Eli Steele Identifies the Hidden Root of Leftist Violence

I'm concerned that Eli Steele has correctly pointed out a problem that has no obvious solution. Certainly no quick fix:

One unique aspect of Leftist-driven violence often goes unnoticed. The recent bloodshed, vandalism, and intimidation that we’ve seen aren’t random but the predictable fallout of a worldview that reduces human complexity to fixed ideological identities. The Left’s obsession with immutable traits -- race, gender, sex -- creates a victimhood hierarchy where dissent feels like an existential threat. When challenged, responses spiral into denial, defensiveness, or even violence from those unable to defend their dogma. This isn’t mere political disagreement, but the grim consequence of a belief system that rejects the Enlightenment’s focus on reason and individuality for rigid orthodoxy.

Recent events expose this pattern. The assassination of Charlie Kirk by Tyler Robinson, radicalized through Leftist politics and his transgender partner’s identity struggles, shows how loyalty to identity can turn lethal when faced with opposing views. School shootings like Audrey Hale’s 2023 Nashville attack and Robin Westman’s 2025 Minneapolis shooting reveal how issues with or challenges to gender identity can ignite rage. Elias Rodriguez’s 2025 murder of two Israeli Embassy employees, accompanied by cries of “shame on Zio-Nazi terror,” reflects a worldview -- shared by many pro-Hamas supporters -- that reduces Jews, Israeli or not, to whites and oppressors. The decade-long wave of Black Lives Matter protests, grounded in claims of systemic racial oppression, fueled riots that caused billions in damages, claimed lives, and pressured countless American institutions into adopting reductive racial identity politics as dogma.

Beyond violence, this ideology breeds intimidation, silencing dissent with threats of job loss or social ostracism. Rooted in identity determinism, this intellectual dead-end leaves no room for nuance or growth, increasing the potential for violence among those trapped in its logic -- a logic now taught to young minds through ethnic studies in K-12 schools.

If we cannot force the Left to retreat from its fixation on identity politics through the ballot box and all legal means, this ideology will only sow ever-increasing division and violence. This challenge is daunting because it demands stripping people of their very identities grounded in immutable characteristics and showing them their worth lies elsewhere -- their character. They will fight with everything they have.

To break this cycle, we must reject the notion that immutable traits dictate moral worth and recommit to reason and individuality. Until the Left abandons its dogma, it will continue to fuel conflict—a stark reminder of what happens when ideological orthodoxy drowns out dialogue.

One way to reject the notion that immutable traits dictate moral worth would be to make sure we remove all financial and social status incentives for enshrining immutable traits. But I am pessimistic that that we can make any headway by engaging in conversation. Where to start?

Continue ReadingEli Steele Identifies the Hidden Root of Leftist Violence

Three Types of Vaccines, Each with Their Risks

Bret Weinstein explains that there are three types of vaccines and none of them are completely safe.

Camus summarizes Weinstein's short presentation:

1. Live Attenuated Vaccines: The risk here is unpredictability and evolution. A virus weakened for one person may cause a serious infection in another. Crucially, it can revert to a pathogenic, transmissible form—a "contagious vaccine." The historical case of the oral polio vaccine causing numerous polio cases stands as a stark warning.

2. Inactivated Virus/Fragments (with Adjuvant): The problem is immune misdirection. A dead virus alone is unconvincing, requiring an "adjuvant"—a chemical alarm bell. This non-specific signal causes the immune system to "freak out," not just at the target antigen but at anything present, like pollen or gut bacteria. Indiscriminately triggering a systemic immune response is a dangerous gamble.

3. mRNA Technology: The danger is haphazard biodistribution. The mRNA instructions travel unpredictably, instructing cells anywhere in the body to produce the foreign antigen. The immune system then rightly identifies these cells as infected and attacks them. This random destruction of healthy tissue—for instance, in the heart—is an unacceptable and fundamentally unsafe mechanism.

Continue ReadingThree Types of Vaccines, Each with Their Risks

COVID Panic in 2025

Wow. And I know other people like this too.

Billy Binion:

I say this without snark: We underestimate how much the government's response to COVID truly broke some people. Many are left with persistent, crippling anxiety about just living daily life. It makes me sad. Some people also seem to really thrive—over 5 years later—off of the purpose & identity they get from being a COVID purist. It's very human to want to fight for something. But the world is not going to stop for you anymore. It is time to find a new cause.

Continue ReadingCOVID Panic in 2025

RFK, Jr. Describes Pharma World

RFK, Jr. described Pharma World:

It's between between Fauci (NIAID) and Gates (Gates Foundation) and Jeremy Farrar (WHO), who is up to his neck in Wuhan. They provide 64% of the biomedical research on the planet. If you are a young researcher, a scientist, a professor in a medical school, they have the capacity not only to make your career, but also to ruin it, and that's the way that they control not only the scientific studies that get done, but also the outcome of all those studies across the planet.

What Fauci has done--he's supposed to do, that kind of study. Instead what he does, he spends the bulk of his budget developing medications, which they then farm out to the university to do phase one, phase two and phase three trials. And the university could make $100 million in one of those trials, plus it gets royalty rights to the drug they're developing. Then, the NIAID takes royalty rights. University takes royalty rights. The principal investigator, who is the professor at the university who's running the clinical trial recruiting the, you know, the volunteers. He may get $15,000 a volunteer in grant money, and then he gets royalty rights, and then the pharmaceutical industry comes in for the phase three, and they then own the bulk of the patent, but they're sharing royalty rights with all these other players. So everybody is now corrupted. Everybody is making money on this drug, and the people who are supposed to be telling us "Was the drug actually benefit people, or is it just making money for Pharma?" Those people don't exist.

Continue ReadingRFK, Jr. Describes Pharma World