PChristo Local Coordinator Location: St. Louis, MO Last login: 11/15/09 RSS feed
Hi! I'm a Washington University student who lives on the Hill in St. Louis. I recently moved here from Springfield, IL, where i was a candidate for Delegate to the RNC for the 18th district. I also served as the District Ballot Access Coordinator. I would like to do whatever I can to help pro-liberty Republican candidates in Missouri. The articles posted in my blog were written for my school's newspaper.
We now have the video evidence, courtesy of our undercover civilian journalist, James O'keefe, of the university creating reasons to shut down our protest.
Washington University Rebuilding the Wall Event
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=28156
This needs to be brought to the attention of as many media locations as possible. It is quite apparent that the liberals on the university campus are telling these students that if we don't like something then nobody should be allowed to do it.
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn`t buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion
silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
Posted by PChristo on 11/10/09 Last updated 11/10/09
Today, commemorating the fall of the Berlin wall 20 years ago, Washington University Young Americans for Liberty (WUYAL) staged an event on campus that incited great controversy. In order to demonstrate the consequences of socialism, WUYAL crafted a Soviet-style gulag. The four walled, 10 foot high stockade was displayed prominently in the middle of campus for most of the day. Around the prison marched guards dressed in Soviet regalia and inside were abused prisoners who had resisted the socialist regime. Playing in the background was the Soviet National Anthem and a speech containing propaganda to which the prisoners were forced to listen.
Students had a wide range of responses to the event. Some were amused, some were inspired and began arguing the merits of capitalism with our soviet guards, some regarded the event as petty, and others remarked that it was offensive to Russian Americans. The gulag drew a local radio station, the campus newspaper, and many bloggers who interviewed participants and passers by. Flyers were distributed with information regarding the realities of socialism and the destruction which it has caused in the 20th century.
It was not long before for some professors decided they were unpleased with this sort of political protest. A few walked by and remarked that they would "make some calls" in order to ensure that we were shut down. About two hours into the event, a university official approached the guards and demanded that we provide him with our paperwork. After successfully demonstrating that we were authorized by event services, he marched off. An hour or so later came a police officer following up on a complaint about the event which she received. After being assured that our event was peaceful, she too left. Finally, the University brought out the big guns. They came with several armed officers and a university official and instructed us to take down our protest on account of the fact that our tools were not inspected prior to the erection of the gulag.
Despite the University's antagonism, our message got out. Though we were forced to take down our gulag, we were able to distribute hundreds of flyers and reveal the destructive side of socialism to many students. It is unfortunate that universities believe in free speech only for the far Left. Thankfully, we were able to elude their bureaucratic system long enough to make an effect.
I am happy that you were able to open some eyes. It is important that people learn the differences between socialism and capitalism and this seemed to make it easy for many to see the differences. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for the post and update! I'm sure the demonstration made a few people reconsider what it means to give up your personal freedom for the safety blanket of big government.
Where there is one voice
there will be two ears...
and a small light
in total darkness
is brilliant.
You would have hoped that at least one "authoritarian"
would have honored the date,
and had humor enough
to at least say it...
"...tear down that wall...."
Having recently been interested in propaganda, I watched the first 6 of 7 parts of WWII's "Why We Fight" films, directed (mostly) by Frank Capra, and funded by the U.S. Gov't.
Part 5 is "The Battle of Russia". In that film it is actually stated that the Russian people were free, and were thus able to mount their resistance to the Nazis. This was stated twice, I believe. I was pretty shocked.
I wish we would toss out "right" and "left" and go with "Big government-small freedom" and "Small government-big freedom."
A totalitarian state uses propaganda, secret police against its opponents, emphasizes the goals of the state over the individual, wants to control every aspect of life, maintains itself by force and lacks accountability to the people, and possesses a one-party political system led by a powerful dictator.
Of course if there are two parties with the same ideas, you really have a one-party system. And you have "100% voter turnout", probably.
Pchristo,
What a delight to read a report such as this with my morning coffee!
Keep on keepin' on! My grandchildren need fighters like you!
Celtic reefer, The way we toss out "left" and "right" and start using "big government-small freedoms" and "small government-big freedoms" is to just do it. Even the main stream media will start using it. It's a good idea. We give a whole lesson on freedom with the use of eight words.
It's that type of creative thinking that brought about the United States of America, and that's what will help bring about the re-establishment of our Republic.
Thank you,
Robert Walker
This is great news, I applied to Washington University for medical school this year and this will be another reason among a million that makes this school my top choice.
What a wonderful concept for bringing a reality to what has been solely a "conceptual" discussion. The University, on their own, added to the reality. You got great coverage and the comments on the update reporting confirm what a good job you did. You made your point to many people. Very well done, Wash U. YAL.
I'm looking forward to seeing the "more video to come" mentioned at the end of the FIRST THINGS article. Please keep up posted.
Haha... so a mock suppression of expression was replaced with a real suppression of expression? Only thing better would've been if the YAL had refused to shut it down and allowed themselves to be arrested. What better way to drive the point home than to have passing students witness pretend prisoners become actual prisoners and cops tearing down the structure.
So, after reading this post I did a quick Google news search for Washington University to see what kind of coverage it was getting, and was surprised to only hit the two links provided here.
So, I decided to shoot Glenn Beck an e-mail. I know lots of folks here aren't necessarily Fox News and/or Beck fans, but I figured if there was a national news network and/or personality that would give the shutdown of a demonstration critical of communism some coverage, them would be the ones. My e-mail's below if'n you're interested in sending along something similar.
to me@glennbeck.com, stu@glennbeck.com
date Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM
subject Washington University shuts down demonstration critical of communism
Glenn/Stu -
Please consider providing some coverage of this recent happening:
Basically, some students at Wash U set up a mock gulag to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the destruction of the Berlin Wall and to remind passers-by of the dangers of an oppressive government. After repeated attempts, the administration and LEOs finally shut the whole thing down.
It's the sort of thing that I think deserves at least a momentary national mention. If it doesn't come from Glenn Beck and/or Fox News, I don't know who it would come from.
As the nation considers much needed health care reform, we must seek to cure the disease of our health care system and avoid treating its symptoms. Most would agree that the main problem with healthcare in America is the exorbitant costs involved. The free market has consistently been proven to be the most efficient vehicle for providing consumers with desired goods at the lowest price. Many now claim that in healthcare, the free market has failed in this regard. It is important to recognize, however, that a free market in healthcare has not existed for some time, and for this reason, we continue to face costs which spiral out control.
Currently in the United States, we operate under a managed-care system, where government intrusion has touched nearly all aspects of medicine. One of the most devastating interventions has been in the insurance industry. For some time now, large insurance companies have used the government to push through regulations and subsidies that isolate their industry from the competition necessary to lower costs. Through code incentives that exempt employer-benefits from taxation, the insurance giants have managed to preserve the employer-based insurance system, and to prevent the possibility of individualized insurance policies, tailored to the needs of the buyer.
Also, through various regulations, the government has restricted the supply of healthcare to the populace. The government licensing system limits the number of medical schools, medical students, hospitals, and doctors available for use in the economy, and consequently, drives up the price. This fact is well known by the cartel that is the American Medical Association, which has been lobbying for trade protections since its inception in 1847.
There are solutions to these problems, but they do not involve increasing government involvement, for typically, when one is in a ditch, it is time to stop digging. A good start would be eliminating the employer-benefit exemption with a simultaneous revenue-neutral decrease in income taxes. This act would return insurance to its original intention, a backup plan for emergencies. Insurance was never intended to be used for everyday doctor visits, but rather for major, unexpected medical crises. Accompanying this change would be the institution of tax-free medical savings accounts where individuals could pay for every day medical expenses out-of-pocket. Introducing this sort of system would effectively lower the cost of healthcare because insurance companies and doctors would have to compete for customers instead of charging arbitrary figures to a price-insensitive population.
Another price lowering measure would be to legalize nurse-practitioners. Under our current system, it is illegal for nurses to perform certain medical services which they are completely capable of providing. In an effort to protect their trade, doctors have successfully lobbied for these restrictions, and kept the prices of these medical services unnecessarily high. A strong nurse-practitioner market would do wonders for providing healthcare for those less able to afford doctors.
These suggestions are just a few of the possibilities when it comes to getting government out of healthcare, and making care more affordable for all income classes. Unfortunately, the only suggestions from the Obama administration involve more government, more money funneled to insurance agencies, more regulation of the doctor-patient relationship, more mandates, more government committees, more false competition, and more interference with the natural allocation of goods and services that the free market provides. Obama's plan is not change at all, but more of the same nonsense that has infected our healthcare system for nearly a century. If this is all Obama has to offer, he can keep the change.
"If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered." This quote was uttered by none other than Thomas Jefferson in discussing the possibility of creating a national bank. Today, our less elegant politicians have made the Federal Reserve the most undiscussed institution in politics. This private bank, formed by an act of Congress in 1913, was created in order to manage the monetary policy of the United States. Since that time, they have usurped the power to create money and credit out of thin air. They have used this power to inflate our currency, making our debt more manageable and our government less restrained by silly things like prices.
There is a cost, however, to all of this easy money. The Federal Reserve, or as it is lovingly referred to, The Fed, is the engine of the business cycle. The Fed has the unique ability to set interest rates. This interest rate is the price at which money is loaned out to other banks. Typically interest rates are set by the market and reflect the amount of savings that exists in an economy. In this case, the interest rate is created by a complex mathematical formula that the wise men on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors thoroughly trust. Through artificially low interest rates, that is, interest rates that are lower than would be set by a free market, the economy is duped into believing there is more savings present than actually exists. Producers respond to this by beginning more projects than can be sustained by the economy, creating a boom. For example, look at the pre-2007 American housing market.
Another problem with artificially low interest rates is that they encourage banks to make more risky loans. With an interest rate set by the market, banks ration out borrowers that they do not believe can be trusted to repay the loan. Lowering the interest rate rations in these borrowers that would have, in a free market, been excluded. These borrowers then go out and purchase the homes built by the producers who believe the borrowers actually have enough savings to buy them.
This party is all very fun for a few years, but eventually the producers realize that there does not exist enough resources in the economy to sustain this inflated course. They begin to retract their projects and dismiss their workers. These workers then are no longer capable of paying their debts and begin to default on the loans they never should have been granted in the first place. The rest of the story involves 500 politicians shouting "too big to fail!" for several weeks until the American people give up and let them spend whatever they want.
Despite all this, no one ever questions the wise men of the Federal Reserve and their decisions regarding the central planning of our economy. In part, this is because we are not allowed to question them. The Federal Reserve Board of Governors meets in secret and does not release the supposed "verbatim" transcripts of the meetings until five years later. Under the U.S. Code The Fed is exempt from audit regarding "(1) transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization; (2) deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters (3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or (4) a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board of Governors and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to clauses (1)-(3) of this subsection," or, as I like to put it: everything.
Currently, in the House or Representatives, legislation has been introduced to remove these portions of the Code and audit the Federal Reserve. This legislation has 49 co-sponsors, yet still must pass several hurdles before becoming law. In the past months, The Fed has put several trillion dollars worth of taxpayer money at risk, yet they do not and will not tell us where it has gone. Anyone interested in the transparency of government should call their congressman immediately and encourage them to co-sponsor H.R. 1207. It's time we pay attention to that man behind the curtain.
By Philip Christofanelli, Freshman, Arts and Sciences
Two years ago when a relatively obscure congressman from Texas began his quest for the presidency, no one was more sure than he that little would come from it. Nine months later, this same congressman had won more straw polls than any other Republican candidate combined and had out-fundraised Mitt Romney. Ron Paul, a 72 year old doctor, watched with amazement as his quest to remind his party of its humble conservative origins became a grassroots revolution.
All over the country, his ardent supporters plastered home-made signs on every space available. With no direction from the proper campaign, thousands of Meetup groups were formed at the local level with a sort of spontaneous order conducive to the free market principles espoused by Dr. Paul. They even created a blimp to float along the East Coast, spreading the doctor's message of individualism and liberty. Despite their organization and creativity, however, Paul supporters were unable to convince enough of their Republican counterparts to propel the congressman to the presidency.
Dr. Paul swore to not let this organization go to waste, and responded by forming the Campaign for Liberty. The goal of Campaign for Liberty (or as it's called, C4L) is to bring the Republican Party back to its roots of fiscal conservatism, personal responsibility, individual liberty, sound money, and non-interventionist foreign policy. Within a month, C4L had 100,000 members. Many of these members are Precinct Leaders that organize supporters at the local levels to promote various causes and candidates that are friendly to the platform.
Here in St. Louis, C4L will be having its first Regional Conference. On Friday, March 27, the conference will begin with speeches by both Dr. Paul and Judge Andrew Napolitano at the Millennium Hotel. This event will be open to the public and free of cost. On Saturday, there will be a speech by author, Thomas Woods, accompanied by political activism training sessions. Students can access these sessions for $75, nearly half-price. Anyone interested in the conference is encouraged to visit www.campaignforliberty.com for details.
Having predicted the burst of the housing bubble as early as 2002, Dr. Paul makes for an interesting and insightful speaker that any student of politics or economics could benefit from hearing. His Campaign for Liberty will be a powerful force in the 2012 Republican Primaries and elections to come. We in St. Louis have the privilege of witnessing the birth of this organization, and that is a opportunity too good to miss.
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson
Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty. [?]
Local Coordinator
RSS feed
