Federal Government Is Behaving Like Pablo Escobar

We’ve come a long way since: All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. To this: To keep your job, your property, and your freedom, you must submit to forced government injections of experimental chemicals developed by pharmaceutical companies motivated by profit and their bottom line. You must also consent to be digitally tracked in perpetuity to ensure your continued compliance with any future mandates the State may deem necessary for the “common good.” Are Democrats so determined to “cancel” the Founding Fathers’ project for human freedom? A look around would have Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison spit on their hands, grab some soft dirt, and get back to work. No way, American Leviathan.

If we were honest, the current US Administration would resemble Pablo Escobar more than Thomas Jefferson. The late-20th century Colombian drug lord and terrorist who controlled the Medellín Cartel threatened those who dared to oppose him with either silver or death. That doesn’t mean forced treatment for COVID-19 is a death sentence, but it sure feels like it, especially when we won’t know the long-term effects for a decade or more.

No, the real target of the US government’s gun is those who defy its medical dictatorship and are denied their natural rights. Plomo, America! Profit from the new government’s powers or discover what life is like for those who refuse. Like Escobar, the US government has decided that threats and coercion work well for selling drugs! “Is there a way to prevent psychopaths from getting into positions of power?” asks Brandon Smith of Alt-Market, reflecting on the crises collectivists and globalists have unleashed on civilization. He wisely observes that our current situation is ironic because democratic institutions were built over three centuries to liberate populations living under the daily threat of death and chaos caused by royal dynasties genetically predisposed to psychopathy and self-grandeur. However, democratic institutions were supposed to “weed out aberrant individuals” through transparent elections.

Having an “aberrant” personality seems more required than a disqualification today. Our ruling psychopaths make it difficult for decent people to run for office. The psychopathic 1% pushing globalism has found it easier to control the votes and actions of poor elected representatives and bureaucrats than dealing with all-powerful kings or volatile dictators. If the psychopaths are ever “exiled,” Smith recommends a future electoral system where a random public lottery (à la William F. Buckley, Jr.) with strict term limits fills every available political and government job.