One Nation wins Farrer by-election with 40% of the vote. By Noah Yim, in The Australian.

One Nation candidate David Farley won the 2026 Farrer by-election, marking the first time One Nation has won a seat in the House of Representatives.

Two-Party Preferred: One Nation 57.3% vs. Independent 42.7%

One Nation: David Farley 39.4%

Independent: Michelle Milthorpe 28.4%

Liberal Party: Raissa Butkowski 12.4%

Nationals: Brad Robertson  9.7%

Some say it was because of the economy, which is safer moral ground because it is what the uniparty would prefer you focus on. But the main issue was immigration, though many are still too shy to say so.

Tenneal Hutchesson, a daycare educator, said she had voted all her life for Labor but chose to vote One Nation in the by-election.

“I like what Pauline Hanson says on TV, her opinions, how strong she is about it,” she said.

She said she had not ordinarily cared about politics but she was very interested in this by-election.

And the issue that resolved her?

“Immigration,” her partner offered.

“It’s the ridiculous amount of immigrants in every town,” he said.

“I left Queensland, Moorooka, the whole street got bought up by African stores. Just completely changed in 12 months.”

It wasn’t the local One Nation candidate David Farley that convinced her to vote for the party but rather, Pauline Hanson, Ms Hutchesson said.

The couple said they had seen a lot more of Senator Hanson in the past year since her hijab stunt on the floor of the Senate, they said.

“Yeah – that’s stupid,” they said. “But it got everyone’s attention”.

“Even if she knows she’s going to get backlash, she stands for what she believes in.”

And down the road, a group of family and friends was enjoying lunch by a playground and said they had mostly voted for One Nation.

The clincher for them, they said, was the immigration issue and that Barnaby Joyce had joined One Nation.

“Immigration — only because of the work and the housing,” one said.

The lifelong Liberal voter said he had voted One Nation this time around.

And the group began talking about Barnaby Joyce’s defection to One Nation.

“I haven’t got much time for Pauline, but Barnaby Joyce … he’s caring, the way he’s approaching, he cares about everything he’s talking about,” he said.

“And he’s got a brain in his head,” Jenny offered.

Liberals bomb. By Kos Samaras in The Australian.

The Liberals’ campaign in Farrer was almost perfectly designed to remind voters why they should not vote for them.

Rather than offering anyone in Deniliquin, Hay or Tocumwal a reason to believe their economic future would be different, the campaign was built on culture-war cosplay, attack ads branding Michelle Milthorpe a “teal, not a real independent”, and a sustained barrage designed to delegitimise the One Nation candidate over old Labor links, migrant comments and party infighting.

The strategic premise was that voters in inland NSW would be moved by who the Liberals’ opponents were rather than by what the Liberals themselves stood for.

Then Angus Taylor took the stage on Saturday night and once again managed to talk about regional Australia without mentioning what was actually happening to its economy. Nothing about wage stagnation, the hollowing out of main streets, the leakage of young people, the cost-of-living pressure on the families he still presumes to represent. It was a speech the perfectly summed up the demise of his party.

The Liberal Party, in government, contributed to both the poor economy for inland NSW (ever-increasing government money is lavished on the cities, where the immigrants are) and mass immigration. The Liberals cannot really talk credibly about either issue without a mea culpa.

Chanting ‘intifada’ is a dangerous act that shortens the distance to violence. By Henry Ergas in The Australian.

It took scarcely a moment, once “Globalise the intifada” began to be chanted on our streets and campuses, for its champions to insist the phrase meant nothing of the sort. Intifada, they patiently explained, simply meant struggle; the slogan was no more than a plea to “internationalise the cause”. According to the Palestine Action Group and its Islamist allies, who rallied in Sydney earlier this week, to claim otherwise is to misread the Arabic.

The defence is not merely intellectually dishonest; it reveals why “it is only words” is among the most dangerous sentences people permit themselves to believe.

As an Arabic noun, intifada does indeed possess an old, generic sense: a shaking, a dusting off. That is hardly unusual: holocaust once meant nothing more than a burnt offering; pogrom, in Russian, mere devastation; nakba, in Arabic, a misfortune ranging from mishap to calamity.

Words such as these begin life as ordinary common nouns. But each was claimed by a particular event: from 1945, the Holocaust; from 1987, the intifada. After that, the generic sense survives only in the dictionaries. It does not survive in the public mind.

Linguists call the process “prototype entrenchment”. The mind, hearing a word, reaches for the most vivid, most repeated, most emotionally charged instance and treats that as what the word stands for. Once the historical event has acquired that role, the bare definition recorded in the dictionary can no longer be peeled away from the moral, emotional and political charge the word has come to convey. To hear “Globalise the Holocaust” in 2026 and think “proliferate the supply of burnt offerings” is to misunderstand spoken English. 

Exactly the same is true with intifada. Its prototype, in the global imagination, is not struggle in the abstract: it is two uprisings whose iconography, indelibly embedded by the violence that broke out in September 2000, includes suicide bombings of buses, restaurants and a Passover Seder. That is what the word now carries, not at its margins but as its core. …

Plausible deniability?

Implicature [is] the part of communication that travels not by what one says but by what one obviously means.

To remark “I am not going to call him corrupt” is to inform the room that he is corrupt. The structure is double-jointed: tested under cross-examination, the speaker retreats to what was literally uttered and accuses the critic of putting words in his mouth.

The implicature does the work; the deniability provides the shelter. “Globalise the intifada” provides a textbook case. …

No, the denial is dishonest:

Pressed in a courtroom, the chant is glossed away as “internationalise the struggle”. Chanted from a stage on a Saturday afternoon, it means burnt buses, bombed cafes, murdered children.

The audiences who hear it — on both sides — hear that second meaning with perfect clarity. A slogan that everyone really took to mean only “internationalise the struggle” would hardly stir emotions; what does the stirring is precisely the violent imagery the speaker can also deny.

Words, especially from crowds, preface violence:

The genuinely dangerous moment, however, is not the slogan in isolation; it comes once the slogan begins to repeat. …

Victor Klemperer, the Jewish philologist who retained his sanity during the Third Reich by recording its language in his diary, observed that the regime’s most powerful instrument was its vocabulary, not its decrees: a handful of words, drilled into daily life, did more to remake ordinary Germans than any speech. “Fanatisch”, once unambiguously pejorative, became under repetition a term of praise. “Aktion” became the bureaucratic veil behind which mass shootings disappeared — to incite an aktion was to incite the slaughter of millions of Jews, without actually saying so. Those shifts required no argument, only iteration. …

Slogans are the instrument that does the tuning: and they are, as Canetti observed in the rise of Nazi antisemitism, the tool that drills in the hatred.

Put these mechanisms together and the result is not innocent speech but the manufacture of an atmosphere. A word historically captured by a violent prototype, dressed up in a deniable paraphrase and chanted by bodies whose private hesitations have been switched off -– that is the recipe by which a society talks itself into permission.

It tells one group who it is by telling it who its mortal enemy is. And it tells “the other” — nowadays “the Zios” — that they are no longer part of the moral community. It hardens the shouters against dialogue and compromise. And it thickens the air with the sense that violence, when it comes, will have been only the natural conclusion of what everyone already knew.

The historical record is unambiguous: where crowds are taught to chant a word that already names a massacre, the distance between word and violence, speech and act, never grows: it shortens.

Repetition is, in short, normalisation: hear a phrase once and it can shock; hear it for the 200th time and it has become part of the air we breathe. The extreme becomes ambient; the ambient, obvious; the obvious, embarrassing to question. Thus, each repetition of “Globalise the intifada” wears the menace in rather than out. The cost of saying it falls while the cost of objecting rises. What was once unsayable becomes ever easier to say.

Repetition does its most lethal work, however, not on the solitary newspaper reader but on bodies in a crowd. Slogans are designed not to be murmured but to be chanted rhythmically in unison. Once a phrase enters a crowd, it ceases to function as communication and begins to function as synchronisation. Voices align, breath aligns, sometimes feet align. Individuals shed the small frictions of doubt and hesitation that, in private, would have given them pause.

Very well articulated.

Voters are tired of Broken Britain and its failing administrative state. By Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph.

Voters are fatigued at the administrative failings of the state. Taxes rise and public services decay. We give more to idle working-age adults than we take in income tax from working adults. Our young entrepreneurs are relocating to Dallas, Dubai, even Dublin, their places taken by illegal entrants from backward lands.

English voters expressed their frustration by switching to Reform and (to a lesser extent) the Greens. Reform also advanced in Wales and Scotland, but the clearest way to signal contempt for the administrative machine there was to vote for candidates who wanted to break away from it. …

Labour’s policy of neglecting its old electorate to court minority voters has resulted in the loss of both groups. The party’s failure is embodied in the person of Starmer: flat-footed, robotic, incapable of either outlining his vision or adapting to circumstances.

Britain’s on the way down, Argentina’s on the way up. What would happen if they refought the Falklands war now?

Archibald Prize reflects Australia’s descent into ideological mediocrity. By Craig Kelly.

The Archibald Prize was once considered the pinnacle of portraiture in Australia. But like so many of our Institutions it’s been captured and perverted by leftists.

Historically, the award recognized talented artists who could capture the spirit of their subjects through mastery of paint, composition, and form.

Today, however, winning entries are no longer chosen for their artistic merit – but for political correctness, their ability to check all the leftist social boxes. …

Today, works that fail to adhere to politically correctness are unlikely to win acclaim, no matter how skilful or moving they may be.

The implicit message to artists is that success depends less on mastery of their medium and more on their willingness to align with leftist ideological currents.

True artistic freedom — with its risk of offending, challenging, or diverging from orthodoxy — has been quietly replaced by a demand for virtue signalling cloaked as creativity.

 

Decline?

 

In turning away from greatness, modern art has become an echo chamber of decline disguised as progress.

There, fixed it:

Argentina is recovering under Milei, no longer living off printing money and calling it social policy. By Martin Varavsky.

After more than two years of Milei, the international press still does not understand what is happening in Argentina.

The narrative abroad is “shock therapy, social pain, fragile coalition.” That frame misses the actual mechanism.

Argentina did not have a budget problem. It had a printing problem. From 2003 to 2023 the central bank financed deficit after deficit until the peso lost 99 percent of its value against the dollar. Annual inflation hit 211 percent in 2023. Half the country was poor. That was the floor. …

The fiscal deficit was eliminated for the first time in 16 years. Monthly inflation fell from 25 percent to low single digits. The central bank stopped printing to fund the Treasury. Country risk dropped from over 2,500 basis points to a fraction of that. Argentine sovereign debt, which used to trade like a default option, began behaving like normal emerging market paper.

Critics say poverty rose. It did, briefly, because removing price controls and subsidies revealed the real prices of energy, transport and food that the state had been hiding with debt. Once measured honestly, poverty has been falling fast. Real wages are recovering. Mortgages in pesos are reappearing, something that had not been possible in a generation.

Take note western governments, which are  increasingly going down the old Argentinian path:

This matters beyond Argentina. It is the clearest live experiment in whether a developed-style economy can be rebuilt by pulling the state out of places it never belonged.  Spain, Italy and France should be paying attention.

A country does not get poor because it lacks resources. It gets poor because its political class learned to live off printing money and calling it social policy. Argentina spent 80 years proving that. It is now spending two years proving the opposite.

Losers:

Milei dismantled the apparatus that fed millions through the subsidy route, the ghost jobs, and the activist posts. That sector isn’t going to be happy about an adjustment that cuts off their income. Milei’s merit is that the majority put up with it anyway.

Still turning around:

The recovery is uneven — formal sectors are rising, while informal ones and small SMEs are still down. The honest indicator isn’t the average; it’s the median in people’s pockets. The hard part is still missing: getting the adjustment to turn into private investment that pulls salaries up.

Commenters:

Milei’s policies is the shock therapy that Finland, France, Spain and several other European countries need. Its not reported, because its diametrically opposed to what politicians want to keep doing: increasing the size of the state. …

Our politicians as well as the puppet masters are scared shitless. So they prevent any positive news on Milei.

Starmergeddon — It’s a bloodbath for The Uniparty Blob in the UK elections. By Joanne Nova.

Turns out, when they have a choice, the Brits don’t want Net Zero or Mass Immigration

The English Council Elections won’t change the UK parliament, but they are the largest most significant poll of the mood of Great Britain. …

Nigel Farage’s Party — Reform UK — have stormed into more than 1,300 councilor seats in England (out of about 5,000), taken from Labour as well as the Tories. The Conservatives haven’t recovered. The Green wave didn’t happen. …

Restore Britain, is new party launched by ex-Reform MP Rupert Lowe, and endorsed by Elon Musk. They are so new, they only stood in 10 seats, but won all of them. Where Reform UK wants to stop the boats and deport illegal migrants. Restore UK wants to reverse mass immigration.

Overall vote:

Reform 27%
Conservatives 20%
Labour 15%
Greens 14%
Lib Dems 14%
Others 10%

Converting the results to seats in the British Parliament if a national election were held now:

 

Nigel Farage’s Reform Party won, but Rupert Lowe’s Restore Party did really well despite what Farage would like you to believe (via Basil the Great):

Nigel Farage said Rupert Lowe wouldn’t win 1% in Great Yarmouth.

Instead he LANDSLIDED the ELECTION and won ALL TEN SEATS.

Nigel Farage said Rupert Lowe wouldn’t win 1% in Great Yarmouth

Instead he LANDSLIDED the ELECTION and won ALL TEN SEATS

Amazing result pic.twitter.com/1NjMi9oozi

— Basil the Great (@BasilTheGreat) May 8, 2026

 

39 Muslim councillors elected. By Elham Asaad Buaras in The Muslim News.

An estimated 134 Muslim candidates stood in England’s local elections on May 1, with 39 winning seats …

• Labour, including its Co-operative wing, fielded the most Muslim candidates — 49 in total — of whom 12 were elected. …
• The Conservatives ran 37 Muslim candidates, eight of whom were successful …
• The Liberal Democrats selected 16 Muslim candidates, half of whom won seats …
• The Greens put forward seven Muslim candidates, with one elected, while Reform UK saw notable success: two of its three Muslim candidates were elected …
• Independent Muslim candidates fared particularly well. Of 12 standing, seven were elected.

“Far right” is the new normal. By Northern Barbarian.

When I hear someone being dismissed as “far right” these days, I think, oh, you mean normal.

Ben Graham:

That moment was a genuine turning point for me.

When ordinary British citizens were immediately framed as “far right” in the aftermath of the 3 young girls from Southport being murdered, I realised something had gone badly wrong in this country.

It was the moment I started questioning how the government views and treats its own people.

 

The honest-to-God, patriotic, hard-working white working class are not going to take the progressive nonsense any more. By Allison Pearson at The Telegraph.

“Our only hope.”

“Last chance to save our country.”

These are phrases I hear a lot around this picturesque market town [Saffron Walden, in the North West Essex constituency of Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch]. …

It seems as if many formerly loyal Tories have come to the conclusion that Reform is the only party on the Right that will deliver for them.

Some don’t trust Farage and wonder what his economic policy might be, but the fence-sitters are being converted. A universal loathing of our soulless, sanctimonious liar-zombie Prime Minister, the perceived bias of his far-Left Government against those Britons who are mysteriously still not claiming benefits (God bless you!), plus a dread of the gangrenous Green Party and its Islamist contingent, have combined lately to consolidate that switch, I think. …

The ruling class have gone off the rails:

Not since Brexit has there been such a pent-up desire to teach our political establishment a lesson it won’t forget. …

Turnout for the Essex election was the highest it has been for decades. Voters reported queues winding out of the doors of polling stations — a sight they said they had never seen before. …

New Labour:

In this seismic realignment of politics, the greatest in our history (certainly since the erasure of the Liberals in the 1920s), one startling change sticks out: Labour can no longer call itself the party of the working class. …

The plumbers, the entrepreneurial painter-decorators who employ a couple of lads, the cab drivers, the small business people having to file another sodding tax return, the publicans, the nightclub bouncers, the florist, the hairdresser who smiles dreamily when I mention his name — they don’t care what those snobs in Westminster and at the BBC say.

They love Nigel just as they loved Margaret Thatcher — he gives them permission to like their country and that’s a good feeling. They know he would never lecture them as “that tw-t” Starmer does and say “To be British is to be diverse”, whatever the hell that means. They want Britain to be British. They feel liked by Nigel, not judged and detested.

Immigration, immigration, immigration:

They don’t think they’re “far-Right” or “racist” because they want to deport illegal migrants or because they’re shocked that 1.5 million migrants are claiming benefits — money they’ve paid into the system that they don’t want the Government to give away to foreigners, thanks very much.

In the bustling Liberty Shopping Centre in Romford, Havering, I find people who are delighted by Reform’s victory.

“Absolutely buzzing, ecstatic, very, very happy,” beams Nicola King. She voted Reform “because of what Labour has done to the country”. As the mother of a three-year-old daughter, she is horrified by excessive immigration and undocumented male migrants landing on our beaches who go on to commit sexual assault.

“The British people — we’ve had enough. We’ve been completely forgotten. This is our country and we need to take it back.”

There’s a sense of betrayal here, and anger over the impact of unprecedented levels of migration under Labour and the Conservatives. Like others I speak to, Nicola, 36, says there has been a dramatic deterioration in the area. “My little girl won’t grow up in the country I grew up in. Every time I push her in the buggy through the park, it’s stressful. There are migrants hanging about.

“All my family have voted Reform because we all know something’s got to be done.”

She is outraged that the Labour Government are asking illegal immigrants to volunteer to leave. “And they’ll give them £40,000. How stupid is that? Normal people can see they’d sneak back in,” she says. “I’ve just had enough. I work hard, I pay my taxes, and they give my money to men who broke into our country and are a danger to my child.” …

Despite the best efforts of the liberal uniparty, flooding the UK with as many strangers and scroungers as possible, men and women like these — the honest-to-God, patriotic, hard-working white working class — still form the majority of this country’s population and they are not going to take the progressive nonsense any more.

They work all hours and struggle to afford a very ordinary life. It’s not fair. They want more for their kids. On May 7, 2026, they voted to show they’d had enough.

“I’m not racist” is a common refrain among locals here before they grow animated talking about being strangers in their own land.

They are not sure Nigel Farage can bring their country back, but they badly need hope and they are glad to punish those who have betrayed them. “The British people – we’ve had enough,” Nicola said.

Immigration and the resulting tribalism is the issue at the moment, and given its impact on demography, will remain so forever more. Wait ’til they get a chance to vote for Restore.

UPDATE from Stephen Neil — a reminder from 8th May 1945, Gateshead, UK:

This beautiful remastered footage was captured by an off duty policeman on 8th May 1945 after Churchill officially declared Victory in Europe. Flags are strung between terraces during the street celebrations in Gateshead. 🇬🇧 #VEDay pic.twitter.com/nSSMcTlFOd

— Bobbie (@bo66ie29) May 8, 2026

Doesn’t look like the advertisements on telly, or any movie in the last 20 years, does it? All white people, which is very jarring because those how would create our reality have been injecting black and brown faces relentlessly into everything for ages.

Alan D. adds:

‘beautiful remastered footage’. Is it authentic? Yes. I was there!

Not Gateshead but closer to the big smoke to the south. There was a big party in my street soon after that day.

Worth noting about this footage: An overwhelming weight had been removed, these people were remembering how to smile. Free from war. It may not be apparent to today’s observer but they were in their best ‘Sunday’ visiting clothes.

Do you see? No uniforms, no insignia, no cars, one bicycle only, only one cloth cap, no one waves or carries a flag, no make-up, no jewelry, no tats, no body piercings, fairly clean streets, lots of flags strung across the street, not all are Union Jacks or St.Georges cross, flags of other nations are ok, they well know what their own flag looks like — a few flags of friends, enemy flags are not brandished.

The left are doubling down, polarizing the country with their extremism. By Camilla Tominey at The Telegraph.

The phenomenal rise of Reform UK in the local elections has triggered predictable howls of outrage from Left-wing quarters. “Fascist!”, “far Right!”, all the usual slurs. After a campaign spent depicting Nigel Farage as Britain’s next Hitler, the snowflakes are now in full meltdown at the terrifying prospect that the electorate might actually elect a “Nazi” as prime minister.

The hysteria reveals far more about the critics than it does about Reform. Those with a rational grasp of UK politics understand the truth: Farage’s party, now replete with former Conservatives and careful to distinguish itself from a harder-Right outfit in Rupert Lowe’s Restore, represents the least of Britain’s problems. While the Left obsesses over phantom threats on the Right, genuine extremism is flourishing elsewhere, cloaked not in Union flags but in the sanctimonious green of virtue-signalling radicalism.

The Greens have eagerly become the face of Islamic-left facism:

The real danger lies squarely with Zack Polanski’s Green Party. They are not merely the new Corbynistas; they are something far worse — a toxic fusion of identity politics, foreign obsessions, and barely concealed sectarianism that now wields real power in local government. …

Polling indicates that the Greens are by far the most popular party among 18-24 year olds. 

For anyone alarmed by the sharp rise in anti-Semitism since October 7, 2023, or concerned about Islamists infiltrating British institutions, these results should set off alarm bells. For ordinary voters who believe Britain is in trouble, with porous borders, failing public services, spiralling energy costs and a growing housing crisis; the Greens’ ascent is a code red.

Because despite the domestic challenges facing the nation, Polanski made it abundantly clear where his party’s priorities truly lie. These local elections, he implied, were never really about fixing Britain: “Palestine is one of the elements on the ballot”. For many Greens, this was effectively a referendum on Gaza …

The party didn’t hide its agenda. Demands have included an end to all arms sales to Israel, a ban on Israeli imports, and labelling the Jewish state an “apartheid” regime. While British families struggle with a cost of living crisis and lengthy NHS waiting lists, the Greens have been laser-focused on importing a Middle Eastern conflict into British local democracy.

Even more cynical was their electoral strategy. The party actively chooses candidates with little apparent interest in environmental issues purely to maximise votes in areas with high concentrations of Muslim voters. This is naked sectarianism dressed up as progressive politics. The Gorton and Denton by-election exemplified the approach, with Urdu-language leaflets flooding the streets. A bizarre campaign video that went viral captured the transformation perfectly: a group of Muslim men, notably no women present, parading a Green candidate riding a bicycle down the high street to the rhythmic strains of Qawwali music. This is no longer about cleaning up the rivers and the seas. It’s From The River to the Sea — and then some.

This pattern of takeover is not anecdotal. It is systemic. In Lambeth, the Greens fielded Sabine Mairey and Saiqa Ali, both of whom were later arrested for allegedly stirring up racial hatred online. One had shared content suggesting that an attack on a synagogue “isn’t anti-Semitism” but legitimate “revenge” for Israel’s actions. The other posted images of Hamas militants. …

For two decades the Left insisted that racism is whatever the self-defined victim says it is. Yet when it comes to Jewish communities reporting record levels of abuse and assault, Polanski pivots to claims that Jews are merely “perceiving” abuse rather than experiencing it. ...

These incidents, alongside many party members’ enthusiastic support for motions declaring “Zionism is racism”, provide concrete evidence of where the true hotbeds of radicalism fester in modern Britain. While Reform channels the legitimate frustrations of working-class and middle-class voters abandoned by the establishment, the Greens offer division and dangerous imported grievances. …

This is not simply about council seats or local planning disputes. It is about the soul of the nation: whether Britain remains a tolerant and functioning democracy or fragments further along sectarian lines.

The political class ignores this reality at its peril. Voters can see it clearly and are increasingly unwilling to accept the hypocrisy of those who cry “far Right” at patriots while platforming extremists in green clothing.

The ABC in Australia support the Greens. They moved on from the Labor Party a couple of decades ago, because they are not really virtuous enough. Labor no longer made them feel sufficiently special, not different to the hoi polloi. But really, how much further left can a party go while retaining some pretense of being able to govern a nation well? The British Greens have thrown caution to the wind and embraced antisemitism with gusto. Is this where the Australian Greens and the ABC are going?

This might herald the end of the British Labour Party. By Fraser Myers at spiked.

A bloodbath. A wipeout. A rout. Call it what you want, there is no understating the catastrophe that has befallen the Labour Party in yesterday’s local elections. These results are not just a bruising defeat for an unpopular incumbent — they signal the beginning of the end for the so-called people’s party.

On the seats declared so far, Labour is having the worst results for a governing party since the Tories in 1995, before they were cast out of power for a generation. Labour’s vote share has plummeted by an astonishing 19 points since its General Election win in 2024. …

The bloodbath for Labour is even gorier in its traditional, northern, working-class heartlands. In Hartlepool – once synonymous with Labour – all 12 seats that were up for election flipped from Labour to Reform UK. In Wigan, dominated by Labour for half a century, Labour has lost 24 out of 25 seats to Reform. In Tameside, Greater Manchester, 14 of the 15 seats defended went to Reform. The so-called red wall has been smashed by the teal tide. …

Delusional (oh, let them eat cake!):

Many Labour MPs are spinning the emphatic swing from Labour to Reform as a demand for Labour to tack leftwards — to further open the borders, to go for broke on woke, to stuff more money into the bloated welfare state. They are already discussing openly how they will use the next few years to sell out the working classes to appease the ‘progressive’ middle classes like themselves. There is no wing of the Labour Party that isn’t contemptuous of the electorate.

The long-overdue death of Labour has finally arrived. Don’t mourn.

Poor, socialist Europe being left behind by US and China. By Michael Arouet.

France having higher public spending as a % of GDP than the late Soviet Union is one of the funniest charts here.

 

Can’t imagine how that relates to this:

 

The gap keeps widening, and given the current technological revolution that Europe [and Australia] chose not to participate in, the gap will widen even further:

 

 

It only gets worse for Europe from here. Europe will not have the infra to catch up or compete.

 

 

Britain subsidies welfare and discourages taxpaying millionaires:

Britain is heading into a debt crisis. Entrepreneurs have enough of overtaxation and being told how bad they are, they are emigrating and taking their taxes and countless jobs with them.

The left’s response? A wealth tax, which will accelerate emigration. Why don’t they get it?

Give Jihad a Chance.

AI is changing campaigning and political argument. With AI, memes might be overtaken soon by meme-videos, because commentary like this on the ISIS brides and Islam-loving Labor can be made so cheaply:

 

🎵Give Jihad a Chance (Latest Song Version 2.0)

It’s been a long week for Immigration Minister Tony Burke.

Tony, the cheeky bugger, quietly let Sneako into the country on the very first day of the Royal Commission into the Bondi attack…& then there is the Isis Brides…. pic.twitter.com/LKLy850iCQ

— Kofy Time (@kofy_time) May 8, 2026

 

And here’s a spectacular example from the LA mayoral race (an ad for Spencer Pratt, the non-left candidate):

Spencer Pratt’s LA mayor ads are incredible. pic.twitter.com/uEge9Q9yyH

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) May 5, 2026

 

Seeing is NOT believing, not anymore.

 

Trump is a Kennedy-era liberal who doesn’t care about guns either way. By Eric S. Raymond.

Trump is a Kennedy-era liberal who has outlasted the time in which his politics was formed. I mean, this was a guy who was semi-ostracized by the New York elites because he liked palling around with Black sports and showbiz figures more than was considered seemly. It’s darkly hilarious to hear him being accused of racism to anybody who remembers those days.

Trump only looks “conservative” because the Democratic party has veered so far to the left. And because when Barack Obama notoriously angered him into running for President, he decided it would be easier to co-opt the entire conservative movement from the populist end than it would be to pry the Democrats loose from the Marxist long-marchers. …

(It’s pretty well established at this point that Trump ran for President as a fuck-you to Obama after Obama mocked him at a White House Correspondents’ Dinner, it’s probably not wise to underestimate how much he’s motivated by getting back at people he thinks have wronged him.) …

Trump, personally, seems to have kept a Kennedy-era liberal’s attitude about 2A [the second amendment, which protests the right of citizens to own guns]. He’s sort of theoretically for it and recognizes the individual-rights case as valid, but it’s nowhere near a core issue for him. Left to himself, he’d probably be susceptible to technocratic pitches for measures like banning Saturday-night specials. He wouldn’t care enough to fight off regulatory creep, or consider pushing for repeal of the NFA.

However, Trump is also a superb practical politician who understands the necessities of holding together a winning Republican coalition. He knows that he needs to keep gun owners on-side, so he’s cheerfully willing to sound a lot more hardcore about this issue than he actually is.

I think he also understands that pro-2A people are far more likely to be effectively single-issue voters than anti-2A people are. What puzzles me is why the Democrats haven’t figured this out, especially since Bill Clinton has been trying to tell them for 30 years that gun control is electoral suicide. Still, they keep stepping on that rake.

Guns and the US Second Amendment. By WiIlis Eschenbach.

Source:

Global Firearms Holdings, Small Arms Survey https://smallarmssurvey.org/database/global-firearms-holdings Civilian Firearms Holdings, 2017 (annex table), Small Arms Survey https://smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/resources/SAS-BP-Civilian-held-firearms-annexe.pdf Estimating Global Civilian-Held Firearms Numbers, Small Arms Survey Briefing Paper 2018 https://smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/resources/SAS-BP-Civilian-Firearms-Numbers.pdf

UNODC – Global Study on Homicide (data portal and reports) https://unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/global-study-on-homicide.html Our World in Data – Homicide rate (UNODC and UN WPP underlying data) https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/homicide-rate-unodc World Bank – Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) indicator VC.IHR.PSRC.P5 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.I

It’s worth bearing in mind that the per capita rate of gun homicide by whites in the US is the same as it is in Europe, but for blacks it is the same as it is in Africa. Hence, overall, per capita gun violence is higher in the US than in Europe. Or at least it was — given the current immigration trends, the gap will be narrowing.