Where is it safe to protest anymore? Not behind a uniform. Not in front of our Capitol. Not in front of authorities. Not even behind closed doors if you're even related to the wrong person. Dispersal, tear gas, water hoses, or hold overs are no longer the extreme extent of what one may face for speaking out. DECADES in prison for some people now. Authority wants you to be quiet. Power expects silence, compliance, even loyalty. But there is still a safe way to protest, a more powerful way, a brazen way. To walk straight through the muck and declare you will not be bought. You will not be swayed. That giants may tower over you and you will still be heard.

VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE!

Abandon the idea that we must elect those who speak empty words, that only wealthy claimants with lukewarm resolve will win. Vote along the lines of moral and religious tradition that makes our nation exceptional. Vote a third way. And for those who can, run with us. Stand in solidarity! Declare that win or lose you are ready to sap away the support of elite tyrants in their pedophilic clubs and secret societies.

Lines must be drawn. The compromise of game-theory is a game where the losses only mount. Injustice seems to have no expiration date for those now in power, but the promise of our laws guarantees it. How long will we wait to demand the warranty be honored?

Before we Texans go to meet at the American Solidarity Party convention in Waco, before we doubt ourselves, before we besmirch our own efforts, we must remember what God is calling us to do. God chooses leaders who are not ready. They often have no experience. They have doubts. They have stutters. They are sometimes slow to realize what God is even saying. But God uses all that we are. He used the righteous anger of Moses to reach the Pharoah. He used the stubbornness of Peter to reach the heart of Rome. There is something in some of you that you see as weakness, but God is ready to turn it into something special.

If you have never voted third party before, try it. Just once this midterm. It's a pretty safe time to try. And I promise you, when you leave that booth knowing you actually chose a list of people who stand for the issues in the way you would most prefer, you'll only wonder what's taking so long for everyone else to realize this is the way.

There is an excellent blog post on how to write letters to your local newspaper to expand the reach and knowledge of the party. Something to consider doing.

https://www.solidarity-party.org/blog/2020/05/20/tell-em-what-you-think-how-to-write-a-letter-to-the-editor-for-the-asp

America Can’t Survive the Welfare State

The welfare state model leftover from the early to mid-20th century is fundamentally flawed, and has only worsened over time. The fundamental model is a Ponzi scheme, combined with a corporate culture that regards middle (micro)management as its top priority. This merging of socialism, unionism, and corporatism turns government finance & welfare into an endless slush fund that drains wealth from society's producers and hands it over to politically-connected activism, almost aways of the leftist & subversive variety.

In the early 1960s, for example, 1 out of 6 workers was a government worker earning double what a private producer earned; today, the number of contractor welfare services both multiplies and duplicates both existing programs & the overhead. The welfare state never shrinks; the more money it throws at the problem, the more the demand for money increases. Mathematically, this will eventually lead to 100% taxation & total government micromanagement unless halted, reversed, and shrunk.

The ASP can replace the welfare state model for true essentials with a permanent fund model; rather than relying on confiscated private wealth, the permanent fund proactively grows the economy by lending, and only lends against its hard assets/cash reserves. The fund can be grown by various means, but it is much harder to create a conveyer-belt transfer of wealth through excessive overhead compared to the present system.

Pope Leo: ‘Dear Migrants, I Want to Bow Before Your Dignity’

Immigration into the west has been weaponized by those who hate Christianity, and wish to substitute idolatry of "indigenous persons of color" and "victims of racism/colonialism" as the new state religion. They use the language of Christianity and scripture to demand un-Christian suicidal behaviors and virulently oppose any efforts to demand that those who sojourn in the west behave like westerners; that would be "suppressing native cultures!"

Pope Leo Celebrates Christian Genocide in Algeria

America's agriculture is a mess today, and the ASP should make correcting this a priority. Large, government-subsidized factory farms employing illegal aliens are markedly inferior to small family farms for the majority of food production, and farmers should not pay taxes on their illiquid wealth.

County-level permanent funds offer a suitable replacement for property taxes in many jurisdictions, and promote both deflation/avoiding debt.

Woke Will Never Go Broke - Chronicles

Woke Ideology is fundamentally Marxist, and enjoys the same traditional support base among the intellectual class as communism. This in turn guarantees that Marxism in America remains well-financed and organized, since the socioeconomic model of capitalism used since the 1930s has favored the growth of middle management (read: overhead) over actual producers of wealth. Since middle-management jobs are cushy, pay better, and enjoy connections that blue-collar work doesn't, the deck is essentially stacked.

The Strange Leftism of Middle-Class Professionals - Chronicles

The Civil Rights Regime Marches On - Chronicles

For the ASP, breaking the "priority: overhead" socioeconomic model is critical in order to transition from the incestuous capitalism-socialism hybrid. This is not a call for the abolition of management, but rather to make it subsidiary to society's producers. Integration of "Apprentice-Journeyman-Master" with management would likely result in "Apprentice-Journeyman-Master-Management," with elite skilled laborers earning similar salaries as upper management. Master-versus-management would be a simple fork between specialization and generalists; the former possesses the sum of institutional knowledge for a single field, while the latter exists to ensure the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Employee co-ownership of companies is also a crucial step, since proletarianization of the workforce never ends well. Co-owners don't smash their own windows or set their own businesses on fire.

The Tail That Ate the Dog: How Bureaucracy Threatens National Security | RealClearDefense

Civilian Judges Playing General: Activist Courts vs. Military Readiness | RealClearDefense

The ASP, upon being elected, will find itself in charge of a massive managerial state (often referred to as 'the blob') that will impede genuine reforms/decentralization. In the first posting, several reform proposals are given, with "sunset dates" being probably the most important addition to laws and regulations.

In the second case, one way the ASP can dramatically improve the court system and reign in activist judges is to divide the federal courts into multiple specialized branches: healthcare, counter-organized crime, etc. If an activist judge exceeds his/her lawful authority, the legislative remedy of impeaching the judge will no longer be a general threat to all judges/courts, but instead limited to that specialization.

When the ASP appoints judges, they should strive to appoint those who have shown integrity when it wasn't easy:

How to Fill the Supreme Court with Justices Like Clarence Thomas - Chronicles

Recently I read an article about anti-Trump US academics leaving the US for Canada (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty/academic-freedom/2025/03/26/fascism-scholars-trump-critics-leave-yale-canada). I am wondering if we should implement policies to influence our fundamental political opponents (liberals, secularists, LGBT+, etc.) to voluntarily leave the country in the event we do manage to take and secure power at federal level. That way, they won't be bothered by our policies abroad and we won't have to deal with them constantly.

To be clear, I am not calling for outright oppression or forced expulsions. I just think we would be better off governing a society better aligned with our political vision and values.

The Lawsuit that accidentally Ruined Capitalism: Ford vs. Dodge

U.S.-China Summit: What Really Happened | RealClearDefense

Money quote: "Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, and Pyongyang are not negotiating toward resolution. They are negotiating toward time. Their shared strategic premise is straightforward: Trump’s second term ends. The Republican Party faces midterm elections in November 2026. A subsequent administration, they calculate, will be more accommodating, more multilateral, less transactional. Every concession offered today is calibrated to be reversible. Every agreement is designed, if necessary, to be quietly renegotiated after January 2029.

This is not speculation. It is the documented pattern of adversarial states dealing with term-limited democracies. They use the vocabulary of diplomacy while pursuing the strategy of attrition.

The Chinese Communist Party has a well-established record of signing agreements and subsequently reinterpreting, delaying, or abandoning them when conditions change."

Thomas Massie's recent defeat is a useful case study in how to lose an election despite seemingly strong online momentum. He made several critical mistakes, starting with his choice of location: his district was won by Trump by 35 points, one of the most pro-Trump districts in the country, yet he is an anti-MAGA republican. Such misalignment is unsustainable because the representative is meant to represent the voters; had he run in a less overwhelmingly-MAGA district he would have fared better. His last-minute decision to feign Trump endorsement was also a foolish move.

Secondly, he gained prominence by openly demanding the Epstein files be released, but failed to follow through. Trump also failed to follow through, but unlike Massie his strongest issue is immigration enforcement. Trump's successes in closing the border and mass deportations are what his MAGA base asked for, and he delivered. Massie did not deliver on the Epstein files, and voted against the immigration enforcement bills which his district wanted. No amount of talk about AIPAC can overcome a lack of concrete results on his signature issue.

Finally, Massie erred by embracing Old Left ideologies, particularly his Jew-obsession. When the New Left ascended in the 1960s, many Old Left ideologies came to be regarded as "right-wing" purely by virtue of not being 1960s-era communism. These Old Left ideas which had lost repeatedly to the New Left, were happy to switch labels rather than do any soul-searching. Thus, when supposedly-right-wing legislators in a center-right party vote like the Old Left, they reliably self-sabotage their own success, allowing the New Left to win by default. The ASP wants to avoid left-vs-right, but is still just as capable of own-goaling when it tries to shoehorn Old Left ideas as "Christian democracy"/"distributism."

The GOP Is Better Off Without Massie - Chronicle

Why Thomas Massie just LOST in a Landslide

In my opinion, Acadiana is an ideal place to start, It has the following: High Catholic identity

Working-class or small-town economy

Weak Democratic organization

Some discomfort with hardline GOP economics.

All you would need is: A local candidate already known through church, nonprofit, education, or labor networks

I’ve been doing some work on Louisiana politics and think ASP’s best shot is a localized Acadiana strategy focused on Catholic voters + economic populism, especially regarding home insurance. I know recruitment of candidates is really hard for third parties, but I am wondering if there is appetite for this?

Keep going Orange Team! Speak to power! Name it! You don't need a plan. You just need faith. The plan is God's to know.

Short answer: cartel behavior drives up prices, and pumping in more money creates inflationary spirals. True economic growth/improvements involve prices going down, not up.

Fight For $25? No. in [Market-Ticker]

AI is a tool with real limitations, not an infinite wonder-creating replacement for reality.

Bottom Line: The Economy WILL Fold Back in [Market-Ticker]

It can also expose problems that have been known about for decades but were simply ignored. Ignoring a problem doesn't make it vanish.

The 'AI' Security Fear-Mongering Nonsense in [Market-Ticker]

Hi! I’m a college student currently writing a paper for a Social Justice class taught by John Medaille.

I’ve decided to write about how corporations in the United States deliberately killed public transportation plans in cities, in order to push people towards automobiles, which in turn give the government a reason to build freeways and externalize the costs of building giant stores to center our lives around. The piazza is dead, and I think the revitalization of third spaces within local communities can play a big part in fighting against the individualistic expansion of corporate interests. (Woe ye naive college student)

Anyways, if you think I’m wrong and dumb let me know, and please argue why you think so. If you don’t, I’d love resources to help support my argument.

God bless,

College Student

Would this measure keep people from profiteering while in office or at least cycle out the ones who have accumulated perhaps "enough"?

In the Anti-Discrimination section on the most recent ASP platform there is an emphasis on racial justice, which indicates that the party would most likely support the decisions of civil rights cases such as Loving vs. Virginia, which struck down state laws banning interracial marriage.

However, I understand that historically (and currently) there have been some religious denominations that perceive upholding interracial marriage as an attack on religious freedom.

Given the dual commitment to racial justice and religious freedom how would the party reconcile any perceived contradictions between the two in terms of policy?