bastiat.mises.orgPower & Market | Mises Institute

Power & Market | Mises Institute Skip to main content Toggle navigation Blog Mises Wire Books Podcast Video Events Beginners Graduate Program Ver en Español Stay Connected Mises Store GO SUPPORT MISES JOIN OR RENEW TODAY SUPPORT MISES JOIN OR RENEW TODAY Power & Market The American Right is the New Target of Washington's "War on Terror" Comments for The American Right is the New Target of Washington's "War on Terror" Print The American Right is the New Target of Washington's "War on Terror" Big Government Politics Lee esto en Español The American Right is the New Target of Washington's "War on Terror" 04/28/2021 Tho Bishop The security walls around the US Capitol may be removed, but the federal response to the January 6 protests has only just begun. The Democrats in Washington are determined to treat the incident as on par with the events of September 11, which may explain a troubling report about the... The security walls around the US Capitol may be removed, but the federal response to the January 6 protests has only just begun. The Democrats in Washington are determined to treat the incident as on par with the events of September 11 , which may explain a troubling report about the potential use of the famed No Fly List. Yesterday Nick Fuentes, a right-wing social media pundit who attended the January 6 protests in the capital, alleged that he has been placed on the federal no-fly list, preventing him from traveling to Florida for a political rally. While Mr. Fuentes shared on social media audio of an airline employee suggesting that his flying restriction did come from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), later that night Tucker Carlson informed his audience that his staff could neither confirm nor deny the report. While critics pointed to previous social media posts which documented his being removed from a plane for failing to comply with mask policies, Fuentes has noted that he had no problem flying to Washington in January. It is unclear whether federal authorities will be in any rush to clarify the situation, but there is no reason not to assume that federal authorities would attempt to use this war on terror tool against political opponents. From its inception, what originally began as sixteen names federal authorities had connected to potential future terrorist attacks quickly grew to over 1 million . As is the case with other surveillance tools handed over to the deep state, there is very little oversight or due process involved in how federal authorities handle potential “terrorist threats.” Since January there has been a concerted effort by Democrat leaders, former deep state officials , and America’s most despicable neoconservatives to push the Biden administration to utilize the power of the federal government against the supporters of Donald Trump. While the incidents at the Capitol on January 6 are used to justify these calls, the weaponization of federal power against political opponents goes back almost as long as the federal government itself . In more recent years, President Biden’s previous service in the White House saw a Democrat administration that used both the IRS and Department of Homeland Security to target conservatives. Another reason to expect escalation from the Biden administration against vocal figures like Fuentes is the unique critique of the current regime from the right. The majority of Republican voters do not simply oppose President Biden due to politics, but flatly reject his democratic legitimacy . As Murray Rothbard explained , it is precisely this sort of attack that the state fears most: The increasing use of scientific jargon has permitted the State's intellectuals to weave obscurantist apologia for State rule that would have only met with derision by the populace of a simpler age. A robber who justified his theft by saying that he really helped his victims, by his spending giving a boost to retail trade, would find few converts; but when this theory is clothed in Keynesian equations and impressive references to the "multiplier effect," it unfortunately carries more conviction. And so the assault on common sense proceeds, each age performing the task in its own ways. Thus, ideological support being vital to the State, it must unceasingly try to impress the public with its "legitimacy," to distinguish its activities from those of mere brigands…. The gravest crimes in the State's lexicon are almost invariably not invasions of private person or property, but dangers to its own contentment, for example, treason, desertion of a soldier to the enemy, failure to register for the draft, subversion and subversive conspiracy, assassination of rulers and such economic crimes against the State as counterfeiting its money or evasion of its income tax. Or compare the degree of zeal devoted to pursuing the man who assaults a policeman, with the attention that the State pays to the assault of an ordinary citizen. Yet, curiously, the State's openly assigned priority to its own defense against the public strikes few people as inconsistent with its presumed raison d'être. This perspective explains the disproportionate treatment that mostly peaceful protesters at the Capitol in January have received in contrast to those arrested during riots in American cities throughout the past year. The state will always treat those who seriously threaten its perceived legitimacy with greater zeal than those guilty of simply destroying the livelihoods of its citizens. This also highlights the self-defeating nature of the modern American conservative movement . For decades now, the same political party that often gives lip service to “federalism” has often been the party directly responsible for the growth of federal power. As noted earlier, it took exactly one administration before the Department of Homeland Security, created by the Bush administration, began to target the very voters who elected him to office. It was just two election cycles before the PATRIOT Act was used to target a Republican presidential campaign. The biggest question that now lies in American politics is whether conservatives are capable of learning from these examples. If the American right is capable of fully absorbing the reality that the greatest threat to their lives, liberty, and prosperity lies domestically—and not abroad—perhaps there is potential for a political rollback of the American empire. If not, American conservatives will come to understand how little constitutional rights truly mean in the face of a hostile state. Image source: WIKIMEDIA COMMONS Keep Reading Read Comments When commenting, please post a concise, civil, and informative comment. Full comment policy here "Transitory Inflation" Is the New Buzz Phrase at the Fed Comments for "Transitory Inflation" Is the New Buzz Phrase at the Fed Print "Transitory Inflation" Is the New Buzz Phrase at the Fed Money and Banking Lee esto en Español "Transitory Inflation" Is the New Buzz Phrase at the Fed 04/27/2021 Robert Aro With April’s Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) and Wednesday’s press conference to follow, we can anticipate some of the key words we will hear from the Fed. The first, gaining in popularity, is “transitory inflation,” or the idea some price increases are only temporary in nature… ... With April’s Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) and Wednesday’s press conference to follow, we can anticipate some of the key words we will hear from the Fed. The first, gaining in popularity, is “transitory inflation,” or the idea some price increases are only temporary in nature… Last month the word came up after the March FOMC meeting. On Friday CNBC wrote about the impermanence of inflation, anticipating: the Fed is expected to defend its policy of letting inflation run hot, while assuring markets it sees the pick-up in prices as only temporary. If inflation calculations show increases in the foreseeable future (or if more people become aware of their loss in purchasing p...