Did someone forward you this? Subscribe here free!
By Max Frost
On my walk to work yesterday, I passed a truck driving down Manhattan’s Houston street with the words “ThyssenKrupp” emblazoned on its side. You may recognize the name from elevators (they’re a leading maker of them), steel plants, or, if you’re a Holocaust survivor, Nazi Germany.
After all, the then-two companies of Thyssen and Krupp played a vital role in Germany’s war effort, taking advantage of slave labor to make a profit and power the Nazi war machine. Krupp did so at none other than Auschwitz, where it established a factory. The company’s sole owner would later receive a 12-year prison sentence after being convicted of crimes against humanity.
Neither Thyssen nor Krupp were Nazis at first. They weren’t sold on Hitler’s policies and didn’t come around until pressure threatened their businesses. And, in doing so, they weren’t alone: The German subsidiary of IBM provided punchcards for the Nazis to track the Holocaust; the parent of Bayer, a pharma company, created Zyklon B for the gas chambers; Mercedes-Benz provided the Hitlermobile; the list goes on. To be a large German company that existed before 1946 is likely to have taken part in the Holocaust.
But the ThyssenKrupp truck struck a nerve, because just the night before, we at Roca had been discussing our own topic of whether America is bound for technototalitarianism. And just after getting to work, I came across an article providing strong evidence for the side that says, “Yes, we are.”
We’re keeping our five-year anniversary giveaway going for another week: We’re giving out a free year of Roca premium to five subscribers. To enter, just sign up for a free trial below!
The rest of this report is for paid subscribers, who fund our journalism. If you start a two-week free trial today, you’ll be automatically entered to win a free year. Once you sign up, you can access all of our articles here!
Editor’s Note
Now we leave it to you, Roca nation: Are we worried about nothing? Are 80,000 AI-powered cameras on our streets a good thing? Where do we draw the line between safety and liberty? Let us know by replying to this email.
In the meantime, here are some replies we received yesterday.
Regarding Gen Z’s sobriety, James wrote:
I’m surprised nobody in the replies mentioned “funflation” as a factor in this. I fall smack in the middle of the millennial group and I don’t enjoy going out anymore because of how expensive things have become since covid happened. Happy hour specials are terrible now and the days of 25 cent wings at the local bar, dollar drafts, $5 pitchers, and dollar shots are long gone. The price gouging at sporting events and concerts ($12+tip for a Miller Light…really??) is downright criminal. Depending on the time and place, a one way Uber to the bar can easily cost you $80.
No thanks. I’d love to go out more, but if I have to choose between watching a movie at home with a beer or two and spending $200 to go out and imbibe with my friends, I’m going to choose the former almost every time. I’m 35 now, and if I go out like I did when I was 25, then I would lose the roof over my head.
And regarding the chaos at the CDC…
Aleta wrote:
I’m replying to your post about the damage RFK Jr is doing to the country. He was responsible for several deaths in American Samoa, where I lived for a time. Those were preventable deaths, but his lies and involvement killed people. Vaccines save lives. It’s really that simple. Using faulty data and junk “science” to convince people the vaccines are the problem, and not the disease, is despicable and should be considered criminal from a person who is supposed to prevent illnesses and keep America healthy. He has no background in healthcare or medicine, and using his platform to spread vicious propaganda and lies is irresponsible at best, and treason at its worst.
He. Must. Be. Stopped.
Will wrote similarly:
If I had to pick one side or the other, I would say that I am more alarmed than supportive of RFK’s CDC Shake Up. It is hard to believe that many of the most highly respected doctors in their respective fields would band together and publicly condemn the direction the CDC was going unless there was reason for doing so. In theory, the medical field is a scientific one, and sciences are subject to change when new research comes out disproving what was previously believed to be true. Therefore, if new/credible evidence came out about harmful affects of vaccines post COVID then one would think that this would be taken as fact regardless of personal politics around the subject, but it hasn’t.
RFK and his new team were clearly biased against vaccines from the jump, so enacting a radical change away from the previous stance on the topic without definitive evidence shouldn’t just be accepted without question. Still, it’s encouraging to see that vaccine safety isn’t treated as a settled issue. Clearly the way vaccines were rolled out during COVID was a flawed operation and many people did suffer from taking them despite there being seemingly universal agreement that they were beneficial at the time. However, do those cases of people getting sick even remotely stack up to the number of lives saved by the rollout of the vaccine? Nobody knows yet. Hopefully, RFK’s widespread skepticism will drive one side to produce definitive evidence that their belief is correct.
But Sandra disagreed:
I’m all FOR the new administration guidelines to get America HEALTHY
So that’s all for today. If you want to read more, find the stories below. Otherwise, see you tomorrow.
–Max and Max
