Dozens of experts were asked to look into the science behind claims that meat eating causes disease and is harmful for the planet in a special issue of a journal called Animal Frontiers.  They have warned against a widespread societal push towards plant-based diets, arguing that poorer communities with low meat intake often suffer from stunting, wasting and anemia driven by a lack of vital nutrients and protein.

Thousands of scientists across the globe have also joined The Dublin Declaration, a group stating that livestock farming is too important to society to “become the victim of zealotry.”  They say that many of the negative claims about meat in our diet are simply not true. 

The Dublin Declaration group has published a statement allowing global signatories to join them in defending meat supported diets and contradicting common claims made by establishment institutions against livestock in agriculture. In particular, the scientists stress that meats provide vitamin B12 intake in human diets, play a major role in supplying retinol, omega-3 fatty acids and minerals such as iron and zinc, as well as important compounds for metabolism, such as taurine and creatine.  There is no vegan equivalent that fills these nutritional needs and a number of supplements are often required to keep them healthy. 

Scientists note that only well resourced (wealthier) people have the means to abandon meat in their diets and consume vegetables and carbs alone.  In other words, veganism is a first world ideology that is impractical for the majority of global population.  Even India, a developing nation often cited by anti-meat activists for it’s religious stance against killing animals, still has a 70% meat eating population. 

Previous studies (such as the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factor Study, published in The Lancet in 2020) warning against the “dangers” of meat are also being debunked.  Dr Alice Stanton, of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, one of the authors of a review of anti-meat claims, notes:

“The peer-reviewed evidence published reaffirms that [the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Risk Factors Report] which claimed that consumption of even tiny amounts of red meat harms health is fatally scientifically flawed…In fact, removing fresh meat and dairy from diets would harm human health. Women, children, the elderly and low income would be particularly negatively impacted.”

The anti-meat movement most likely finds its roots in astroturf.  Pro-vegan research tends to be funded by globalist institutions like the UN and the WEF, which have made clear that they want meat to become a “rare treat” rather than a dietary staple. 

This would be accomplished by a number of means, but a primary tool would be emissions taxation on farmers and agricultural products leading to artificially higher prices.  The UN hopes to ward much of the populace away from meat by making it unaffordable.  This is similar to the tactic they have recommended for pushing people away from “fossil fuels.”  If price is a problem and you still need protein, the globalists suggest fake meat (which is more expensive than real meat for now), or shifting to a third world diet and eating bugs instead.

The UN says its goal is to enforce a completely meat and dairy free human diet by 2050 in order to “fight climate change,” though they have been caught in the past greatly exaggerating how much livestock methane contributes to overall emissions. Even if you believe that there is a real climate crisis (despite there being no evidence to support the hype), there is still the fact that livestock emissions are a negligible portion of supposed “greenhouse gases.”  You wouldn’t be accomplishing anything to save the planet by becoming vegan.     

When climate hysteria is not effective, the same groups try to frighten people away from meat using fraudulent health concerns.  We have seen this lately in the meat issue as well as with natural gas appliances.  Baseless health risk claims are promoted using the corporate media as an amplifier, and the evidence proving the claims wrong is never addressed.   

Without regular access to meat vast numbers of people may be dependent on manufactured supplements to stay healthy.  Much of these supplements are produced in countries overseas that may become hostile and cut off exports. Not to mention, governments could also control the supplies for their own citizens as leverage.  The price factor for foods would make sustaining the current population untenable, leading to either mass starvation or deliberate population reduction.       

Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,

Irish authorities are pushing forward a bill that will make it a crime to disseminate and possess content deemed to be hateful—a development Elon Musk warns is a threat to free speech in the country.

The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022 (pdf) seeks to “amend the law relating to the prohibition of incitement to violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of certain characteristics (referred to as protected characteristics) of the person or the group of persons and to provide for an offence of condoning, denying or grossly trivialising genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace.”

It aims at “combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.”

The bill classifies “race, skin colour, nationality, religion, national or ethnic origin, descent, gender, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, and disability” as protected characteristics.

Gender is “the gender of a person or the gender which a person expresses as the person’s preferred gender or with which the person identifies and includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female.”

The bill empowers Irish authorities to convict people criminally for alleged hate crimes. According to the bill, a person can be deemed guilty of an offense if the individual “(i) communicates material to the public or a section of the public, or (ii) behaves in a public place in a manner, that is likely to incite violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of their protected characteristics or any of those characteristics.”

“Massive attack on freedom of speech,” Musk said in an April 30 tweet responding to an organization called Free Speech Ireland, which criticized the Irish government for voting against “human rights and quite literally for thought crime legislation.”

An amendment to include the UN Convention on Human Rights protections on free speech into the hate speech bill was defeated. Another amendment to excuse the section allowing for prosecuting individuals possessing offensive material without communicating it was also defeated.

This means that Irish authorities can arrest a person for simply possessing material deemed as potentially inciting hatred if disseminated.

A person deemed guilty of violating the bill’s provisions shall have to pay fines, face imprisonment for up to 12 months, or both.

Burden of Proof

The legislation also shifts the burden of proof onto the accused. During his April 26 speech at the lower house of the Irish legislature, Paul Murphy, an elected member for Dublin South-West, warned that Section 10 of the bill “creates the possibility of someone being criminalized purely for having material which is hateful, without that material being communicated to the public.”

“That’s a problem. That gets to the fundamental problem of this bill. That is the creation of a ‘thought crime.’”

“Subsection 3 states that where it is reasonable to assume that the material was not intended for personal use, the onus will be put on the accused to prove their own innocence by showing that the material that they prepared or even just material they possessed was never intended to be publicly communicated,” Murphy stated.

“Within Section 10, you have the creation of a thought crime. And then you have a dangerous reversal of the burden of proof, where the burden is now placed on the accused to overturn the presumption that the material was not intended for personal use. This is extremely problematic.”

Religious Issues

The constitution of Ireland protects freedom of religion, provided it adheres to public order and morality. Some fear that the new hate speech bill might harm religious freedoms.

For instance, priests may hold opinions on subjects like gender and sexual identity that can be seen as violating the new bill’s provisions, thereby putting them under threat of prosecution.

The country’s progressive government has pushed the bill. The legislation is currently in its second stage of the legislative approval process and needs to go through three more steps before being signed into law by the president.

A petition at Change.org run by Free Speech Ireland asking for no hate speech laws in the country warns that the legislation will “patently undermine the fundamental right of speech” in the nation.

“So-called Hate Speech laws are a savage hypocrisy: they would do more to divide communities in Ireland by highlighting that they are different and thus should be treated differently under the law.”

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

Beijing is fully aware the NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is the un-dissociable double of the U.S. war against its Belt and Road Initiative.

Imagine President Xi Jinping mustering undiluted Taoist patience to suffer through a phone call with that warmongering actor in a sweaty T-shirt in Kiev while attempting to teach him a few facts of life – complete with the promise of sending a high-level Chinese delegation to Ukraine to discuss “peace”.

There’s way more than meets the discerning eye obscured by this spun-to-death diplomatic “victory” – at least from the point of view of NATOstan.

The question is inevitable: what’s the point of this phone call? Very simple: just business.

The Beijing leadership is fully aware the NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is the un-dissociable double of an American direct war against the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Until recently, and since 2019, Beijing was the top trade partner for Kiev (14.4% of imports, 15.3% of exports). China essentially exported machinery, equipment, cars and chemical products, importing food products, metals and also some machinery.

Very few in the West know that Ukraine joined BRI way back in 2014, and a BRI trade and investment center was operating in Kiev since 2018. BRI projects include a 2017 drive to build the fourth line of the Kiev metro system as well as 4G installed by Huawei. Everything is stalled since 2022.

Noble Agri, a subsidiary of COFCO (China National Cereals, Oils and Foodstuffs Corporation), invested in a sunflower seed processing complex in Mariupol and the recently built Mykolaiv grain port terminal. The next step will necessarily feature cooperation between Donbass authorities and the Chinese when it comes to rebuilding their assets that may have been damaged during the war.

Beijing also tried to become heavily involved in the Ukraine defense sector and even buy Motor Sich; that was blocked by Kiev.

Watch that neon

So what we have in Ukraine, from the Chinese point of view, is a trade/investment cocktail of BRI, railways, military supplies, 4G and construction jobs. And then, the key vector: neon.

Roughly half of neon used in the production of semiconductors was supplied, until recently, by two Ukrainian companies; Ingas in Mariupol, and Cryoin, in Odessa. There’s no business going on since the start of the Special Military Operation (SMO). That directly affects the Chinese production of semiconductors. Bets can be made that the Hegemon is not exactly losing sleep over this predicament.

Ukraine does represent value for China as a BRI crossroads. The war is interrupting not only business but, in the bigger picture, one of the trade and connectivity corridors linking Western China to Eastern Europe. BRI conditions all key decisions in Beijing – as it is the overarching concept of Chinese foreign policy way into mid-century.

And that explains Xi’s phone call, debunking any NATOstan nonsense on China finally paying attention to the warmongering actor.

As relevant as BRI is the overarching bilateral relationship dictating Beijing’s geopolitics: the Russia-China comprehensive strategic partnership.

So let’s transition to the meeting of Defense Ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) earlier this week in Delhi.

The key meeting in India was between Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and his Chinese colleague Li Shangfu. Li was recently in Moscow, and was received by Putin in person for a special conversation. This time he invited Shoigu to visit Beijing, and that was promptly accepted.

Needless to add that every single player in the SCO and beyond, including nations that are for the moment just observers or dialogue partners as well as others itching to become full members, such as Saudi Arabia, paid very close attention to the Shoigu-Shangfu camaraderie.

When it comes to the profoundly strategic Central Asian “stans”, that represents the six feet under treatment for the Hegemon wishful thinking of using them in a Divide and Rule scheme pitting Russia against China.

Shoigu-Shangfu also sent a subtle message to SCO members India and Pakistan – stop bickering and in the case of Delhi, hedging your bets – and to full member (in 2023) Iran and near future member Saudi Arabia: here’s where’s it at, this the table that matters.

All of the above also points to the increasing interconnection between BRI and SCO, both under Russia-China leadership.

BRICS is essentially an economic club – complete with its own bank, the NDB – and focused on trade. It’s mostly about soft power. The SCO is focused on security. It’s about hard power. Together, these are the two key organizations that will be paving the multilateral way.

As for what will be left of Ukraine, it is already being bought by Western mega-players such as BlackRock, Cargill and Monsanto. Yet Beijing certainly does not count on being left high and dry. Stranger things have happened than a future rump Ukraine positioned as a functioning trade and connectivity BRI partner.

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.”

– Thomas Jefferson, 1789

What does it say about the state of our freedoms that there are now more pencil-pushing, bureaucratic (non-military) government agents armed with weapons than U.S. Marines?

Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles and LP gas cannons are the IRS, Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities.

Add in the Biden Administration’s plans to swell the ranks of the IRS by 87,000 new employees (some of whom will be authorized to use deadly force) and grow the nation’s police forces by 100,000 more cops, and you’ve got a nation in the throes of martial law.

We’re being frog-marched into tyranny at the end of a loaded gun.

Make that hundreds of thousands of loaded guns.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the number of federal agents armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment, authorized to make arrests, and trained in military tactics has nearly tripled over the past several decades.

As Adam Andrzejewski writes for Forbes, “the federal government has become one never-ending gun show.”

While Americans have to jump through an increasing number of hoops in order to own a gun, federal agencies have been placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets and military gear.

For example, the IRS has stockpiled 4,500 guns and five million rounds of ammunition in recent years, including 621 shotguns, 539 long-barrel rifles and 15 submachine guns.

The Veterans Administration purchased 11 million rounds of ammunition (equivalent to 2,800 rounds for each of their officers), along with camouflage uniforms, riot helmets and shields, specialized image enhancement devices and tactical lighting.

The Department of Health and Human Services acquired 4 million rounds of ammunition, in addition to 1,300 guns, including five submachine guns and 189 automatic firearms for its Office of Inspector General.

According to an in-depth report on “The Militarization of the U.S. Executive Agencies,” the Social Security Administration secured 800,000 rounds of ammunition for their special agents, as well as armor and guns.

The Environmental Protection Agency owns 600 guns. The Smithsonian now employs 620-armed “special agents.”

Even agencies such as Amtrak and NASA have their own SWAT teams.

Ask yourselves: why are government agencies being turned into military outposts?

What’s with the buildup of SWAT teams within non-security-related federal agencies? Even the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department have their own SWAT teams. Most of those officers are under the command of either the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Justice.

Why does the Department of Agriculture need .40 caliber semiautomatic submachine guns and hollow point bullets? For that matter, why do its agents need ballistic vests and body armor?

For that matter, why do IRS agents need AR-15 rifles?

Why do local police need armored personnel carriers with gun ports, compact submachine guns with 30-round magazines, precision battlefield sniper rifles, and military-grade assault-style rifles and carbines?

Why is the federal government distributing obscene amounts of military equipment, weapons and ammunition to police departments around the country?

Why is the military partnering with local police to conduct training drills around the country? And what exactly are they training for? The public has been disallowed from obtaining any information about the purpose of these realistic urban training drills, other than that they might be loud and to not be alarmed.

We should be alarmed.

As James Madison warned, “We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.”

Unfortunately, we’re long past the first experiment on our freedoms, and merely taking alarm over this build-up of military might will no longer suffice.

Nothing about this de facto army of bureaucratic, administrative, non-military, paper-pushing, non-traditional law enforcement agencies is necessary for national security.

Moreover, while these weaponized, militarized, civilian forces which are armed with military-style guns, ammunition and equipment; trained in military tactics; and authorized to make arrests and use deadly force—may look and act like the military, they are not the military.

Rather, they are foot soldiers of the police state’s standing army, and they are growing in number at an alarming rate.

This standing army—a.k.a. a national police force—vested with the power to completely disregard the Constitution and rule by force is exactly what America’s founders feared, and its danger cannot be overstated or ignored.

This is exactly what martial law looks like—when a government disregards constitutional freedoms and imposes its will through military force, only this is martial law without any government body having to declare it: Battlefield tactics. Militarized police. Riot and camouflage gear. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Drones. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Concussion grenades. Intimidation tactics. Brute force. Laws conveniently discarded when it suits the government’s purpose.

The militarization of America’s police forces in recent decades, which has gone hand in hand with the militarization of America’s bureaucratic agencies, has merely sped up the timeline by which the nation is transformed into an authoritarian regime.

Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of administrative, police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military with little to no regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.

This quasi-state of martial law has been helped along by government policies and court rulings that have made it easier for the police to shoot unarmed citizens, for law enforcement agencies to seize cash and other valuable private property under the guise of asset forfeiture, for military weapons and tactics to be deployed on American soil, for government agencies to carry out round-the-clock surveillance, for legislatures to render otherwise lawful activities as extremist if they appear to be anti-government, for profit-driven private prisons to lock up greater numbers of Americans, for homes to be raided and searched under the pretext of national security, for American citizens to be labeled terrorists and stripped of their rights merely on the say-so of a government bureaucrat, and for pre-crime tactics to be adopted nationwide that strip Americans of the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty and creates a suspect society in which we are all guilty until proven otherwise.

Don’t delude yourself into believing that this thinly-veiled exercise in martial law is anything other than an attempt to bulldoze what remains of the Constitution and reinforce the iron-fisted rule of the police state.

This is no longer about partisan politics or civil unrest or even authoritarian impulses.

This is a turning point.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are sliding fast down a slippery slope to a Constitution-free America.

If we are to have any hope of salvaging what’s left of our battered freedoms, we’d do well to start by disarming the IRS and the rest of the federal and state bureaucratic agencies, de-militarizing domestic police forces, and dismantling the police state’s standing army.

A team of artificial intelligence engineers equipped a Boston Dynamics robot dog with OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Text-to-Speech voice, creating what could be a real-life Skynet-like robot. 

In a recent video posted to Twitter, machine learning engineer Santiago Valdarrama showed how the robo-dog can interact with humans via a voice interface faster than control panels and reports.

“These robots run automated missions every day,” Valdarrama said in a Twitter thread, noting that each mission could be “miles-long, hard-to-understand configuration files” and “only technical people can handle them.” When paired with ChatGPT and Google’s Text-to-Speech voice, a user can ask simple questions to the robot about “configuration files and the mission results.” 

“We can now ask the robots about past and future missions and get an answer in real time. ChatGPT interprets the question, parses the files, and formulates the answer,” he said. 

The ChatGPT brain means anyone can talk to the robo-dog. 

We integrated ChatGPT with our robots.

We had a ton of fun building this!

Read on for the details: pic.twitter.com/DRC2AOF0eU

— Santiago (@svpino) April 25, 2023

In the short term, integrating a ChatGPT brain into robots may appear harmless. However, there’s a dark risk to artificial intelligence, giving rise to intelligent robots in a Skynet-like scenario. 

Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

Last September– a bit more than seven months ago– my father died. Technically he was my step-father, but he was every bit my dad, and I loved him. The loss was hard.

We didn’t do a memorial service right away, though. My mother understandably just wasn’t in the right frame of mind. So we waited… until last weekend, and held the memorial service at the George Bush Presidential Center at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

It was a good thing my mother booked such a large venue; the memorial service was incredibly well attended, and nearly 500 people came to pay their respects.

After the service was over, I wanted to get my mind off the day’s events, so some friends and I popped upstairs to check out the Bush presidential museum… which was currently presenting an exhibit aptly named “Freedom Matters”.

I couldn’t agree more.

Access to the museum, however, is tightly controlled. And you can only enter after going through an airport-style security checkpoint. You know the drill– empty your pockets, take off your clothes, and submit to an angry authority who treats you like you’ve just been booked at the county jail.

My friend Jim was lucky enough to receive extra screening; after setting off the metal detector, he was pulled aside and assumed the “I surrender” pose while gruff security personnel waved a magnetic wand near his genitals.

Curiously the security wand kept going off, prompting the increasingly irate guard to demand “what is this? What’s in here?”

I couldn’t help myself and shouted, “It’s his dignity!” Apparently Jim forgot to remove it before going through security.

The irony seemed to be lost on the guards, whose brusque treatment of museum visitors was taking place directly in front of an exhibit literally called “Freedom Matters”.

At the front of the exhibit was a large banner– I snapped a photo– defining freedom, according to a former Soviet dissident:

“Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it’s a fear society.”

I thought about this quote for a few moments, glanced back at the security guards wanding another unlucky visitor, and quickly realized– based on this definition– that the US is quickly becoming a fear society.

You can no longer freely express views without fear of reprisal anymore– especially if those views conflict with the radical woke left.

Personal opinions can easily be viewed as hate speech, misinformation, violence, etc. And we’ve all seen too many instances of people’s lives being ruined by cancel culture. But I’ll come back to this.

After wandering around the museum for a while and enjoying some jokes with my friends, I finally returned home to the AirBnb I’m renting with my family, very close to where I grew up in the Dallas area.

It’s the quintessential American suburb: clean, quiet, safe, and stable. The house where I’m staying is at the end of a picturesque tree-lined cul-de-sac, and on the other end of the street is a large park where small children were playing organized sports in the afternoon.

Parents chatted with each other on the playground while their kids bounced around the jungle gym. Retirees were out walking their dogs. Even the postman drove by and greeted some of the residents by name. Everyone was happy… and it was basically perfect.

This isn’t the famous ‘American Dream’. It’s not a dream. This is real life as it’s supposed to be… the pinnacle of civilization, the product of more than two centuries of hard work and responsibility. It is the American Reality.

That’s why it’s so frustrating to watch the people in charge dismantle it. Brick by brick, neighborhood by neighborhood, they’ve been chipping away at this vast, enviable middle class prosperity, ripping it away in front of our very eyes.

They’ve encouraged “mostly peaceful” violence and caused an alarming rise in crime as a result of their soft “criminal first” policies.

They’ve sent the cost of living to record highs, and yet have no understanding how their spending practices could have possibly contributed to inflation. They’ve expanded the national debt to a record high $31.5 trillion and plan to keep overspending tax revenue by trillions of dollars every year.

They’ve worked hard to re-engineer childhood education (and have succeeded in many school districts). Biology has been rewritten to conform to new woke ethics. Math is racist. And parents who complain about the decline in educational standards are threatened by the federal government.

The most comical part of this suffering is the abject political dysfunction that’s on display every single day of our lives.

Consider that, amid deadly and toxic train derailments, airplanes around the country that have been grounded, total chaos at the national seaports, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s priority right now is ensuring that Ford and General Motors use female crash test dummies.

It’s so ridiculous it almost sounds made up. And yet it’s completely true.

Or consider that the Treasury Department is now weeks away from defaulting on the national debt, once again, having reached its statutory debt limit. Congress is required to pass a law to raise the debt ceiling.

Yet the President of the United States refuses to negotiate a single penny in spending cuts in order to reach a compromise with the House of Representatives. Not a penny.

Simultaneously the guy was shown on video recently unable to remember how many grandchildren he has, or even the fact that he had recently returned from a trip to Ireland.

These examples of extreme incompetence never end. It’s so aggravating. Even terrifying.

That’s why I write so much about taking simple, sensible steps to reclaim control.

For example, if you think Pete Buttigieg is doing a great job as Transportation Secretary, then by all means, please continue to overpay your taxes and give him as much of your money as possible.

If, on the other hand, you recognize that he is demonstrably incompetent, completely unqualified to be Transportation Secretary, and was only given the position because he checks a diversity box (and agreed to endorse candidate Biden in 2020) then you might want to consider the multitude of completely legal ways to reduce your tax bill… and stop giving Pete so much money to waste.

It’s perfectly normal to feel angry or disgusted with America’s terrible leadership. But it’s a lot more effective to channel some of that energy into reducing their impact on your life.

There absolutely are ways to reduce your tax bill, to mitigate the effects of inflation, to still make phenomenal investments, to fund your retirement, and to ensure that you’re in a position of strength no matter how destructive they become.

There’s no downside in doing this. If this decline reverses and America starts to dig its way out of this hole, you won’t be worse off for putting yourself in a stronger position.

And that is actually still a possibility. This country has so much potential upside from its entrepreneurial brilliance, talented workforce, immense resource wealth, and more. That’s why it’s so bewildering to see how badly the people in charge are screwing it up.

At the moment, though, it’s difficult to see any real change on the horizon. As President Biden said in his re-election announcement, he wants to “finish the job”. By that I presume he means completely destroying the country.

This is nothing new; history is full of superpowers who eradicate themselves from within. They lay waste to the very ideals that made them strong and prosperous to begin with, they create divisions and disunity, and they subject themselves to horrendous, weak leadership.

But it’s one thing to understand the decline of empires and civilizations through the lens of history. It’s quite another to watch it happen from your living room window.

*  *  *

If you can see what is happening, and where this is all going, you understand why it is so important to have a Plan B. That’s why we published our 31-page, fully updated Perfect Plan B Guide, which you can download here.

The only reason to vote for Biden?  He’s not Trump.  This is the sentiment repeated across America as millions of Democrats say they would rather opt out of the Biden train and find a different candidate by 2024.  Of course, this was the same view many leftists vocalized in 2020, but they voted for him anyway.  

Whether or not you believe that federal elections matter in the slightest, it’s important to point out that Biden is perhaps one of the least liked presidents in recent memory, and one that sparks zero enthusiasm from his political base.  Despite an increasing woke fanaticism among leftists in terms of ideology and Biden doing everything in his power to push their agenda, a majority of Democrat voters (52%) still do not want Biden to run for office again next year.

It appears that the embarrassment is becoming too much for them…

Voters seem to be excited about Joe Biden running again

pic.twitter.com/idqVOPm6S9

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 2, 2023

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has warned that the employment landscape will change drastically over the next five years amid increasingly widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI), the transition to green energy, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards, and slower economic growth.

According to WEF’s “The Future of Jobs Report 2023,” roughly 23 percent of jobs are expected to change by 2027, with around 69 million new jobs to be created and 83 million eliminated, resulting in a decrease of 14 million jobs, or 2 percent of current employment.

The report (pdf) surveyed 803 companies collectively employing more than 11.3 million workers in 27 industry clusters and 45 economies from across the globe, on macro and technology trends and their impact on jobs and skills, as well as the “workforce transformation strategies” that businesses plan to implement between now and 2027.

It found that clerical or secretarial roles, including bank tellers, cashiers and ticket clerks, data entry clerks, postal service clerks, and administrative and executive secretaries will likely see the fastest decline in roles over the next five years relative to their size today, with roughly 26 million fewer jobs by 2027.

Meanwhile, certain tech jobs, including those focused on AI and machine learning, sustainability specialists, business intelligence analysts, information security specialists, and fintech engineers, are expected to see an increase in employment.

Overall, the biggest job growth will likely be seen across the fields of education (10 percent, leading to 3 million additional jobs), agriculture (30 percent, or 3 million additional jobs), and digital commerce and trade (4 million additional jobs), according to the report.

Renewable Energy, ESG Pushing Job Changes

The WEF cites trends such as the transition to renewable energy, ESG standards—which are used by companies in the investment decision-making process to measure sustainable and ethical impacts—advancing technology adoption, and localization of supply chains as the “leading drivers of job growth,” while economic challenges such as ongoing high inflation, slower economic growth, and supply shortages pose “the greatest threat” to job creation.

“The largest job creation and destruction effects come from environmental, technology, and economic trends. Among the macro trends listed, businesses predict the strongest net job-creation effect to be driven by investments that facilitate the green transition of businesses, the broader application of ESG standards, and supply chains becoming more localized, albeit with job growth offset by partial job displacement in each case,” the report states.

U.S. Republican lawmakers have repeatedly warned that companies embracing ESG standards risk slashing investment returns and hampering economic growth, which could have ripple effects across the economy.

“Climate change adaptation and the demographic dividend in developing and emerging economies also rate high as net job creators,” the WEF report adds. “Technological advancement through increased adoption of new and frontier technologies and increased digital access are expected to drive job growth in more than half of surveyed companies, offset by expected job displacement in one-fifth of companies,” it continues.

The report also cites the increasing cost of living for consumers as another factor that will likely pose the greatest threat to the job market in the next five years and will significantly displace jobs.

Firms ‘Need to Be Ready for the Disruptions Ahead’

Elsewhere, the WEF found that the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, increased geopolitical divisions, and demographic dividends in developing and emerging economies ranked lower as drivers of business evolution by respondents.

The latest report comes shortly after Goldman Sachs economists forecast two-thirds of occupations across America could be partially automated by AI, which has exploded in use in recent years, despite concerns over its potential risks to society and humanity.

However, economists also noted that its use in both business and society could lead to an almost $7 trillion increase in global GDP owing to increased productivity and manufacturing, among other factors.

According to the WEF report, nearly 75 percent of companies surveyed plan to adopt AI, big data, and cloud computing within the next five years, which around 50 percent of firms believe will create job growth and 25 percent expect will lead to job losses.

Elsewhere, the report found that organizations estimate roughly 34 percent of all business-related tasks are currently performed by machines, with the remaining 66 percent performed by humans.

“The latest findings in the Future of Jobs Report renew calls for action from all labor market stakeholders,” said Sander van ‘t Noordende, CEO of the human resource consulting firm, Randstad.

“Acceleration in digitalization, AI, and automation are creating tremendous opportunities for the global workforce, but employers, governments, and other organizations need to be ready for the disruptions ahead. By collectively offering greater skilling resources, more efficiently connecting talent to jobs, and advocating for a well-regulated labor market, we can protect and prepare workers for a more specialized and equitable future of work,” he added.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Cities governed by Democrat mayors have seen the largest increases in homicide rates over the past year as well as registered the highest homicide rate per capita in Q1 out of 45 cities, according to a new report.

Homicide rates in 45 of the most populated American cities rose by approximately 10 percent on average between Q1, 2021 and Q1, 2023, and continue to rise, according to an April 26 report by WalletHub. Blue cities were found to have a higher increase in homicide rates compared to red cities. The report designated a city as red or blue based on the mayor’s political affiliation.

The top five cities that saw the greatest increase in per capita homicide are Richmond, Virginia; Memphis, Tennessee; Durham, North Carolina; Garland, Texas; and Washington, D.C.

Except for Garland, where Mayor Scott LeMay is a Republican, the remaining four cities have mayors who are affiliated with the Democratic Party.

The highest homicide rate per capita in the first quarter of 2023 was in Memphis at 14.19 per 100,000 residents. New Orleans, Louisiana, came in second at 12.76, followed by Baltimore, Maryland, with 10.47, St. Louis, Missouri, with 9.91, and Detroit, Michigan, with 8.52.

Excluding St. Louis, the other four cities have mayors affiliated with the Democratic Party. The mayor of St. Louis, Tishaura Jones, was a former Democrat member of the Missouri House of Representatives.

Political Reason Behind Spiking Homicides

Gregg W. Etter, a professor at the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Central Missouri, blamed the tendency of politicians to seek “simplistic, one-size-fits-all solutions to complex problems” as a reason behind the spike in homicides across the nation.

Politicians offer such solutions to gain favor with political interest groups during elections, he pointed out. For instance, when faced with the issue of police using force in isolated instances, such politicians might support defunding the police rather than dealing with problematic officers.

This ends up resulting in a less-effective police force, higher response times, lower morale among officers, and an “increasing unwillingness” to engage in proactive policing, he said.

“This has left many police forces in a strictly reactive mode, only responding to crimes that have already occurred. In addition, no-cash bail rulings have put many dangerous criminals back onto the streets even though they are arrested several times for violent crimes,” Etter said.

“In cities where these two things are happening, the crime rate has spiked. You have less police officers and more dangerous criminals at large.”

Countering the rising homicide trend will require boosting police funding and improved police training to avoid some of the problems resulting from the use of force, he added.

Read more here…