Facebook Rants: Gun Ban and Liberal Education, RP’s Poor Economic Freedom, and Cuba’s Universal Health Care and Brain Drain
- NOTE: I posted the following snippets on my Facebook page.
Inquirer editors and op-ed writers (Neal Cruz) keep telling their gullible readers: Less guns means less crimes.
That statistically fallacious, non-factual slogan is utterly WRONG!
Did gun ban in the Failippines ever work? Hell no!
Remember that the Maguindanao massacre that killed 58 disarmed innocent people took place during an election gun ban.
Here’s what the government did.
- First, they (I mean the Arroyo government) armed the Ampatuan warlords through Executive Order 546. This EO authorized warlords in Mindanao to build their own private armies.
- Second, they disarmed innocent individuals and journalists through the total election gun ban.
So, when the Ampatuan warlords went berserk, they used the guns funded by the government and corrupt-money as well as their private army to slaughter 58 disarmed people, including 30 journalists, who couldn’t defend themselves.
Plus, who perpetrated the infamous Manila hostage crisis in 2010 that exposed the shameful and cowardice of our police? It was Mr. Rolando Mendoza, a former commissioned police officer.
Is there any relation between the rate of gun ownership and the number of gun-related crimes?
Homicide by firearm rate per 100,000 population. We need to get this variable since countries vary in terms of population. USA, for example, has over 307 million population (as of 2010), while the Philippines has over 95 million. Usually, leftist don’t get this. Others with sinister statistical agenda simply ignore this.
- Philippines: 8.93 (homicide by firearm rate per 100k pop) or 7,349 (total). RP is #105 in gun ownership yet it is one of the most violent countries in the world.
- United States: 2.97 (9,146). Remember that USA is #1 in the world in gun ownership, and yet it is only 28th in the world in gun murders per 100,000 people. So, this belies Neal Cruz’s (of Inquirer) claim that “more guns means more crimes”.
- Socialist Venezuela: 38.97 (11,115)
- Switzerland: 0.77 (57). It is #3 in the world in gun ownership.
- Finland: 0.45 (24). It is #4 in gun ownership.
- Honduras: 68.43 (5,201). It is #88 in gun ownership.
(Source: the ultra-leftist Guardian)
Here’s a question or statement for Filipino gun-grabbers:
“I still don’t get it… You want to disarm yourselves and others who obey the law and entrust only your lives and safety, including those of your children and loved ones, in the hands of our corrupt, tyrannical politicians and incompetent, poorly trained and extortionist members of the police and military? You want to disarm all law abiding citizens, depriving them of their right to sufficient self-defense, when you know full well that criminals don’t obey the law and will still get guns and use them?”
Give me a modern-day politician who tells you that ‘should your government turn to tyranny or become destructive of your individual rights, the people have the right to alter or abolish it and to institute new Government’, and I’ll tell you a real, genuine defender of freedom.
During the official founding of the United States of America on July 4, 1776, Thomas Jefferson wrote these words: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”
That is the main reason why the founding fathers believed that every man has the right to bear arms, and that no law or political decree may infringe upon this inalienable, ‘natural’ right.
Is there any relation between rampant school shootings in the United States and its liberal, state-funded education system?
Today’s Pravda thinks so…
From Pravda, of all places. For those still unaware of the checkered, interesting history of Pravda, this Russian newspaper was once the official propaganda network of the USSR.
Pravda is turning against its communist past.
The author of this Pravda op-ed blames progressive/liberal education. In America, progressivism or liberalism is a political term that is mostly associated with leftism or statism. However, not all progressives or liberals are by definition socialists. Some progressive merely advocate government control of certain social and economic sectors and activities without calling for absolute communal ownership of lands and all modes of production.
Here’s an excerpt:
“Being raised devoid of comforting, love, discipline, affection and physical caring (such as hugging, caressing, holding, breast-feeding, kissing, embracing and cuddling, of which American parents give their children so very little), Americans in their collective folly are frustrated, anxiety-ridden, insecure, enraged, angry, unhappy and selfish. The ensuing hostile, violent and rancorous social scene, besides moral chaos, social disintegration, barratry and generational conflict, is remarkable for the unprecedented intensification of social conflict: Marx’s class warfare, Hobbes’ social warfare (the bellum omnium contra omnes), and Machiavelli’s political warfare. Can anyone therefore really wonder at Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Newtown? Absalom, Absalom!”
The op-ed writer talks about the logical, ultimate result of progressive public education in the United States. History has it that public education in America started during the late periods of 18th century. It was Horace Mann, an education reformer and considered the father of public education in USA, who campaigned for state control of the education system. He supported the decision to adopt the Prussian education system.
Historically, public education was first introduced and implemented by tyrants who sought to indoctrinate, brainwash young people.
Here’s how 20th century tyrants used public education to turn children into monsters:
- In Germany, Hitler made the country’s children (he established the Hitler Youth) part of his political agenda. As a result, many parents were frightened that their children would report them to the Gestapo, which gave young people a power that they enjoyed.
- Mao turned young Chinese into revolutionary solders and used them against his enemies during his Cultural Revolution.
Thankfully, Filipino public educators and politicians have not yet mastered the art of brainwashing. They have not yet discovered the hidden potentials of public education in preserving political power and social status quo. Here, Filipinos are just copy-cats. They simply copied the system and implemented it, and then arrogantly thought they’re simply doing the right thing.
Public education, to be beneficial to political power, needs at least two basic institutions:
- Deliberate political design. It needs a tyrant with a long-term goal. That tyrant could be a single person (a Hitler or a Mao) or a political collective (just like the Communist politburo or Iran’s clerics).
- A single ideological base. It needs philosophers or ideologues like Horace Mann, Joseph Goebbels, Plato. It also needs a Frankfurt School, a Columbia University, or a more ideologically aggressive UP.
Pravda also published this op-ed titled Americans never give up your guns. Here’s an excerpt:
“The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?
“No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.”
The apparent, undeniable results of healthcare socialism in Cuba include brain brain, poor medical facilities, less competent doctors and economic bankruptcy.
Is this what P-Noy is trying to do with his universal healthcare program being supported by some useful idiot doctors?
Here’s what you’d get when you try to nationalize healthcare: BRAIN DRAIN.
From this story: “Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez is dying of cancer in Havana, in a live demonstration of Cuba’s vaunted socialized medical care. He went there instead of Brazil because he wanted to make a political statement. What irony.”
Chavez’s chosen successor, Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro, reportedly said: “While Mr. Chavez often lauds Cuban doctors, switching from Cuban to Brazilian care would have suggested the Cubans aren’t capable of world class care.”
Cubans started to flee their country since 1960s. South Africa is one of the top importers of Cuban doctors. “In 1998 there were already 400 Cuban doctors practicing medicine in South Africa’s rural areas. By 2004, there were about 1200 Cuban doctors working in African countries, including inAngola, Botswana, Cape Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Ghana,Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, Zambia, Zimbabwe, andareas in the Sahara.” (Source: Perez, L.A., Krull, C. and Marino, S.C., 2010, Cuban Studies 41. PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 92).
HERE’S A BREAKING NEWS:
Chavez is now freeing its doctors, allowing them to travel abroad.
From this Yahoo news: “Cuba is eliminating longstanding restrictions on health care professionals’ overseas travel as part of a broader migration reform that takes effect next week.”
Does this mean Cuba had impose severe travel restrictions on its doctors? The answer is YES!
To avert BRAIN DRAIN, of course!
Here’s another excerpt:
“For many years Cuban doctors have been limited in their ability to travel or had to undergo cumbersome bureaucratic procedures. They are routinely denied permission to travel or receive it only if they plan to leave for good and after a five-year process of being released from their duties.
“The restrictions were justified as necessary to prevent brain drain from a sector that is the pride of Cuba’s Communist leaders, and which lost thousands of skilled professionals in the 1960s as the country increasingly embraced socialism following the Cuban Revolution. Many more left during the economic crisis of the 1990s.”
From the Heritage Foundation: “Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property. In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in any way they please, with that freedom both protected by the state and unconstrained by the state.”
The Top 10 Most Economically FREE Economies!
Philippines was ranked 97th.