Category Archives: Freedom

The Real Enemy Is Collectivism

Posted on by
29

Quote of the Day

Socialism kills, fast or slow. But on the way there, it makes people into dumb animals posturing and killing for no good reason.

The enemy is collectivism. The enemy is welfare. The enemy is turning humans into dependent zoo animals.

None of which will be solved by doing the same, but harder, and with different colors of skin as the all precious must be coddled.

All it will do is destroy the little that is still functioning. And make it harder to come back.

I beg you with tears in my eyes to believe civilization is worth saving. It is socialism that must be torn down. Please start working towards civilization.

Sarah H. Hoyt
June 15, 2026
The Color of Your Head – According To Hoyt

As I read it, the main point of her post is that there is a bunch of crap going on all over the world and that includes the U.S.A. A lot of people, of most any political persuasion, try to distill the problem down to skin color. That isn’t the real problem. To use an example of hers:

It’s not the skin color, you see. If it were Abigail Spanberger would be a firebrand for freedom and Clarence Thomas would be communist. Or if you prefer, replace those with Bernie Sanders and Thomas Sowell. The parallel stands. And it remains crazy.

I’ve said this before, judge people as individuals, not as a group. If you judge people as an immutable group you, in some sense of the word, are a collectivist. This will not yield optimal results. You will lose the ideas and influence of people like Colion Noir, Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, and Thomas Sowell.

Embrace the ideas and accept the contributions of the people that make meaningful advances in our fight against socialism in all its forms.

Demanding Discrimination

Posted on by
7

Quote of the Day

If we treat them equally, the result must be inequality… the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently.

F.A. Hayek
1960
The Constitution of Liberty( The Definitive Edition)[CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY][Paperback]: F.a.Hayek: Amazon.com: Books

On X, this quote has morphed into:

In order to make people equal, you have to treat them differently. If you treat people alike, the result is necessarily inequality.

More quotable and easier to understand, but not quite accurate.

Useful ammo when dealing with people demanding reparations, affirmative action, DEI, etc. The point being is that if they insist upon equality, they are demanding discrimination.

Do you want to move back to America?

Posted on by
9

Quote of the Day

The Democrat governor of Colorado signed into law one of the most restrictive gun bans ever adopted in the United States. The law bans the manufacturing and selling of semiautomatic firearms. This is on top of the liberal state’s existing ban on high-capacity magazines. That’s just crazy.

…

So, to all gun manufacturers in Colorado, my question to you is simple. Do you want to move back to America?

Governor Greg Gianforte @GovGianforte
Governor of Montana
Posted on X April 23, 2026

Good question. It is not just the gun industries either. Look at the “wealth taxes” and “millionaire taxes” and high regulations being implemented in the Democrat socialist run states. Business and people are leaving because the further you can distance yourself from such toxins the better your life, community, and future.

See also:

The Last Trillionaire Must Die

Posted on by
28

Quote of the Day

At 10:01 a.m. on June 12, 2026, Graham Platner, the freshly minted Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Maine, posted the following on X:

“Elon Musk just became the world’s first trillionaire.

Let’s make sure he’s also the last.”

No policy proposal. No discussion of tax brackets, carried-interest loopholes, or regulatory reform. Just a flat, public declaration that the existence of a single individual who has accumulated more wealth than any human in history is an intolerable moral emergency that must be prevented from ever happening again.

The sentence is not a critique of monopoly power, regulatory capture, or government favoritism. It is a death sentence pronounced on the category of human being who creates at scale.

It is the purest distillation of socialist psychology yet uttered by a major-party Senate candidate in the United States: Excellence has occurred. Make sure it never occurs again.

This is not an aberration. It is the logical endpoint of everything Platner has signaled since he entered the race.

…

The correct response to “Let’s make sure he’s also the last” is not a technocratic defense of marginal tax rates.

It is a full-throated defense of the right of human beings to achieve without limit and without apology. It is the recognition that the alternative to Musk-scale creation is not a more equitable distribution of existing goods.

It is a slower, poorer, grayer world in which the best anyone can hope for is to be slightly less mediocre than their neighbors.

Maine does not need another politician who resents the existence of greatness.

It needs a political culture that treats the creation of a trillion dollars of value as evidence of national vitality rather than moral emergency.

The man who can make reusable rockets routine, who can force the automotive industry to electrify faster than it wanted to, who can put global communications infrastructure in orbit while governments dither…this man is not the problem. He is the proof that the problem is elsewhere.

Graham Platner’s tweet is a window into the soul of a politics that has given up on creation and now contents itself with the management of decline.

The only question left is whether the voters of Maine…and eventually the country…will ratify that surrender or reject it with the same ferocity that built the civilization now under attack.

The first trillionaire exists.

The question is not whether we can prevent another. The question is whether we still have the will to produce one.

LHGrey
June 12, 2026
The Last Trillionaire Must Die: Graham Platner’s Envious Death Wish and the Socialist Pathology of Resentment

See also the post on X.

I wish I could write like her. I am left nearly speechless after I read anything she writes.

Eat the Low Hanging Fruit First

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Plaintiffs request the following relief from this Honorable Court:

a. Enter a declaratory judgment stating that the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5), 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a), and all other related laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, violate the right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution;

b. Enter a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants’ enforcement or application of the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5), 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a), and all other related laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, because it violates the right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution;

c. Award Plaintiffs the costs of this action and reasonable attorneys’ fees; and

d. Award Plaintiffs such other legal and equitable relief as is just and appropriate and
as necessary to effectuate the Court’s judgment.

R. Brent Cooper
Cody J. Wisniewski
David H. Thompson
Peter A. Patterson
William V. Bergstrom
January 20, 2025
ELITE PRECISION CUSTOMS LLC; TIM HERRON; FREDDIE BLISH; and FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC v. The BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES

For more information on this case see also:

I am so pleased this area of 2nd Amendment law is being pursued. It seems like it should be a real slam dunk. If someone can travel to another state and buy weed, get an abortion, or go to church, then why shouldn’t buying a self-defense tool be a no-brainer, “Hell yes, of course!” That’s just from the philosophical viewpoint.

The legal viewpoint is even stronger. The ban on purchasing handguns depending on which side of a line your feet are resting on is obviously an infringement on the plain text of the 2nd Amendment. And, as pointed in this filing:

Bruen reiterated that, “when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 17. And a court may “[o]nly” conclude that the conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s protection if the government can “justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Id. at 24.

  1. This Court already conducted the type of historical analysis that Bruen requires in Mance. The Court observed that “the earliest known state residency restrictions on the purchase or possession of firearms” occurred in 1909. 74 F. Supp. 3d at 805 (“Defendants have not presented, and the Court cannot find, any earlier evidence of longstanding interstate, geography based, or residency-based firearms restrictions.”). Given this history, the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban must be enjoined again.

My view is that it is low hanging fruit that should gathered first. It creates a slippery slope that will create momentum, make it easier to win difficult cases like AR and even machine gun bans, and, figuratively, result in the anti-gun movement making a high velocity splat in the history dumpster where they belong.

The Peter Principle and Socialism

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In the impersonal offices of North American education in the 1970s, a Canadian educator named Laurence J. Peter observed with clinical irony how hierarchies devoured talent. He saw systematic promotions: the excellent teacher became a mediocre principal, the competent principal a clumsy bureaucrat, the bureaucrat a disastrous civil servant. From that observation emerged the Peter Principle, published in 1969: “in a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to their level of incompetence.” Promotion is based on prior success, not on aptitude for the new role. The result is that organizations end up filled with people who no longer master what they do, but who can no longer be demoted without breaking the system.

…

The left’s social engineers, eternal dreamers of planned paradises, respond to the disaster they themselves generate by demanding more hierarchy, more State, more positions for their faithful. When the machine clogs with incompetents, the solution is never to shrink the monster’s size; it is to inject it with more militants and more budget. The cycle is inexorable. Loyalty over competence, failure over correction, excuses over reality. And in the end, as always, the bill is paid by those at the bottom, while the red Peters keep rising, with beatific smiles, toward their next level of catastrophe.

𝗖𝘂𝗯𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗻 𝗛 𝗱𝗲 𝗢𝗿𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗳𝗶́𝗮 @CubaOrtografia
Posted on X May 14, 2026

The original post was in Spanish, the English translation was by X.

While I’m sure the above is an important component of socialism disasters and government in general, there are other issues as well. As I have brought them up many times before (and here are but two examples) I will not dilute the current observation.

Big 1st Amendment Win at SCOTUS

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

SCOTUS decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. NJ is huge. Despite the iconic SCOTUS decision in NAACP v. Alabama, and the more recent decision in Americans for Prosperity Fdn v. Bonta, many lower courts have continued to insist that compelled disclosure of one’s affiliations is not a harm that can even support a challenge to the government’s actions.

Yesterday the Supreme Court firmly rejected that approach:
“Demands for private donor information … ‘chill’ protected 1st Amendment associational rights even when those demands contemplate disclosure only to government officials and not ‘the general public. …

“An injury in fact does not arise only when a defendant causes a tangible harm to a plaintiff, like a physical injury or monetary loss. It can also arise when a defendant burdens a plaintiff ’s constitutional rights. And our cases have long recognized that demands for a charity’s private member or donor information have just that effect.”

This is a huge win for privacy and freedom, a huge blow to those who seek to “cancel” individuals or intimidate them from participating in public debate with threats of government retaliation, direct or indirect.

Brad Smith @CommishSmith
Posted on X, April 30, 2026

This is great news. For years the anti-gun people wanted the NRA membership list. This should at least slow them down. Of course, pro-gun people cannot get the anti-gun organization lists either. But then, that is only a few thousand people compared to the millions of people who belong to the CCRKBA, FPC, GOA, NRA, SAF, etc. And the anti-gun people are becoming less and less relevant.

As Mark Smith at The Four Boxes Diner says, “The trend is our friend.”

Welcome to the awakening. Enjoy your stay.

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

This video is worth the watch. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

This is what single issue voters finally find out. Your vote should be about policy, not the person. Identity politics only goes so far before it all unravels.

Welcome to the awakening. Enjoy your stay.

Sassafrass84 @Sassafrass_84
Posted on X, April 20, 2026

Democrats do not have a monopoly on tribal loyalty over policy. Republicans talk a good talk about economic freedom and gun owner rights, but don’t really do much about it, they opposed gay marriage and grudgingly tolerate it now. And they are downright hostile to social freedoms such as freedom from religion, recreational drug use, social nudity, and sex work.

But freedom loving people cannot fight on all fronts at the same time. If we have the backing of Republicans and a chance to fix the wrongs of Democrat policies, then help them out. And when there is a chance to undo wrongheaded Republican policies, take advantage of that momentum too.

Wake up and align yourself against government overreach. The policy is important. The party and the people are not.

Useful Idiots

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

People on the right who have been mentally modelling the world since they were kids, constantly updating and revising their mental model so that it’s able to reliably anticipate basic functioning of the world around us, so we can navigate the world without being blindsided all the time; have trouble internalising this:

  • leftists don’t abide by the principle of non-contradiction
  • they do not understand the world through abstract or ideal first principles which they then apply universally, in a predictable and stable manner
  • like situations are therefore not alike
  • everything is its own thing & has no bearing on anything else
  • noticing patterns is racist hateful and evil so they stopped doing that a long time ago, pattern recognition is haram

Every position they hold is a unique stance that they imbibed from the media. They don’t start from an abstraction and think critically to rach their conclusion. They literally watched Colbert and had it drilled into their brain. They don’t have first principles or universal values. They do what they are told. Because it benefits their coalition to do so. That’s it.

That’s their whole worldview and it’s why they don’t flinch when they contradict themselves. They don’t have an “ideology” arrived at through abstract reasoning or critical thinking, they’re part of a cult that does everything humanly possible to prevent them from ever thinking about anything for any reason. They regurgitate the party line and experience affirmation and inclusion from their peers when they do. So they keep doing it. It’s that basic. They are Pavlov’s dog.

Aimee Terese @aimeeterese
Posted April 7, 2026 on X

I can see this being true for a high percentage of the people on the left. Those who are also known as “useful idiots”.

But there are also those who are rational, deliberate, and carefully choose their words and actions. These are the Lenins, Castros, Pol Pots, Mao Zedongs, Sanderses, Schumers, and Clintons of history — the folks who promise progress but somehow always end up needing more of your land, your money, and your compliance, all enforced under pain of death.

Greener Pastures

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

On Dec. 1, 2025, Washington reported 706,046 active CPLs. On April 1, that number had plummeted to 696,015. The alarming decline has been explained by many gun owners, saying they’ve either left Washington for more Second Amendment-friendly environs in Idaho, Texas, Oklahoma and elsewhere, while others have decided to carry without a CPL because they refuse to pay the state to exercise their right to bear arms, which is specifically protected by both the state and federal constitutions.

Dave Workman
April 3, 2026
Wash. CPL Numbers Decline; Gun Owners Flee, Others Refuse to Renew – TheGunMag

I think the Washington state gun laws will be straightened out by the Federal courts in less than five years. But the taxes and crime situation will probably continue to deteriorate. So, with that in mind I am working on an escape plan. I can’t leave right now because I need to save up money for retirement. Underground bunkers in Idaho are expensive.

The underground bunker be completed soon (only a few more days of work). I will then start counting the days until I can retire and have the option to leave Washington state as well.

Are you thinking of fleeing the tyranny of your state too? I’m giving free tours of my underground bunk to people attending Boomershoot this year (the first weekend of May). It would give you something to think about…

Free Speech and Guns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Brits surrendered their firearms in 1997.

Less than 30 years later, they’re being arrested for Facebook posts.

That’s not “safety.” That’s the speed of tyranny once a government knows its citizens can’t push back.

When people are disarmed, the state no longer fears the people. And when governments have zero fear of the people, they do whatever the hell they want.

Stacy is Right @PoliticalStacy
Posted on X, April 4, 2026

From later in the same thread:

Imagine What a Fully Free Society Could Build

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The average American today lives better than John D. Rockefeller did in 1926. That is not an exaggeration. It is a fact.

Rockefeller could not fly across the country in five hours. You can for $200. He could not video call his family from another continent. You do it for free. He had no antibiotics, no MRI, no air conditioning in July. He could not carry every book ever written in his pocket. You are reading this on a device that does all of that and more.

Americans throw away 30-40% of their food. Not because they are wasteful, but because food is so abundant that waste is affordable. Your car has climate control, navigation, and safety systems that did not exist at any price a century ago. Your home has heating, cooling, refrigeration, and entertainment that emperors could not have imagined.

None of this was voted into existence. None of it was redistributed from the rich. It was created by free minds operating in what remains of a free market. Every comfort you enjoy today is the product of a man who thought, invented, produced, and traded voluntarily.

This is what the remnants of capitalism still deliver, even while it is being dismantled. Imagine what a fully free society could build.

The Rational Animal 🤔 @theobjectivist
Posted on X, April 3, 2026

I have nothing to add.

The FBI can Track You

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The FBI is buying up information that can be used to track people’s movement and location history, Director Kash Patel said during a Senate hearing Wednesday.

…

The U.S. Supreme Court has required law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant for getting people’s location data from cell phone providers since 2018, but data brokers offer an alternative avenue by purchasing the information directly.

Alfred Ng
March 18, 2026
FBI is buying data that can be used to track people, Patel says – POLITICO

And with your location information they know things about you even your closest friends do not know. Even if you are couch surfing trying to avoid giving up your location, they know where you live. They know if you were in the vicinity of that January 6th riot. They know if you were scouting the house where four University of Idaho students were murdered. They know you visit the gay bath house a couple times a month when you tell your wife you are working late. They know you are part of the “Underground Railroad” for slaves/wetbacks/Jews/dads-with-child-custody problems.

We live in interesting times.

6G Mobile Communication Systems

Posted on by

5G phones have settled into common use and now 6G is on the drawing boards. So, what will be in the 6G feature set?

Read about it here: The 6G vision: Fewer dead zones, smarter networks, and built-in ‘radar’.

This looks to a scary feature:

One of the planned new features in 6G is called Integrated Sensing and Communication, or ISAC.

“It’s the big talking point that’s getting the most attention right now. ISAC means that we will no longer see the mobile network as just a way to transport data. Instead, radio waves will be transformed into a sensor, a kind of radar. The network can ‘see’ and measure distance, speed, and movement with centimeter precision without the devices needing GPS or cameras. This opens doors for everything from traffic monitoring to fall detection in healthcare,” says Mikael Gidlund, professor at Mid Sweden University.

The idea that all mobile phone masts could be able to sense their physical surroundings and detect presence or movement may sound like science fiction — and also like a nightmare from a privacy perspective. This is something Mikael Gidlund is well aware of.

“This is one of the most important technical challenges that must be solved for the technology to gain acceptance. The goal is to design the system according to the principle of ‘privacy by design.’ ISAC works like a radar, not a camera. It works with anonymous point clouds rather than biometric data. We can see that someone has fallen and needs help, but not who it is. By allowing data processing to take place locally in the mast and building technical barriers to identification directly into the standard, we can actually increase privacy by replacing cameras in sensitive environments. Anonymization is not an option — it is a technical prerequisite for trust.

They are saying some of the right words and phrases. But if they have centimeter resolution, it probably means this tech will enable the detection of people who carry guns. If they can tell if someone has fallen, they can tell if two or a group of people are having sex.

I find it telling they enumerate some potential benefits, but then lump all the downside into “privacy.” And just because they don’t know who someone is, if they can detect a person who as fallen, then I’m almost certain they can track an individual person. And if they can be tracked, privacy just disappeared.

As a first step, what needs to be done is to enumerate all the ways this technology could be abused and apply “privacy by design” to those use cases. My intuition tells me there will not be much left in the benefits category once they have eliminated the potential for abuse.

Why Americans Love Guns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Americans have always known that ultimately, no matter who you are, now matter where you are, no one is coming to save you. You must possess the means to save yourself, or at least to fight back, to make yourself expensive and dangerous to kill, so you can save the next guy.

This is the reason, the real reason, why Americans love guns.

We let you pretend it was because we were fat stupid belligerent rednecks who like power fantasies, because that lie seemed to make you happy, and it’s not nice to take away the comforting delusions of toddlers and crazy people.

But now that delusion is hurting you, and, contemptuous as you have been of us, you are fellow human beings, fellow civilized humans beings, and we don’t want to see you die, so we have to tell you the truth.

We love guns because they are not only the tool of liberty, they are symbol of our value, not as tools or slaves of regime, but as independent, free human beings of inherent worth.

In America, when I walk past a police officer on the street, he has a badge and a gun. But I have a gun, too. Right there under my shirt. And my works just like his.

And that changes everything. Because now I am not the only one dependent on the rule of law. He is dependent upon the rule of law, too. Because if the rule of law is the only thing that prevents him from killing me under color of authority, then the rule of law is the only thing that prevents me from killing him in the act of resistance.

The deterrents exist on both sides, and we all have to play nice. And mostly, we do. Because those deterrents make sure we really, really want to.

They’re not playing nice any more on your side of the big blue wobbly thing. They have guns. All you have is a mouth and a keyboard.

How that working out for you?

An armed society is a polite society. That’s not just a saying. That’s not just fiction.

Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_
Posted on X, August 14, 2024

Read the whole thing.

Contract Enforcement

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

You do not have rights you cannot defend. Rights are asserted, not granted.

Dr. John ⚡️@dj_doctor_john
Posted on X, August 15, 2024

The Bill of Rights is worded as guarantees, not as grants. But enforcing those guarantees is the tricky part.

I have also learned, the hard way, that unless you can defend a contract it is worthless.

They are essentially the same thing. The Bill of Rights is a contract. If you do not have the power to enforce it then any infringement is possible, or more realistically, a certainty. Keeping and bearing arms is our ultimate long-term enforcement tool of the Bill of Rights.

They Protect Each Other

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

They must destroy the 1st Amendment to restrict the 2nd Amendment.

Missouri_Mule
February 20, 2026
3rd Circuit Upholds NJ Ban on 3D Gun Files

He is not wrong. It seems to me they need to rachet them both down essentially simultaneously. They protect each other.

I Bet that Hurt

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Perhaps, the most surreal conversation I had was not hearing a Chavista president singing capitalism’s praise, or friends who have been out of the country for eight years finally looking for a flight to Caracas; but a European diplomat who, after a long pause, told me: “At least for now, we’ve got to admit that Trump got this one right.”

Stefano Pozzebon
CNN
February 17, 2026
I’ve covered Venezuela for a decade. But this US visit was like nothing I’ve seen before

CNN (AKA Clinton News Network and Communist News Network) saying “Trump got this one right?”

Wow! I wonder how many responses they got from their main body of readers demanding Pozzebon’s head on a platter. That had to have really hurt.

While I reluctantly acknowledge it was probably (let’s see how things are a year from now) the right thing to do, I’m uncomfortable with the U.S. being the world’s policeman. There is also the whole, other than might makes right, lack of authorization to use violence to affect the internal affairs of another country. Then there is the issue that while success is good, failures can really, really bad. This turned out well but a future attempt at a similar action (my bet is Iran would be the next target) could result in a catastrophe such as, or even worse than, what happened with Operation Eagle Claw in April of 1980.

It Is not Just About Guns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

As a gun guy for a loooong time, I have bad news for 3D printing guys—the word “gun” is often enough for people to give up their rights out of fear.

People will gladly bend over & let the state have their way with them if it will help with the made up “Gun Problem”.

Guns are the Goldstein Big Brother uses to fuel enough Two Minutes Hate so that people will gladly turn their eyes away from abuses like this because they have been brainwashed into thinking somehow this will keep them safe.

It won’t. And it WILL be used against more than printed guns. It’s a form of control and they will use their fairly successful campaign of making guns out to be the boogeyman to allow them to control more & more of your life.

This is why I’ve fought gun control. It’s MUCH more than just the guns, always has been. But too many people are scared shitless of loud noises & Hollywood portrayals that they honestly fear them enough to allow whatever draconian laws are presented and then call you names & try to have your life ruined if you oppose them.

Robb Allen @ItsRobbAllen
Posted on X, February 9, 2026

This is regarding the restrictions certain politicians are putting on the 3D printers. These restrictions include printer firmware recognizing gun parts and refusing to print them and the printer “calling home” to report restricted items being made.

This is a First Amendment issue as well as a Second Amendment issue.

Don’t be Anti-Communist, be Pro Freedom

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

A distinctive mark of fascism is its conception of politics, best captured by Carl Schmitt, an early-20th-century German political theorist whose doctrines legitimized Nazism. Schmitt rejected the Madisonian view of politics as a social negotiation in which different factions, interests, and ideology come to agreement, the core idea of our Constitution. Rather, he saw politics as a state of war between enemies, neither of which can understand the other and both of which feel existentially threatened—and only one of which can win. The aim of Schmittian politics is not to share the country but to dominate or destroy the other side.

Jonathan Rauch*
January 25, 2026
Yes, It’s Fascism – The Atlantic

Via email from a reader.

Most of the body of the article is behind a paywall so I only have the part quoted in the email.

As many of you will point out, there is no compromise or coming to agreement with those who want you dead. There is no compromise with those who want a cradle to grave welfare state for everyone. But there is a better way to go about opposing them without risking a death spiral into your own purity test driven genocide of killing all the communists.

There is a fair amount of truth to what I could read in the quote above about the definition of fascism. And I prefer to use the oldest definition I can find. It is from an unabridged dictionary copyrighted in various years from 1927 through1946. In part, the Fascisti were:

… organized in connection with a repressive movement directed against the socialists and communists and the disturbances excited by them during 1919 and the years following, which regarded the government as criminally negligent in failing to deal with these disturbances, and took measure on its own account, often violent ones, to combat them…

Hence, one could say people opposed to socialists and communists meet part of the definition of Fascist. Aside from the increased ease of which the dirty label sticks there are other reasons to not defining yourself as opposed, especially violently opposed, to communists and socialists.

Remember the poem from a couple days ago: Laugh, and the World Laughs with You? If you are an unhappy, angry person you will have fewer people who wish to be around you and join your political bandwagon. Be for something good. Be for freedom. Be for liberty. Be for a booming economy. Be for a wealthy society.

Let the communists and socialist be against that.

* Rauch is not a new name to this blog: