 What I will be talking today would be kind of part 2 of David's presentation on Murray Rodberg and other scholars of the von Mises Institute during the last 30 years, von Mises Institute developed a very impressive body of knowledge and political economy of war. And so we have the works of Murray Rodberg, of Ralph Reiko, of Robert Higgs, which I think that it kind of establishes the revisionist school, Austrian school of history, of history, of political economy, of these sad developments. And definitely we are trying to complement each other. As Soviet dictator Leonid Brezhnev once said about Politburo members that they developed an atmosphere of uncritical mutual adoration, which is appropriate only for capitalist society. So the alternative, the socialists, usually would behave like spiders in a jar. So I would say that in von Mises Institute, which is the most pro-capitalist institution, research institution in the world, I think that it is very nice that we do peacefully cooperate with each other and like each other work. Well, today I will talk about this Gang of Four, this is a picture actually which was posted near the Vilnius Airport in freely Lithuania. So Ludwig von Mises, he wrote that the characteristic feature of this age, and he was writing that exactly in 1934, is the age of the destructive wars and social disintegration, is the revolt against economics, revolt against economics. And that's exactly what happened. von Mises wrote also in Human Action that there are two patterns of socialism. And these two patterns would be one is Russian pattern and another would be German pattern of socialism. And Russian pattern would be purely bureaucratic when everything is owned by the state. Everything is owned by the state. So the whole economy is run like a huge post office, like a huge post office. So that's a Russian pattern. And then there is a German pattern which normally preserves private ownership of markets, prices, wages, and interest rates. There are however no longer entrepreneurs but only shop managers, betriebs furor in the terminology of the Nazi legislation. So amazingly enough that usually we would think that say the Western countries, the so-called Western democracies, would follow German pattern. And I remember that Mary Rodbert would talk about that, that we are not yet on the Russian path. We are mostly following this German pattern of socialism. However, if you will look back, you would see that that Russian pattern is also very much around with the government motors, with the government owning a lot of our economy and nationalization of healthcare industry which is about 24% of our gross domestic products. So it's almost one fourth of our economy if we will put healthcare, pharmaceuticals, theory of medical devices together. So that's quite a lot. Amazingly enough that between the wars, which was this period of self-destruction of capitalism, even propaganda, even posters were very similar, very similar. This is one of the Roosevelt's posters that work promotes confidence. And so the Union, the poster would look exactly the same with the same person even and that would say work is honor. And you remember what in Hitler's concentration camps they had Arbeit macht frei. So the work makes you free. So this is the, this even thinking about that is more or less the same. This also, if you will replace capital with Kremlin, that would look like a typical Soviet poster about security, about social security, the government will take care of you. And Murray Rodbert, he did a lot of work to expose this tide of zeitgeist, the spirit of time. The 20th century was for him essentially of evil that had to be repudiated. Rodbert believed that history is not progressive. It doesn't all the time go only up and up and up. History is erratic. And the most tragic kind of deep it took in the 20th century, the century, the most bloodiest century in the history of human earth. Rudy Rammel, demographer from University of Hawaii, he wrote 28 books about that. One is famous book, Death by Government, in which he believes that over 200 million people were murdered by socialists of all kinds during the 20th century. That's more than at any other century in the history of human society. And while talking about Stalin, who was definitely the most evil out of the four, he created the real perfect killer state, a real perfect killer state. And in Soviet Union alone, they murdered anywhere from 43 to 61 million people. I was, last Thursday, I was, just two days ago, was at Montclair State University in New Jersey, and we had debate, and I presented libertarian point of view against conservative and against so-called liberal. And the so-called liberal was not a liberal even. He was the most ardent Stalinist fanatic that I ever met. I never met people like him, even in Soviet Union or communist China to that matter. And his name is Grover Furr. If you would have time, just look him up on the Internet, Grover Furr, F-U-R-R. David Horowitz, who is kind of conservative, whatever, specialist in education, he believes that he is the worst professor in the world, in the world. And he is teaching since 1917, that poor university, exposed to this view. He believes that Stalin didn't kill enough, yeah, that Stalin didn't kill enough, that the worst thing, and so all of these unkilled people, then they badmouthed him after he died. And so that's, and it was very difficult to even to talk about that, yes. For example, we discussed also war on drugs, and he said all drugs in the world are produced by the CIA. And so we need just to abolish CIA, which I agree with, and then the drug problem would disappear. I don't think CIA is capable of anything like that. So Murray wrote also that private property under the regimes of this gang of four is eliminated. Individualism goes by the board. Individuality is flattened. All property is owned and controlled communally. And the individual units of the new collective organism are in some way equal to one another. If I would be, if I would be like Mr. Furr, if I would be a present tenant of the White House, I would do exactly that, that the program is right here. And I think that exactly what is happening today. So Robert, he focused, I think, his attention on the fact that there is not much, it's only quantitative, not qualitative difference between welfare, welfare state, and socialism. That both patterns, that the German pattern and the Russian pattern, are essentially complementary to each other. But when you go on the slippery slope, then you would end up, by the logic of history, you will be drawn into gulags, into Stalinism, into mass murder. And other members of the gang of four, they were trying to do that. Some of them succeeded more than others. But we will just talk a little bit about that. Well this is a little bit premature. But I hope that all of our socialist idols would end up like that. So there, a great analysis of the war and great depression which led to socialization in the United States for us to lose freedoms was associated with Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal. It's analyzed in the great book Depression War and Cold War Studies in Political Economy. I think that the works of both Higgs are already classical works of our time. We'll return back to that. Ralph Raker, great wars and great leaders of the libertarian rebuttal. Another great work and published by von Mises Institute. Also Ralph Raker published a lot of wonderful articles about Churchill, about Churchill on Lurochwell.com on von Mises' site as well. So let's look at them a little bit more attentively. Who were these people and how did they interact with each other? Well Churchill, this is a quote from Ralph, that Churchill was a racist, goes without saying, yet his racism went deeper than with most of his contemporaries. It is curious how with his stark Darwinian outlook, his elevation of war to the center of place in human history and his racism, as well as his fixation on great leaders, Churchill's worldview resemble that of his antagonist, Hitler. And this is absolutely true because if you will look, that was Hitler and to some extent Stalin, well Stalin won the Second World War, I mean that if you would look who won the Second World War, that was Stalin. The Second World War was officially the war for independence and freedom of Poland. So Poland was sacrificed first after the war. It was given to Stalin on a plate with a silver lining and about 800,000 Poles were murdered just in a short period of time between 1946 and 1949 when Boleslaw Berot established his communist dictatorship in Poland. So Churchill adored Stalin. It's amazing that Churchill had this fascinatingly, I would say, idiotic idea that Stalin did not represent ideology, that Stalin was not a socialist, that Stalin was fighting for Russian national interests, that Stalin was Russian nationalist in disguise, in disguise of German, or for Georgian, I'm sorry, of Georgian communist, which sounds bizarre because in Russian national interest if such thing exists, I think it doesn't, what means national interest, but in interest of all Russians would be to get rid of Stalin right away because he destroyed Russian people more than anybody else in Russian history. Churchill used to say, one may dislike Hitler's system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations. This is a quote from Winston Spencer Leonard Churchill. So this, and he talked about that in 1937, he published an article in The Guardian. So he, you can see that he admired Hitler also as a nationalist, admired Hitler, that Hitler is pursuing German national interest. He at that time also, that was already 1939, he said at the meeting at the British cabinet that I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia, it is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. But perhaps there is a key, that key is Russian national interest. So he, before the war, Churchill embraced both dictators, Hitler and Stalin alike as promoters of their national interest, of which Churchill himself was envious. In the first quote you can see that he probably would be that champion admirable enough to restore, to restore our courage. So speaking about his humanism, because he was presented as a humanist, he got a Nobel Prize for literature. At that time I think Nobel Prize committee had enough distancing not to offer him a Nobel Prize for peace, because if there will be a Nobel Prize to the worst warmonger, then he could compete for that, definitely. Because Churchill, there was not a war that Churchill didn't like. And Churchill personally participated in all wars which happened during his lifetime. In all wars he was either a war correspondent or an officer or a planner or a person who is responsible for mass murder of his own people. He was first lord of admiralty in 1917 during the Gallipoli disaster, during which he should take all responsibility. And many historians do blame him for engineering of this mass butchery of mostly British, New Zealand and Australian soldiers in Turkey. So then these three, they adored each other, especially Roosevelt, he loved Stalin. His ambassador in Moscow, Davis, was writing to Roosevelt in 1938 that he is impressed by the courage with which Stalin is getting rid of trash. And trash would be that people that all the staged trials, all the stage show trials, he believed, Davis believed that all of them were true. All of these people confessed, all of these people confessed. Now we have, I am working at the Library of Congress at the Volkogonov Archives. This is amazing archives. Soviet general Volkogonov, he was a Soviet propaganda hitman. And I would switch him off right away. He was just even, I don't know, worse than Rachel Meadow or whomever else. And I didn't know that since 1980 he was making highly illegal copies of secret Soviet documents. He was a director of the Soviet Institute for Military History. And then when Soviet Union collapsed, he shipped them all to the Library of Congress. U.S. government insisted to ship them to CIA and he resisted that. Yeah, because CIA would put it on the lead again. That's for sure. So in the Library, of course, we have this fascinating handwritten memos by all of these people. And from this Volkogonov Archives, it is obvious that, for example, these other two, Churchill and Roosevelt, they would send telegrams to each other all the time. There was no internet. And so they were sending telegrams. And these telegrams would be read by Stalin earlier than they would reach the White House or the Downing Street 10. So Stalin was monitoring all correspondence between these other two. Between these other two. The major kind of, I would say, betrayal of Europe was at Yalta. In Yalta, they agreed that there would be free elections in the countries of Eastern Europe, that government of Poland would be both communist and non-communist. I don't know how that would come. And they agreed also to set up the United Nations to set up the United Nations. So this is, from all points of view, this is absolutely ridiculous. What really happened was, as you know, that Stalin got most of Europe, everything he wanted, everything he wanted. And these people were doomed for the communist slavery for a long time. Then the outcome of this, and I see that my time is running out, Soviets, ex-Soviet, even experienced shortage of everything. And even my books already are gone and everything. I was speaking about books before I'll forget. I just published this book. It's called Tea Party and the American Counter-Revolution. It will be reprinted because this is pretty bad edition and you can see how awful it is. It's written together with Roman Skasky, a great libertarian who is a great friend of the Music Institute as well. And so we have welfare state. What if I will just go to what do we face today? And this is what we do. And that's what this Roosevelt and Churchill created in the West. And I'm so sorry I just didn't. And some people would say that, well, the guy is very good. Well, Stalin was very good in 1915. You can see that. And I would like to end with this. That all collectives, social utopias will end in a disaster irrespective of difference in detail. That Murray is a Rodbert dictum. I think we see it and we see this welfare state unraveling before our eyes the same way as the Soviet Empire unraveled. However, everybody thought that it will exist for another 10,000 years. Well, thank you very much. I just look like my time is gone. But I will be around it so we can, because I definitely have way more to say.