. Artificial scarcity pushes capital toward existing units. Airbnbs didn’t create the shortage either. They move units between long term and short term use. They don’t erase housing. Cities with the worst rent spikes are the same cities that made building illegal or impractical for decades. You don’t fix high prices by banning buyers. You fix them by allowing supply to expand. When housing is easy to build, no investor can corner the market because competition crushes margins. Regulation didn’t stop the problem. It created it.
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more
7
12
1
66
1,162
Every housing provider (landlord) is outnumbered 100 to 1 by tenants. They are permanently a minority voting bloc at the ballot box. If you let them, tenants will vote to have their landlords killed if it means lower rent. It’s up to responsible politicians to understand how housing works, and roll back the onerous burdens on housing providers that ultimately make life harder for tenants, too. I know it’s tempting to give infinity concessions and handouts to the majority voting bloc, but tenants aren’t automatically right just because they don’t own property and you’ve deemed them oppressed. The housing market has been so bafflingly distorted by communist rules.
Landlords deserve equal rights under the law. Not special treatment. Just fairness.
76
483
9
3,344
45,593
~Melissa~ retweeted
đŸ”„đŸ”„đŸ”„
“The most harm of all is done when power is in the hands of people who are absolutely persuaded of the purity of their instincts and intentions.” — Milton Friedman
2
8
289
So happy that these two were recognized for winning their 3 year battle to protect property rights in Idaho! Congrats again!
We were so honored to accept the 2026 Elevation Award at the Mountain States Policy Center Gala celebrating our 3 year effort to protect property rights in Idaho! Thank you again to the legislators that listened and were courageous enough to stand up for our fundamental rights. đŸ„°đŸ‡șđŸ‡žâ€ïž @MtnStatesPolicy @freedomcaucusID @IdahoGOP @Mikeemoyle @kelly_a_anthon @redmanforidaho @LakeyTodd @intheknowidaho @Citizens_Idaho @jgebbia @Airbnb @JesseBWatters @RentResponsibly
11
111
1,523
~Melissa~ retweeted
Washington has a pattern. A new program promises to help, falls short, and then asks for more of your tax dollars to fix the shortfall. Liberty breaks that cycle by trusting you to make your own choices and keep the rewards. I make that case every day in the Senate, and I will never stop fighting for liberty.
154
162
9
1,188
41,948
~Melissa~ retweeted
Socialism is greed enforced by people with badges & guns
153
125
9
1,163
31,401
Other peoples’ stuff is not your stuff. Yes, even if you think they have too much and you want it.
48
372
18
3,555
32,991
Over 99% of what politicians do today is none of their business. Their legitimate role is to protect individual rights, not manage our lives, redistribute our earnings, dictate our choices, or decide what outcomes society should produce. Government was supposed to protect us from coercion, not become its primary instrument.
20
107
11
303
3,284
~Melissa~ retweeted
Excessive spending is a problem. Impose strict state and local spending limits. Use resulting surpluses to reduce property tax rates. The state can buy down school district property taxes until zero. Cities, counties, and special districts can do this for their own property taxes. It all starts with spending less. Eliminating property taxes is necessary and doable, but there must be the political will to do it.
In 2019, local governments took in $32 billion in property tax revenue. In 2026, that number is now $62 billion. Had the 2019 revenue merely be adjusted for population growth and inflation through this year, it would amount to roughly $49 billion — $13 billion less than current revenue collections. Why not return some of that extra $13 billion to taxpayers?
5
10
505
The moral case for capitalism is that your life belongs to you. Your work, your savings and your plans don’t become somebody else’s property because they have a moving speech about how they’d use them.
68
553
40
4,708
100,732
When we say socialism eventually runs out of other people's money, that applies consistently even by socialists' own standards. They routinely complain that generations of taxation and redistribution have failed to satisfy their demands, yet their solution is invariably more of both. And when an ideology focuses on redistributing wealth rather than producing it, running out of wealth to redistribute becomes increasingly inevitable. An ideology that pursues equality by tearing down those at the top rather than raising those at the bottom faces another problem: once you've brought down the top, there's a new top to target. The ceiling keeps getting lower while the demands from below keep growing, and the incentive to produce what everyone demands keeps shrinking. It's a race to the bottom, with equality in poverty as its logical destination. You cannot redistribute wealth that nobody produces.
3
25
1
79
1,069
~Melissa~ retweeted
My dear American friends, in my last post I gave you a snapshot of where France stands today. Now let me show you how we got here. I want you to see the whole movie before you buy the ticket. After the war, France was a machine. We called it the Trente Glorieuses, thirty glorious years. We built Concorde, the most beautiful aircraft ever made. We built a fleet of nuclear reactors in about fifteen years and gave ourselves some of the cleanest, cheapest electricity in the world. We built Ariane and put Europe in space. We built the TGV, the fastest train on earth. We invented the Minitel, an online network in millions of homes before most of you had heard of the internet. We were not a museum. We were builders. Then came 1981. François Mitterrand. Think of him as our Bernie Sanders, except he actually won. At his side, in the office next to his at the ÉlysĂ©e, sat a 37-year-old prodigy named Jacques Attali, his special adviser for the next ten years. The brightest minds of the left, convinced they could run an economy from a ministry. Here's what they did. They governed with Communist ministers. In 1982 they nationalized dozens of banks and the biggest industrial groups in the country: Paribas, Suez, Saint-Gobain, Thomson, Pechiney, RhĂŽne-Poulenc. They lowered the retirement age to 60. They cut the work week to 39 hours and added a fifth week of paid vacation. They created a wealth tax. They hired massively into the public sector. Reality hit in less than two years. Capital fled, inflation ran wild, and the franc was devalued three times. In March 1983 Mitterrand had to slam on the brakes and impose austerity just to stay in the European monetary system. But here's the trick: the brakes never reversed anything. They just slowed the ratchet. The so-called right came back with Jacques Chirac, and nothing was undone. Under Chirac's presidency, France passed the 35-hour work week. Left or right, every government added one more program, one more rule, one more tax, and nobody ever took one away. At the same time, the political class did something even more destructive than bad economics. It turned the youth into a political instrument. Instead of teaching young people, including millions of children of immigrants, to love the country they lived in, it taught them a story of guilt and grievance: France as the oppressor, France as the thing to resent. You cannot integrate people into a country you've taught them to despise. We are living with the consequences of that narrative today, in our schools, our suburbs, our streets. Then forty years of slow decline, all the way to Macron. And the story has a perfect ending. In 2007, Jacques Attali chaired a commission on how to unleash French growth. Its deputy rapporteur was a young civil servant named Emmanuel Macron. The commission proposed more than 300 reforms to free the economy. Almost none were ever implemented. Even the men who built the system knew it wasn't working, and even they couldn't undo it. No balanced budget since 1974. Public spending around 57% of GDP. Debt above 3,300 billion euros. Growth stuck under 1%. Now the number that should keep you up at night. In 1995, GDP per person in France was about $27,000. In America, about $29,000. We were neck and neck. Today France is around $49,000. America is around $90,000. You are now nearly twice as rich per person as we are. What changed? Not our talent. Not our engineers. Not our schools of mathematics. The only thing that changed is that we went all in on socialism. The 35 hours, the endless regulation, the taxes that chase out anyone who builds, the belief that the state should do everything and the individual should ask permission for everything. There's a line people love to attribute to Einstein: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We tried. For forty years, we tried. Every government promised that one more program, one more tax, one more regulation would finally fix things. You just saw where it got us. So if you choose the Democratic Party, which is literally turning socialist in front of your eyes, you will deserve what comes next. Let me tell you exactly what will happen if you go down that road. Nobody will vote for decline. Every single measure will sound generous, compassionate, reasonable. Your builders will slowly leave or stop building. Your state will grow every year and never shrink. Your debt will compound. And in thirty years, your kids will look at a chart like the one I just described and wonder when it all went wrong. You still have something we lost. You have Elon Musk sending rockets to orbit and landing them on their tail. You have Palmer Luckey building the defense industry of the future. You have Jeff Bezos, Jensen Huang, and thousands of founders nobody has heard of yet, building in garages right now. Trust your entrepreneurs. Don't trust your politicians. I come from your future. Don't make it yours.
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you. I come from your future. In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream. Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them. The promise was protection. The result is stagnation. The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe. I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has. Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France? Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
359
3,637
424
10,436
482,151
Generosity is a choice. Forced sacrifice is a demand.
24
128
11
461
3,818
My suspicion is that most socialists wouldn't be nearly so eager to declare housing a right if they were personally responsible for financing, building, and maintaining homes for someone else's benefit. Notice how conveniently their priorities become universal rights the moment someone else is expected to pay for them. The question they consistently avoid is simple: How does your desire for something give you a rightful claim to someone else's property, money, or labor? Declaring something a right doesn't magically produce it. It merely disguises the obligation you're imposing on someone else.
La vivienda es un derecho, no un negocio. Ser rentista no es un trabajo. Y de este barco no me baja absolutamente nadie
11
87
4
474
4,431
~Melissa~ retweeted
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you. I come from your future. In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream. Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them. The promise was protection. The result is stagnation. The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe. I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has. Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France? Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Je n'ai jamais Ă©tĂ© aussi optimiste. Pas malgrĂ© le chaos actuel, mais grĂące Ă  lui. Je vais vous expliquer pourquoi l'empire du mensonge construit par la gauche depuis cinquante ans va s'effondrer, et pourquoi ce n'est pas une opinion mais une question de physique. Tout commence avec un mouvement nĂ© sur X il y a quelques annĂ©es : l'effective accelerationism, ou e/acc. Au dĂ©part, c'est une idĂ©e presque thermodynamique. L'univers a une tendance de fond : la matiĂšre s'organise pour capter et dissiper l'Ă©nergie de plus en plus efficacement. Une cellule fait ça. Une forĂȘt fait ça. Une civilisation fait ça. Le marchĂ©, la technologie et le capital sont les formes les plus avancĂ©es de ce processus. Ce sont des machines Ă  transformer l'Ă©nergie en intelligence, en abondance, en complexitĂ©. La thĂšse e/acc est simple : il ne faut pas freiner cette dynamique, il faut l'embrasser. Plus d'Ă©nergie, plus de calcul, plus d'innovation, plus de croissance. Monter sur l'Ă©chelle de Kardashev au lieu de s'excuser d'exister. En face, il y a les « dĂ©cels » : ceux qui veulent ralentir, rĂ©guler, taxer, interdire, culpabiliser. Ceux qui voient le progrĂšs comme une menace Ă  contenir plutĂŽt qu'une force Ă  libĂ©rer. Mais il y a une dimension de l'accĂ©lĂ©ration dont presque personne ne parle. L'accĂ©lĂ©ration n'est pas seulement un moteur. C'est un filtre. Pensez Ă  n'importe quel organisme. Un corps humain en bonne santĂ© peut courir. Il accĂ©lĂšre, son cƓur pompe plus fort, ses muscles consomment plus d'oxygĂšne, et tout fonctionne parce que le systĂšme est bien conçu. Maintenant, prenez un corps malade. Des artĂšres bouchĂ©es, un cƓur fragile, des organes qui ne communiquent plus entre eux. Faites-le courir. Il ne va pas plus vite vers la santĂ©. Il va plus vite vers l'infarctus. L'accĂ©lĂ©ration ne corrige pas les dĂ©fauts d'un systĂšme. Elle les amplifie. Un systĂšme sain qui accĂ©lĂšre devient plus fort. Un systĂšme dysfonctionnel qui accĂ©lĂšre meurt plus vite. Et c'est exactement ce qui est en train d'arriver au projet que je vais appeler par son nom : le projet globalo-socialiste. Celui portĂ© par les dĂ©mocrates amĂ©ricains, par la technostructure de Bruxelles, par les entitĂ©s supranationales qui n'ont de comptes Ă  rendre Ă  personne, par un rĂ©seau d'ONG financĂ©es par l'argent public pour dicter la morale aux peuples qui les financent. Regardez ce que ce projet a produit. Des États obĂšses qui prĂ©lĂšvent plus de la moitiĂ© de la richesse produite et qui dĂ©livrent des services publics de plus en plus dĂ©gradĂ©s. Des Ă©coles qui n'apprennent plus Ă  lire mais qui apprennent Ă  culpabiliser. Des hĂŽpitaux Ă  bout de souffle malgrĂ© des budgets records. Une immigration massive sans aucune exigence d'assimilation, prĂ©sentĂ©e comme une chance par ceux qui n'en subissent jamais les consĂ©quences. Une dĂ©sindustrialisation organisĂ©e au nom d'une Ă©cologie punitive qui dĂ©localise la pollution en Chine et l'emploi avec. Des normes, des normes, et encore des normes, jusqu'Ă  ce qu'il devienne plus simple de crĂ©er une entreprise Ă  Austin qu'Ă  Lyon. Une justice qui excuse le coupable et soupçonne la victime. Une censure qui avance masquĂ©e sous le nom de « lutte contre la dĂ©sinformation ». Et une jeunesse Ă  qui l'on a expliquĂ© que son pays, son histoire et sa civilisation Ă©taient des crimes Ă  expier. Ce n'est pas un ensemble de bugs. C'est la conception elle-mĂȘme. Maintenant, changeons d'image. Voyez ce systĂšme comme un moteur. Un bon moteur, c'est de la prĂ©cision. Des piĂšces qui s'emboĂźtent, un minimum de frottements, une Ă©nergie qui se transforme en mouvement. Le marchĂ© libre, la propriĂ©tĂ©, la responsabilitĂ© individuelle, la monnaie saine : c'est ça, un moteur bien conçu. L'information circule par les prix, chaque erreur est sanctionnĂ©e, chaque bonne idĂ©e est rĂ©compensĂ©e. Le moteur socialiste, lui, est mal conçu dĂšs le dĂ©part. Il ne tourne pas sur la crĂ©ation de valeur mais sur sa redistribution. Il ne rĂ©compense pas la performance, il la taxe. Il ne laisse pas les erreurs mourir, il les subventionne. RĂ©sultat : ça frotte partout. Ça chauffe. Ça grince. Chaque piĂšce use la piĂšce d'Ă  cĂŽtĂ©. Et que font ceux qui pilotent ce moteur ? Au lieu de le reconcevoir, ils changent les piĂšces. En permanence. Une piĂšce cĂšde, on en remet une neuve. Encore une. Encore une. Ces piĂšces de rechange, vous les connaissez. Elles s'appellent la dette publique et la planche Ă  billets. La France a dĂ©passĂ© les 3 300 milliards d'euros de dette et n'a pas votĂ© un budget Ă  l'Ă©quilibre depuis le milieu des annĂ©es 70. Les États-Unis ont franchi les 37 000 milliards de dollars. Les banques centrales ont maintenu des taux Ă  zĂ©ro pendant des annĂ©es, imprimĂ© des montants que plus personne ne sait se reprĂ©senter, et quand l'inflation est arrivĂ©e, elles ont fait semblant d'ĂȘtre surprises. Milton Friedman l'avait pourtant dit il y a cinquante ans : l'inflation est toujours et partout un phĂ©nomĂšne monĂ©taire. Chaque crise, on rachĂšte du temps avec de l'argent qui n'existe pas. Chaque problĂšme structurel, on l'arrose de liquiditĂ©s pour masquer le bruit du moteur. Mais les frottements sont toujours lĂ . Ils s'accumulent. Et la facture des piĂšces de rechange finit par coĂ»ter plus cher que le moteur lui-mĂȘme : la charge de la dette devient l'un des premiers postes de dĂ©pense de l'État français. Pendant des dĂ©cennies, ce moteur mal conçu a pu tourner Ă  3 000 tours par minute. Lentement. Bruyamment. Mais il tournait. Le monde allait assez doucement pour que le bricolage permanent suffise Ă  masquer l'absurditĂ© de la conception. Et puis l'IA est arrivĂ©e. L'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'accĂ©lĂ©ration la plus brutale de l'histoire humaine. Ce qui prenait des annĂ©es prend des mois. Ce qui prenait des mois prend des jours. Des entreprises de dix personnes font ce que faisaient des entreprises de mille. Le capital, les talents et les idĂ©es se dĂ©placent Ă  la vitesse de la lumiĂšre vers les endroits oĂč ils sont bien traitĂ©s. L'IA vient de faire passer le moteur de 3 000 Ă  20 000 tours par minute. Posez-vous la question qu'un ingĂ©nieur se poserait. Que se passe-t-il quand on fait monter Ă  20 000 tours un moteur mal conçu, rafistolĂ© de partout, qui frotte Ă  chaque rotation ? Il explose. Pas parce que quelqu'un l'a sabotĂ©. Parce que la physique ne nĂ©gocie pas. Et c'est exactement ce que nous voyons en ce moment, sous nos yeux. L'insĂ©curitĂ© qui gagne des villes entiĂšres qui Ă©taient paisibles il y a vingt ans. Le conflit de Gaza importĂ© dans nos rues et instrumentalisĂ© par une gauche qui a troquĂ© l'ouvrier contre le clientĂ©lisme communautaire. La misĂšre qui revient dans un pays qui a pourtant un des taux de dĂ©pense publique les plus Ă©levĂ©s au monde. Des classes moyennes qui travaillent et n'arrivent plus Ă  se loger. Une France fracturĂ©e, oĂč l'on parle dĂ©sormais Ă  voix haute de risque de guerre civile. Ce ne sont pas des accidents. Ce ne sont pas des « crises » successives sans lien entre elles. Ce sont les piĂšces du moteur qui commencent Ă  voler. C'est la consĂ©quence logique de cinquante ans de socialisme international : un systĂšme qui a dĂ©truit la responsabilitĂ©, la frontiĂšre, la monnaie, l'Ă©cole et la fiertĂ©, et qui dĂ©couvre qu'Ă  haute vitesse, tout ce qui a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©truit ne peut plus ĂȘtre compensĂ© par une ligne de dette supplĂ©mentaire. Et c'est lĂ  que je deviens profondĂ©ment optimiste. Parce qu'une fois qu'on a compris ça, on comprend aussi que leur projet a une date de fin. Pas une date politique. Une date physique. Un systĂšme qui consomme plus qu'il ne produit, qui punit ceux qui crĂ©ent et rĂ©compense ceux qui dĂ©truisent, qui finance son prĂ©sent en hypothĂ©quant l'avenir de ses enfants, ne peut pas durer indĂ©finiment. Il n'est pas soutenable par construction. L'IA ne fait qu'avancer l'Ă©chĂ©ance. Le mensonge a besoin de lenteur pour survivre. Il a besoin que les consĂ©quences arrivent assez tard pour qu'on puisse accuser quelqu'un d'autre. Dans un monde Ă  20 000 tours, les consĂ©quences arrivent immĂ©diatement. Le mensonge n'a plus le temps de se cacher. Alors, que faire quand le moteur explose ? On en construit un nouveau. Et cette fois, on le conçoit correctement. Écoutez Elon Musk. Un homme qui a reconstruit l'industrie spatiale, la voiture Ă©lectrique et l'infrastructure satellite en partant d'un principe simple : revenir aux premiers principes. Ne pas demander « comment on a toujours fait », mais « qu'est-ce qui est physiquement vrai ». C'est exactement ce dont nos États ont besoin : arrĂȘter de rafistoler et repartir de la base. Écoutez Javier Milei. Un homme dont tout le monde se moquait, arrivĂ© Ă  la tĂȘte d'un pays ravagĂ© par un siĂšcle de pĂ©ronisme, et qui a pris la tronçonneuse au sens propre. MinistĂšres supprimĂ©s, dĂ©penses coupĂ©es, inflation Ă©crasĂ©e, excĂ©dent budgĂ©taire retrouvĂ©. Il a prouvĂ© une chose que la gauche jurait impossible : on peut dĂ©monter le moteur socialiste et le peuple peut le soutenir. Écoutez Milton Friedman. Relisez-le. Tout Ă©tait dĂ©jĂ  lĂ . La monnaie, la libertĂ© de choisir, la responsabilitĂ©, les effets pervers de l'intervention publique. Il disait que si l'on confiait le Sahara au gouvernement fĂ©dĂ©ral, il y aurait pĂ©nurie de sable en cinq ans. On a ri. On a confiĂ© le sable. On a eu la pĂ©nurie. Revenez Ă  une hiĂ©rarchie et au respect du beau. Une civilisation ne tient pas que sur des chiffres. Elle tient sur l'idĂ©e qu'il existe des choses supĂ©rieures Ă  d'autres. Que l'excellence vaut mieux que la mĂ©diocritĂ©. Que le mĂ©rite compte. Qu'une cathĂ©drale est plus belle qu'un parking. Que transmettre est un devoir et pas une oppression. Le relativisme a Ă©tĂ© l'arme culturelle de ce projet. Le retour du beau, du vrai et de l'exigence en sera l'antidote. Et enfin, faites le Nuremberg du communisme. Le nazisme a Ă©tĂ© jugĂ©, documentĂ©, enseignĂ©, et il est devenu moralement indĂ©fendable. Le communisme, avec ses dizaines de millions de morts, ses goulags, ses famines organisĂ©es et ses peuples rĂ©duits en esclavage, n'a jamais eu ce procĂšs. On peut encore porter un t-shirt du Che dans une universitĂ© sans que personne ne cille. Tant que ce procĂšs historique et moral n'aura pas eu lieu, l'idĂ©ologie continuera de muter et de revenir sous de nouveaux noms. Il faut nommer les crimes, les enseigner, honorer les victimes, et rendre cette idĂ©ologie aussi infrĂ©quentable que celle qu'elle prĂ©tendait combattre. Le monde qui vient sera plus rapide, plus exigeant et plus impitoyable avec les systĂšmes mal conçus. C'est une terrible nouvelle pour ceux qui ont vĂ©cu du mensonge. Et c'est la meilleure nouvelle de notre gĂ©nĂ©ration pour tous ceux qui veulent construire. Le moteur va exploser. À nous de dessiner le suivant.
2,849
33,542
2,642
91,987
3,473,223
“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance...” - John Philpot Curran
1
21
557
Socialism, the shortened definition: “Make someone else do it.” And if they refuse, make the government force them.
15
49
4
252
2,338
“No matter how worthy the cause, it is robbery, theft, and injustice to confiscate the property of one person and give it to another to whom it does not belong.” — Walter Williams
9
258
15
780
7,949