Author: Joey Caso

Recycling Paper Products Kills More Trees Than It Saves

By Joey Caso | United States

Recycling kills trees. Although this seems like an argument that would be presented by a Kremlin-paid troll, the economics of why this happens is clear and sound.

Firstly, one must ask, “who has the greatest incentive to keep the tree population up in a market-based economy?” It would be quite evident that it would be someone who relies on trees to make a profit. Well, what is the largest industry that relies on trees? The paper industry. This seems to be a pretty simple series of mental steps yet nobody seems to take them, or even worse than that, nobody wants to.

See, we are raised to look at the corporation and the capitalist that runs it with utter contempt. Don’t believe me? How about the Lorax, a book so popular that in 2012 it was ranked 33 on the School Library Journal’s survey about the “Top 100 Picture Books”. What is this book about? A greedy capitalist who destroys the environment to make a profit.

Let’s dissect this. The Once-ler made a product called a Thneed which he made from the Truffula tree. In order to do so, he cuts down the Truffula trees to make his versatile garment until he cuts down the very last one. Then his once-booming business comes to a dramatic end. Now, this is supposed to demonstrate that you should not be greedy, and impressionable kids fell for it, me being one of them. But upon reflection you realize the Once-ler wasn’t greedy, he was just plain dumb.

If he was truly greedy and had half of a brain, he would have replanted trees at the same rate at which he cut them down. To give time for the Truffula trees to grow he would have needed to slow down the process of cutting them down in order to create a continuous loop of resources and with it, a continuous loop of profit. One might say, “The Once-ler’s Thneeds were in such high demand that he needed to cut down Truffula trees at a fast rate.” Well, what would slow down the rate at which he needed to require his resources? A rise in the price of a Thneed. Raising the price would have decreased the demand of the Thneed while creating a larger profit for the Once-ler, who already has a resource creation and collection set up that will supply him with a profit forever until there is no demand for it. That is real greed. That is rational greed. That is capitalism.

Now just like the Once-ler paper industries want that infinite loop of resources and profit. This means just as the food industry wants to keep the population of chickens and cows up and just as the trophy hunting industry wants to keep the population of endangered species up, the paper industry wants to keep the population of trees up.

Now, what force helps to destroy the paper industry? Recycling, specifically the recycling of paper-based products. With the reuse of the paper, the paper industry loses demand for its products. If recycling happened in mass the demand for paper would plummet and along with it the industry that had a profit incentive to save trees.

Featured Image Source.


Redpillblocked: How Candice Owens Is Tarnishing The Conservative Movement

By Joey Caso | United States

Stefan Molyneux, The Rubin Report, Louder with Crowder, Infowars and even Fox News have contributed to the fame of the young, attractive, black, conservative female by the name of Candace Owens. (More widely known as, Redpillblack). However, when right-wingers arranged to meet her it seemed that her external characteristics were all they had in mind once she made it clear she was a conservative. The truth is that she does not only contribute nothing new to the conservative movement, but she tarnishes it.

This can be clearly demonstrated in the exposition of her disastrous debate with the moderate-right, transgender Youtuber, Blaire White on the Youtube show, the Rubin Report in early November of 2017. In this “debate” that can only be described as an enraging, soul-crushing, dumpster fire, Candace opens up with something so meaningless, so irrelevant, so, as Blaire later describes, “petty”, it blows the mind of every competent person listening.

She starts off stating that she isn’t comfortable using the “she pronoun”, which is highly suspicious to begin a discussion for a mainstream conservative especially one that was a social justice warrior just a year before. She continues to say, “I think it betrays the audience when you make it sound like this is a petty catfight and there are two girls sitting across from a table, when in fact it is a grown man sitting across from a grown woman.”

It is at this moment when I share all the pain expressed in the disheartened face of Dave Rubin. Listening to her mini-rant was like drowning in a pool of built up tension and pure idiocy. This was the jagged foundation the rest of the hour and a half live-stream debate was built on, things only got worse from there.

I don’t know what was worse, the complete irrelevance and personally aggressive nature the statement contained or the idea that two women having a conversation about public disagreements would be a nonconstructive cat fight. It was at this point in my research of Redpillblack where I became massively skeptical about her political alignment.

To say what she said and then repeatedly and obnoxiously yell at Blaire White while playing the victim card was like watching a manifestation of what a radical liberal thinks a conservative is and what a radical conservative thinks a liberal is, in one person.

This debate was about Candace’s since-deleted site, Social Autopsy, an anti-harassment kick-starter many called out for being fishy, before and after she made her claim to conservative fame. The site collected people’s public information across all of their platforms and put it in one place. It had sections to insert someone’s pictures, first and last name, the city/state they live in, their social media URL’s, the school they go to and even their current employer, with the screenshots of the triggering thing they posted too, of course.

To make a site to hold someone’s feet to the fire when they post a stupid or slightly offensive meme is absolutely ridiculous. As she narrates in the site’s promotion video, she wished to create profiles compiled with the information I mentioned earlier for those who “lob hate speech over the internet.” With all of this in mind, I could have seen her side of the argument, this site could have acted as some kind of cyberspace invisible hand that disincentives bullying.

However, once criticism came her way her argument which she could have stood by was traded for fake ignorance, hypocrisy, and conspiracy theories. In the debate, Blaire White points out that the site could have been easily used for doxxing and according to her, was used for doxxing.

Social autopsy was a database that people used to enter information about others, the thing is that there is no telling if that information is public or not, Candace just assumes so. If you get mad at a friend or co-worker you can post a picture that they did not post online, an address that they kept private, an employer that they did not input into their profiles, etc.

Candace argued this database was “a non-functioning splash page” another point of contention in the debate. Many YouTubers and the “anti” community, like Andy Warski, took Blaire’s side saying the idea Social Autopsy was simply a splash page was unequivocally false.

After that Redpillblack then described all of the people who made videos criticising her dox-inviting database in hopes of getting it taken down, as “bottom feeders”.  She then continues to make the absolutely terrible point that “there’s so much going on in the world today” so its weird to dedicate your time on her and her crap chute of a site and not on terrorism or “everything that has been going on with the Trump presidency”.

Then there were the conspiracies.

In a Facebook video, Candace says that there were conspiracies about her being a government plant which in reality were very scarce. However, many questioned if she was truly conservative which is pretty reasonable considering what I have mentioned thus far. But what she did was make a conspiracy about the conspiracy by calling it a “deep web rumor” which was beyond an exaggeration, it was just plain false.

She then says that she firmly believes Richard Spencer, who agreed with her skeptics, is a “democratic operative”. You might wonder, ‘There must be a surplus of undeniable evidence to make such a claim.’ Well as you would probably guess by now, this is not the case. She provides approximately zero evidence to back up this claim as well as the next claim she spouts in which the conservative accounts criticizing her were apparently just “trolls” that were out to get her.

With all of this deception and overall suspiciousness, one would think it is reasonable to be skeptical of Redpillblack, right? According to her, absolutely not. She said in her Facebook video, “we cannot become skeptics”. So naturally, on my skeptic Instagram account, I commented all of my grievances in a respectful manner under one of her posts.

This was met with a nearly immediate block from her.

Minutes after commenting I could not find her account. So using one of my other Instagram accounts I went back to the post in which I commented to see my comment taken down and an array of endless positive comments, odd for such a contentious character.

So lets recap, Candace Owens is someone who is rude, obnoxious, suspicious and deceptive, who also believes everyone is out to get her and those who aren’t should not be skeptical of her. I don’t know about you but that does not scream conservative to me. But she still continues to climb the corporate ladder at Charlie Kirk’s organization Turning Point, where she currently resides as Director of Urban Engagement. It’s time for conservatives giving her a platform to block her, just as she blocked me.

Image from The Rubin Report.

Pick Up the Antidote of Liberty

By Joseph Caso | USA

People in America are confused now more than ever. We have rioters that claim peace, racists that claim others are racist, anti-fascists using fascist tactics, liberals that claim to be conservative, libertarians who are pro-government, the list could go on. A lot of people are trying to fight for the side they believe is right, democrats and republicans alike.

They are both wrong. The real fight will never be between these political parties but, rather, between true libertarians and true authoritarians.

First, we need to understand why the great constitutional republic that is the United States was formed. It was formed by people oppressed by a government they once trusted, people who fought and won against the world’s strongest military power. These people weren’t fueled by money or political gain, but rather by the thought that they could somehow, against all odds, create a government in which the people are not oppressed. A government founded on the principles of John Locke, someone who believed that the government should serve the people and in doing so, protect their rights to life, liberty, and property.

But now it has seemed like we have started to lose these valuable ideals that we once held dear. This begs the question, “Haven’t we learned from the past?” Whenever there is a place that doesn’t follow these ideals there is tyranny, and the places that are not yet tyrannical are just like U.S.: slowly descending down a slippery slope to authoritarianism. These words seem ridiculous, but that is the worst part. Western governments do their best to normalize the elimination of the people’s rights in exchange for more government power, by taking their citizens’ rights away slowly but surely. To speed this up they disguise their increase in power as a form of societal progress while slandering those who disagree. Congress passes bills that can only be described as taxpayer-funded government steroids that masquerade as acts of “equality” or “safety.” They make you look like you don’t want Americans to be protected or you are just one of “phobes,” transphobe, Islamophobe, xenophobe, etc.  It is a despicable rabbit hole that western societies are starting to go down and we need to stop.

An example of this would be gun control. We have the right to bear arms in order to ensure that the government doesn’t overstep its bounds. So why would we allow that same government in which we are supposed to protect ourselves from to dictate what we can use to protect ourselves from them? Oh yeah, we need to give them up for “safety,” makes sense. Typical government rights violation for the “greater good.”

Another example of this is when those who are brainwashed in our society try to shut down “hate speech.” The ignorance in that is self-evident. Our rights cannot be alienated whether it is by the government or by another citizen, for example, I can’t use my right to bear arms to shoot someone because that would interfere with their right to life. Shouldn’t that apply to freedom of speech? If someone uses their freedom of speech to shut down yours isn’t that a violation of your rights? The answer is yes, especially in the case of physical force to achieve this end.

What is even worse is that it is not just about people shouting down speakers. If we look to our friends up north we can see that they are passing laws and motions directly impeding on freedom of speech, making into law what citizens can’t say in order to eliminate “hate” and forcing them to say things in that same regard. I am of course speaking of the new motions restricting Islamophobia as well as the slightly more infamous bill (thanks to Professor Jordan B. Peterson of The University of Toronto), that coerces people to refer to someone with their “correct” gender pronouns, bill C-16, which has since been passed and made into law.

We need to stop living in the moment and look into the future if we continue to take these deceivingly “progressive” steps toward big government we will continue to have our rights restricted and our American values spat on. If we don’t wake up now we along with almost every other country on Earth will be plagued with the disease of authoritarianism. So please put down the syringe of government power and reach towards the antidote of liberty, before it is too late.