Category: Joseph Somsel

Do Private Uranium Investors Have a $3B Claim against Obama Administration Officials?


As the Uranium One scandal unfolds and North Korea nukes up, Americans rightly worry about the integrity of our regulatory and approval mechanisms related to fissionable material.  It appears that members of the Obama Administration may have used the extensive regulation and secrecy integral to US uranium operations to bankrupt a $3 billion private firm, and civil litigation, with very different and often more permissive rules of discovery and deposition, may be feasible as a mechanism of getting at the rot. Some questionable federal government actions reported here in American Thinker in 2009 could be the basis for a civil suit against former Obama Administration officials.

A good thing happened at the close of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union back in 1991.  The Soviets had tons of highly enriched uranium (90%+ U-235) that the Russians had little use for with the end of Cold War.  Some of it was in the form of nuclear warheads and bombs.  The other extensive inventory was reactor fuel from scrapped nuclear submarines.  A big worry for nuclear experts was how the weak and unstable Russian government was to maintain effective security on this near-ideal bomb making material.  The first nuclear weapon used on Hiroshima used highly enriched uranium.  This type is also considered the easiest to design and implement – the perfect terrorist weapon.

US lawmakers recognized the problem and came up with a solution.  Buy the excess enriched uranium from the Russian government, “down-blend” it with normal uranium to low levels suitable for commercial reactor fuel (about 5% U-235) and use it to power American electricity supplies.  The Russian government got some needed cash and the world had less to worry about from terrorist nuclear weapons.  They called the program “Megatons to Megawatts.”  For much of the 1990s and 2000s, somewhere between 10 and 20% of American electricity came from Russian warheads and submarine fuel.

The US had another problem – our own uranium enrichment facilities.  We, too, had a greatly reduced need for enriched uranium for our military and the production facilities built for the Cold War were looking like they were obsolete technologies.  The gaseous diffusion process first used at Oak Ridge by the Manhattan Project was much less efficient and economical compared to the new centrifuge technology coming on-line.  Future demand would come from the price-sensitive commercial nuclear power industry.

To solve both problems the two government gaseous diffusion plants (Oak Ridge, Tennessee and Paducah, Ohio) were privatized.  These plants were originally constructed by the Manhattan Project and its successor, the Atomic Energy Commission, to meet US military and later commercial needs for “separative work units” or “SWU” .  This upgrades the U-235 concentration of in natural uranium from 0.711% to a more usable level that could reach 90+% for nuclear weapons (like the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima) and for nuclear naval reactor fuel.  Commercial reactor fuel makes do with less than 5% U-235.  The balance is the more abundant isotope U-238.

The US government ultimately reaped $3 billion from the sale to a new firm, the US Enrichment Corporation (USEC) by some reports. Their 1998 IPO set the per-share price at $14.25. But to sweeten the deal for what looked like soon-to-be white elephants, USEC was made principal agent for the commercial sale of Russian down-blended uranium.  The US government retained responsibility for the decommissioning and cleanup of the plants once they closed for good.  At their IPO, they claimed to supply 75% of the US market for enrichment services and 40% of the world market.  Assets totaled over $3 billion.

USEC worked great as a commercial business “flipping warheads” until the Russians decided they had sold enough of their highly enriched uranium.  President Obama terminated the “Megatons to Megawatts” program by executive order in 2015.  The US and Russia tried to cut a deal to take over commercial sales of Russian plutonium, but a lack of commercial interest in reactor fuel using plutonium was probably a factor – the extra security required is not worth the hassle for power reactor operators.  Besides, the US government already has 33 tons of surplus weapon-grade Pu-239 it planned on burying at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

So without a stream of Russian uranium to sell and two obsolete enrichment facilities, USEC decided it needed to build a new centrifuge plant of its own.  It had the infrastructure and experience required already for shipping and handling so there were some savings to be had plus  access to US government technology.   The Nuclear Renaissance was flowering and with new plants, a big increase in enrichment services would be needed.  Other players jumped into the US market with the announced construction of several new plants. As was discussed in our earlier article in 2009, USEC applied for a loan guarantee for construction of the new centrifuge plant. Its application was repeatedly denied while a $1.2 billion loan guarantee for a corporation wholly owned by the French government for a plant in Idaho was approved.  A Dutch/UK/German company started construction on a plant in Louisiana with no guarantee from the US government at all!  USEC had to show signed contracts for the output before loan approval.  If only Solyndra had had to meet that condition for its $535 million government loan.

Even more suspicious was that the “safety” of the USEC centrifuge design was questioned by the US government with resulting project delays.  What struck one as funny about this decision was that the reasons for the rejection were reported as secret in the industry press at the time.  Ultimately, this was dismissed as the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission concluded no nuclear safety issues.  Of course, an actual centrifuge design is considered a secret for proliferation concerns, like the ones that A. Q.  Khan stole from the Dutch for Pakistan.  A small demonstration plant using the USEC design is now completing a three year test run, so some level of scale model approval must have occurred.  In the meantime, the market for SWUs has collapsed with the price per SWU falling from $140 in 2011 to less than $50 today.

USEC went bankrupt in 2012, although it has reorganized itself and emerged a shadow of its former self under the name of Centrus Energy.   Its principal business is as a sales agent for TENEX, the Russian enrichment concern.  But even that is limited by a 2008 law restricting Russian imports of enrichment services.  A perusal of the latest SEC 10-K filing for 2016 suggests Centrus may be worth more dead than alive, what with net loss carry-forwards exceeding their assets and non-trivial unfunded pension liabilities.  The market value of their stock bottomed out at about $9,000,000 but is at this writing showing at $32 million.

So where are the claims?  Since it went public for about $3 billion in 1998 and is now worth maybe $30 million, somebody has taken a serious haircut.  Toshiba Corporation and Babcock & Wilcox Company bought in for $200 million, for example. Assets went from $3 billion in 1998 to $716 million on a net operating loss of $67 million at the end of 2016.  Today its core business is as agent for the Russian enrichment company TENEX.  USEC once served 40% of the world market from its own production – today it handles 4% of the world market simply as agent for SWUs from TENEX.  Employment went from 4,400 in 1998 to 338 today.

That haircut can be traced, in large part, to US government decisions which oft times made little or no sense to an outside observer.  First, USEC has been denied federal loan guarantees that were granted to agencies of foreign governments in direct competition.  Second, their technology was delayed in “nuclear safety” evaluations that were considered secret.  Granted, “Megatons to Megawatts” gravy train had to come to an end someday and was formally ended by Obama by executive order. It looks to me that the USEC was deliberately killed by the Obama Administration.

Chants of “Lock Her Up” would set a very risky precedent for criminal prosecution of losing presidential candidates as would throwing outgoing administration appointees in jail.  But going the O.J. Simpson route of civil cases by private citizens stripping ill-gotten gains from bad actors in government could a meaningful deterrent to future wrong doing.  The shareholders of USEC could band together to look deeper into what role the people in the Obama Administration misused their power to affect the evaporation of their capital and the ruination of USEC.  The Clinton Foundation has deep pockets, deep enough to motivate most lawyers in private practice.  Perhaps the civil courts can affect justice faster than the Congress or federal prosecutors.

Joseph Somsel is a 45 year veteran of the commercial nuclear power industry.  He has no financial interest in the subjects of this article.

As the Uranium One scandal unfolds and North Korea nukes up, Americans rightly worry about the integrity of our regulatory and approval mechanisms related to fissionable material.  It appears that members of the Obama Administration may have used the extensive regulation and secrecy integral to US uranium operations to bankrupt a $3 billion private firm, and civil litigation, with very different and often more permissive rules of discovery and deposition, may be feasible as a mechanism of getting at the rot. Some questionable federal government actions reported here in American Thinker in 2009 could be the basis for a civil suit against former Obama Administration officials.

A good thing happened at the close of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union back in 1991.  The Soviets had tons of highly enriched uranium (90%+ U-235) that the Russians had little use for with the end of Cold War.  Some of it was in the form of nuclear warheads and bombs.  The other extensive inventory was reactor fuel from scrapped nuclear submarines.  A big worry for nuclear experts was how the weak and unstable Russian government was to maintain effective security on this near-ideal bomb making material.  The first nuclear weapon used on Hiroshima used highly enriched uranium.  This type is also considered the easiest to design and implement – the perfect terrorist weapon.

US lawmakers recognized the problem and came up with a solution.  Buy the excess enriched uranium from the Russian government, “down-blend” it with normal uranium to low levels suitable for commercial reactor fuel (about 5% U-235) and use it to power American electricity supplies.  The Russian government got some needed cash and the world had less to worry about from terrorist nuclear weapons.  They called the program “Megatons to Megawatts.”  For much of the 1990s and 2000s, somewhere between 10 and 20% of American electricity came from Russian warheads and submarine fuel.

The US had another problem – our own uranium enrichment facilities.  We, too, had a greatly reduced need for enriched uranium for our military and the production facilities built for the Cold War were looking like they were obsolete technologies.  The gaseous diffusion process first used at Oak Ridge by the Manhattan Project was much less efficient and economical compared to the new centrifuge technology coming on-line.  Future demand would come from the price-sensitive commercial nuclear power industry.

To solve both problems the two government gaseous diffusion plants (Oak Ridge, Tennessee and Paducah, Ohio) were privatized.  These plants were originally constructed by the Manhattan Project and its successor, the Atomic Energy Commission, to meet US military and later commercial needs for “separative work units” or “SWU” .  This upgrades the U-235 concentration of in natural uranium from 0.711% to a more usable level that could reach 90+% for nuclear weapons (like the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima) and for nuclear naval reactor fuel.  Commercial reactor fuel makes do with less than 5% U-235.  The balance is the more abundant isotope U-238.

The US government ultimately reaped $3 billion from the sale to a new firm, the US Enrichment Corporation (USEC) by some reports. Their 1998 IPO set the per-share price at $14.25. But to sweeten the deal for what looked like soon-to-be white elephants, USEC was made principal agent for the commercial sale of Russian down-blended uranium.  The US government retained responsibility for the decommissioning and cleanup of the plants once they closed for good.  At their IPO, they claimed to supply 75% of the US market for enrichment services and 40% of the world market.  Assets totaled over $3 billion.

USEC worked great as a commercial business “flipping warheads” until the Russians decided they had sold enough of their highly enriched uranium.  President Obama terminated the “Megatons to Megawatts” program by executive order in 2015.  The US and Russia tried to cut a deal to take over commercial sales of Russian plutonium, but a lack of commercial interest in reactor fuel using plutonium was probably a factor – the extra security required is not worth the hassle for power reactor operators.  Besides, the US government already has 33 tons of surplus weapon-grade Pu-239 it planned on burying at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

So without a stream of Russian uranium to sell and two obsolete enrichment facilities, USEC decided it needed to build a new centrifuge plant of its own.  It had the infrastructure and experience required already for shipping and handling so there were some savings to be had plus  access to US government technology.   The Nuclear Renaissance was flowering and with new plants, a big increase in enrichment services would be needed.  Other players jumped into the US market with the announced construction of several new plants. As was discussed in our earlier article in 2009, USEC applied for a loan guarantee for construction of the new centrifuge plant. Its application was repeatedly denied while a $1.2 billion loan guarantee for a corporation wholly owned by the French government for a plant in Idaho was approved.  A Dutch/UK/German company started construction on a plant in Louisiana with no guarantee from the US government at all!  USEC had to show signed contracts for the output before loan approval.  If only Solyndra had had to meet that condition for its $535 million government loan.

Even more suspicious was that the “safety” of the USEC centrifuge design was questioned by the US government with resulting project delays.  What struck one as funny about this decision was that the reasons for the rejection were reported as secret in the industry press at the time.  Ultimately, this was dismissed as the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission concluded no nuclear safety issues.  Of course, an actual centrifuge design is considered a secret for proliferation concerns, like the ones that A. Q.  Khan stole from the Dutch for Pakistan.  A small demonstration plant using the USEC design is now completing a three year test run, so some level of scale model approval must have occurred.  In the meantime, the market for SWUs has collapsed with the price per SWU falling from $140 in 2011 to less than $50 today.

USEC went bankrupt in 2012, although it has reorganized itself and emerged a shadow of its former self under the name of Centrus Energy.   Its principal business is as a sales agent for TENEX, the Russian enrichment concern.  But even that is limited by a 2008 law restricting Russian imports of enrichment services.  A perusal of the latest SEC 10-K filing for 2016 suggests Centrus may be worth more dead than alive, what with net loss carry-forwards exceeding their assets and non-trivial unfunded pension liabilities.  The market value of their stock bottomed out at about $9,000,000 but is at this writing showing at $32 million.

So where are the claims?  Since it went public for about $3 billion in 1998 and is now worth maybe $30 million, somebody has taken a serious haircut.  Toshiba Corporation and Babcock & Wilcox Company bought in for $200 million, for example. Assets went from $3 billion in 1998 to $716 million on a net operating loss of $67 million at the end of 2016.  Today its core business is as agent for the Russian enrichment company TENEX.  USEC once served 40% of the world market from its own production – today it handles 4% of the world market simply as agent for SWUs from TENEX.  Employment went from 4,400 in 1998 to 338 today.

That haircut can be traced, in large part, to US government decisions which oft times made little or no sense to an outside observer.  First, USEC has been denied federal loan guarantees that were granted to agencies of foreign governments in direct competition.  Second, their technology was delayed in “nuclear safety” evaluations that were considered secret.  Granted, “Megatons to Megawatts” gravy train had to come to an end someday and was formally ended by Obama by executive order. It looks to me that the USEC was deliberately killed by the Obama Administration.

Chants of “Lock Her Up” would set a very risky precedent for criminal prosecution of losing presidential candidates as would throwing outgoing administration appointees in jail.  But going the O.J. Simpson route of civil cases by private citizens stripping ill-gotten gains from bad actors in government could a meaningful deterrent to future wrong doing.  The shareholders of USEC could band together to look deeper into what role the people in the Obama Administration misused their power to affect the evaporation of their capital and the ruination of USEC.  The Clinton Foundation has deep pockets, deep enough to motivate most lawyers in private practice.  Perhaps the civil courts can affect justice faster than the Congress or federal prosecutors.

Joseph Somsel is a 45 year veteran of the commercial nuclear power industry.  He has no financial interest in the subjects of this article.



Source link

Progressivism and the Seven Deadly Sins


It’s a brave new world, progressives proclaim, and the old rules no longer apply. From the Russian Communists’ New Man to the mantra of “That’s not who we are” from Obama, it’s always different this time.

But is it? Has mankind, after millennia of contemplation, perhaps discovered eternal verities about human nature? One historical test is that when a culture denies the wisdom of the ancients, it eventually fails; those remaining must pick up the pieces and start anew.

“Wisdom of the Ancients” and “eternal verities” are abstractions, of course. But there is a short list going back to Socrates and St. Augustine that is a handy pocket guide to human pitfalls and frailties. It is called “The Seven Deadly Sins.”

Let’s go through the list one by one and see if we can recognize any these in modern American progressivism, in its social, cultural, and political forms. Note that all humans are prone to the Seven Deadlies, progressives and conservatives alike. Normal people just don’t make a movement out of them.

Gluttony

Contrary it what you may think, this is not the sin of getting fat and obese. Rather, it is focusing on food for other reasons than substance. In the case of progressives, food snobbery is a basic part of the class distinctions that sets them apart and above the masses. Of course, one can be a foodie and not be a progressive, but the correlation of Blue ZIP codes and Whole Foods is no coincidence. You are what you eat, be you Woke or Deplorable. Free range chicken or KFC? Indian Pale Ale or Bud? Eating “organic” can be objectively shown to not affect the taste or nutrition or wholesomeness of food, in most cases. It does affect the price and social cachet and is too often a matter of pride to progressives (See more at “Pride” below.)

Lust

The recent news of the passing of Hugh Hefner is a timely reminder that sex has its place and has to be balanced within an honorable person’s life. While I’m not as critical of the Playboy philosophy as other conservatives, seeing it as a somewhat reasonable response to technological change and affluence, sex remains at its core about making children and the next generation. A young playboy could be expected to settle down, marry, and have children – even Hefner tried it, three times.

The current glorification of purely non-reproductive sexual behavior like homosexuality and transgenderism is surely a huge mistake — pure, unbalanced lust leads nowhere for the individual nor for society. Worst, the disdain many progressives show for “breeders” leads to demographic replacement as Mark Steyn has explained repeatedly.

Sloth

To a hardworking man coming home exhausted after a long day, sloth might sound like an idea pretty close to heaven. But work builds true self-esteem. One is contributing and in return one earns a paycheck.

Progressives facilitate sloth as a matter of policy in at least two ways. Welfare is of course the most serious and destructive. With rules that favor single mothers and absent fathers, the State rewards the destruction of the family and the production of rudderless young men and women. “Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop” is another eternal verity. Useless men are not free.

A new wrinkle is the legalization of recreational marijuana in many U.S. states. One can reasonably argue that the medical consequences of freely available pot are trivial compared to alcoholism, drunk driving, etc, and so a free people should be able to put in their bodies what they chose. What is seldom mentioned is that a major consequence of smoking a lot of pot will be a big increase in sloth in the smoking population – been there, done that!

Greed

This one is really simple. Working to build personal and family wealth is not greed. Keeping it is not greed. Stealing that wealth earned and accumulated by others is. Who is for high taxation to “redistribute the wealth”? Who wants confiscatory inheritance taxes? Progressives, of course, especially if that wealth passes through the hands of a government controlled by progressives.

Envy

What progressive political movement hasn’t relied on a tactic of playing to envy as a path to power? Lately, progressives invented the notion of “white privilege” and harp on it incessantly to excite envy in “people of color” and to isolate them from mainstream American culture. As a historical example, Franklin D. Roosevelt campaigned against the “malefactors of great wealth” in his presidential run in 1932 during the Great Depression. Envy of the success of conservative talk radio was the motivation for a call for a return of the “Fairness Doctrine.”

Wrath

What a sinful pleasure it is to wallow in self-righteous wrath! Even better is to physically hit, kick, smash, burn, and shoot. Rioting by Black Lives Matter in some of our cities was justified as wrath over police “brutality.” Rioting and mass assaults against conservatives by Antifa is called protective wrath to suppress all sorts of imagined evils. James Hodgkinson attempted a mass assassination of Republican congressmen in wrath over the election of President Trump.

And what is contemporary feminism about but wrath against men?

Pride

St. Augustine considered pride to be the source of all other sins, much as Aristotle considered courage to be the foundation of all virtues. A modern progressive must reek of pride to declare himself wiser than either. To claim to understand more about gender than Schopenhauer or about politics than Machiavelli or about economics than Smith is neither humble nor plausible.

Even worse, based on that prideful claim of greater understanding than the great thinkers of Western Civilization, progressives claim the right and duty to impose their mission on others, using government or street coercion as handy tools.

But What of Progressive Virtue?

Just as there is the Seven Deadly Sins, there’s the Seven Cardinal Virtues. To be fair, I should task myself to analyze progressivism against them. They have Hope and Faith that their cause will do good. But is “social justice” true Justice? Is Charity served with other peoples’ money collected by taxation? Prudence and Temperance? To experiment with the fate of Western Civilization expecting human behavior to change simply because progressives want it to is both risky and radical. They do have the Courage of their beliefs, I must grant.

Conclusion

Vices and virtues arise in the heart of the individual. But society reflects the character of its people and in turn molds the individual. Progressivism is waging war on the West by extolling and justifying the Seven Deadlies.

Normals, as Kurt Schlichter so accurately calls us, are in no ways immune from and innocent of the Seven Deadlies. We just recognize them as pitfalls on the way to the life well lived that we should recognize and strive to resist. Progressives seem to embrace them as tools for achieving the social, political, and economic change they imagine is the next step to Utopia.

It’s a brave new world, progressives proclaim, and the old rules no longer apply. From the Russian Communists’ New Man to the mantra of “That’s not who we are” from Obama, it’s always different this time.

But is it? Has mankind, after millennia of contemplation, perhaps discovered eternal verities about human nature? One historical test is that when a culture denies the wisdom of the ancients, it eventually fails; those remaining must pick up the pieces and start anew.

“Wisdom of the Ancients” and “eternal verities” are abstractions, of course. But there is a short list going back to Socrates and St. Augustine that is a handy pocket guide to human pitfalls and frailties. It is called “The Seven Deadly Sins.”

Let’s go through the list one by one and see if we can recognize any these in modern American progressivism, in its social, cultural, and political forms. Note that all humans are prone to the Seven Deadlies, progressives and conservatives alike. Normal people just don’t make a movement out of them.

Gluttony

Contrary it what you may think, this is not the sin of getting fat and obese. Rather, it is focusing on food for other reasons than substance. In the case of progressives, food snobbery is a basic part of the class distinctions that sets them apart and above the masses. Of course, one can be a foodie and not be a progressive, but the correlation of Blue ZIP codes and Whole Foods is no coincidence. You are what you eat, be you Woke or Deplorable. Free range chicken or KFC? Indian Pale Ale or Bud? Eating “organic” can be objectively shown to not affect the taste or nutrition or wholesomeness of food, in most cases. It does affect the price and social cachet and is too often a matter of pride to progressives (See more at “Pride” below.)

Lust

The recent news of the passing of Hugh Hefner is a timely reminder that sex has its place and has to be balanced within an honorable person’s life. While I’m not as critical of the Playboy philosophy as other conservatives, seeing it as a somewhat reasonable response to technological change and affluence, sex remains at its core about making children and the next generation. A young playboy could be expected to settle down, marry, and have children – even Hefner tried it, three times.

The current glorification of purely non-reproductive sexual behavior like homosexuality and transgenderism is surely a huge mistake — pure, unbalanced lust leads nowhere for the individual nor for society. Worst, the disdain many progressives show for “breeders” leads to demographic replacement as Mark Steyn has explained repeatedly.

Sloth

To a hardworking man coming home exhausted after a long day, sloth might sound like an idea pretty close to heaven. But work builds true self-esteem. One is contributing and in return one earns a paycheck.

Progressives facilitate sloth as a matter of policy in at least two ways. Welfare is of course the most serious and destructive. With rules that favor single mothers and absent fathers, the State rewards the destruction of the family and the production of rudderless young men and women. “Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop” is another eternal verity. Useless men are not free.

A new wrinkle is the legalization of recreational marijuana in many U.S. states. One can reasonably argue that the medical consequences of freely available pot are trivial compared to alcoholism, drunk driving, etc, and so a free people should be able to put in their bodies what they chose. What is seldom mentioned is that a major consequence of smoking a lot of pot will be a big increase in sloth in the smoking population – been there, done that!

Greed

This one is really simple. Working to build personal and family wealth is not greed. Keeping it is not greed. Stealing that wealth earned and accumulated by others is. Who is for high taxation to “redistribute the wealth”? Who wants confiscatory inheritance taxes? Progressives, of course, especially if that wealth passes through the hands of a government controlled by progressives.

Envy

What progressive political movement hasn’t relied on a tactic of playing to envy as a path to power? Lately, progressives invented the notion of “white privilege” and harp on it incessantly to excite envy in “people of color” and to isolate them from mainstream American culture. As a historical example, Franklin D. Roosevelt campaigned against the “malefactors of great wealth” in his presidential run in 1932 during the Great Depression. Envy of the success of conservative talk radio was the motivation for a call for a return of the “Fairness Doctrine.”

Wrath

What a sinful pleasure it is to wallow in self-righteous wrath! Even better is to physically hit, kick, smash, burn, and shoot. Rioting by Black Lives Matter in some of our cities was justified as wrath over police “brutality.” Rioting and mass assaults against conservatives by Antifa is called protective wrath to suppress all sorts of imagined evils. James Hodgkinson attempted a mass assassination of Republican congressmen in wrath over the election of President Trump.

And what is contemporary feminism about but wrath against men?

Pride

St. Augustine considered pride to be the source of all other sins, much as Aristotle considered courage to be the foundation of all virtues. A modern progressive must reek of pride to declare himself wiser than either. To claim to understand more about gender than Schopenhauer or about politics than Machiavelli or about economics than Smith is neither humble nor plausible.

Even worse, based on that prideful claim of greater understanding than the great thinkers of Western Civilization, progressives claim the right and duty to impose their mission on others, using government or street coercion as handy tools.

But What of Progressive Virtue?

Just as there is the Seven Deadly Sins, there’s the Seven Cardinal Virtues. To be fair, I should task myself to analyze progressivism against them. They have Hope and Faith that their cause will do good. But is “social justice” true Justice? Is Charity served with other peoples’ money collected by taxation? Prudence and Temperance? To experiment with the fate of Western Civilization expecting human behavior to change simply because progressives want it to is both risky and radical. They do have the Courage of their beliefs, I must grant.

Conclusion

Vices and virtues arise in the heart of the individual. But society reflects the character of its people and in turn molds the individual. Progressivism is waging war on the West by extolling and justifying the Seven Deadlies.

Normals, as Kurt Schlichter so accurately calls us, are in no ways immune from and innocent of the Seven Deadlies. We just recognize them as pitfalls on the way to the life well lived that we should recognize and strive to resist. Progressives seem to embrace them as tools for achieving the social, political, and economic change they imagine is the next step to Utopia.



Source link