Digital Duty of Care: The Government Wants to Spy on Your Private Messages and Stop You Criticizing Them

Digital Duty of Care: The Government Wants to Spy on Your Private Messages and Stop You Criticizing Them. By the IPA.

The government is using online safety, particularly children’s safety, to justify a much broader system of internet surveillance, regulation and potential political censorship.

1. The legislation would regulate almost the entire internet
DDoC imposes a general duty to prevent online harm rather than targeting specific, demonstrable problems. It uses vague terms such as reasonably foreseeable risks, appropriate action and effective measures. Practical rules will be developed through regulations and guidance rather than directly debated in Parliament. The legislation would establish an open-ended regulatory framework whose eventual scope is difficult to predict.

2. Private emails and files could become subject to surveillance (2:24–7:15)
The proposed requirements could force services such as Gmail and Google Drive to introduce age verification and scan private emails, messages and stored files. Item 53 of the bill would provide access to exemptions and privileges involving:

  • Political opinions and search histories.
  • Biometric information.
  • Racial or ethnic information.
  • Sexual orientation and other sensitive personal details.
  • Information that might be shared with overseas regulators.

Importantly, these are the witnesses’ interpretations of the bill’s potential consequences, not evidence that the Commissioner is already conducting such surveillance.

3. Political profiling could become possible (7:45–8:52)
One witness gives the hypothetical example of someone who voted No in the Voice referendum being classified as more likely to publish supposedly harmful content. He likens this to pre-crime: authorities identifying potential offenders before they have actually done anything unlawful.

4. The proposed law could encourage censorship without explicitly ordering it (9:00–14:10)

If internet companies face substantial financial penalties for failing to prevent vaguely defined harms, they may become extremely cautious about what they allow users to publish. With potential penalties of up to $109 million, companies could respond by removing lawful content rather than risk regulatory action.

5. The witnesses see a connection with earlier attempts to regulate speech (9:47–13:10)

The government has repeatedly sought broader powers over political discussion through three different legislative initiatives:

  1. Misinformation and disinformation legislation.
  2. Proposed hate speech restrictions.
  3. The new Digital Duty of Care legislation.

Each initiative has a different public justification but shares a common objective of expanding government control over online speech. Children’s safety has become the latest political justification for these powers.

6. Independent bloggers and podcasters might be particularly vulnerable (22:56–28:19)

The government could use the legislation to silence politically influential podcasters and independent media. Professional journalism receives special treatment, but why should they when ordinary Australians, bloggers and independent commentators have the same interest in discussing political affairs?

The IPA does not identify a specific automatic shutdown mechanism. Instead, it argues that the combination of vague obligations, regulatory discretion and substantial penalties could make censorship possible.

For example, does this blog qualify for a professional news exemption? Presumably not. So, Australia would go back to the pre-Internet world where only a few, easily controllable organizations have an effective ability to comment on current affairs or criticize politicians.

President Xi would approve.

Stephen:

People will leave Australia because of this.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Piddington shows how much the globalists hate us

Piddington shows how much the globalists hate us. By Fraser Myers at spiked.

Piddington is a nice village in England, about 10 miles northeast of Oxford.

With a population of just 350, [it] will soon be forced to welcome around 1,250 mostly male ‘asylum seekers’. UK communities secretary Angela Rayner has confirmed she will use emergency powers to override the furious local opposition and will fast-track the conversion of a former military barracks into accommodation for illegal immigrants.

The Piddington asylum camp confirms that, whatever Labour ministers may say in public, providing for illegal immigrants is their overriding concern. And there is no amount of public anger, legal challenges or difficult headlines that will ever get in their way. …

The problem:

The case against the Piddington camp is so overwhelming and obvious that it is incredible it needs to be stated. Villagers will soon be outnumbered by illegal immigrants by four to one. Women in Piddington will be outnumbered by eight to one. Anyone who so much as glances at a newspaper will understand the dangers here. Every single man in the camp will have arrived in Britain illegally. None will have faced any serious vetting. Many will come from countries that are so misogynistic the Foreign Office advises women not to travel there. The new arrivals will likely even be given one of the Home Office’s new guidebooks, asking them not to rape, sexually abuse or harass any women or children they encounter. Downing Street’s insistence that the safety of locals is its ‘top priority’ is an insult to the nation’s intelligence. It is about to spend £250million on a project that is all but guaranteed to make Piddington less safe.

The locals are organized against it:

The fact that even the Piddingtonians are to have a migrant camp foisted on them is especially disheartening. Their campaigns have been well-organised, disciplined and eye-catching. The symbolic referendum, in which residents voted overwhelmingly to declare independence from the United Kingdom in protest against the migrant camp, hit international headlines.

The fears of local women, as expressed in a local letter to all female MPs, had a similarly outsized impact on the migration debate. Senior figures from Reform UK and the Tories have visited the village, hoping to bolster the locals’ campaign and embarrass the Labour Party. Yet none of this has made the slightest dent in the government’s determination to house illegal migrants here. …

Not even the anointed people can stop the illegal immigrants:

Then there is the class dimension. For good or ill, Piddington’s revolting residents have been given a far more sympathetic hearing than similar anti-migrant protesters. …

The Lib Dem-voting residents have largely been spared the usual smears of ‘racist’ and ‘far right’ that have been levelled at anti-asylum protesters in places like Crowborough, Taunton, Gosport and Portsmouth. But even this hasn’t helped their cause. …

When protesters as well-heeled and well-organised as the Piddingtonians are unable to have their voices heard, what hope is there for the rest of us?

Britons have taken almost every opportunity to register their displeasure with out-of-control immigration at the ballot box. Polls routinely find that opposition to illegal migration cuts across party lines and class divides. And yet the government still uses every power at its disposal, not to stop the boats, but to accommodate an endless influx of arrivals.

If there were any lingering doubt, Piddington proves it: the well-being of illegal immigrants trumps the safety, rights and democratic voice of British citizens at every turn.

There you have it, laid bare. The globalists in charge hate their citizens and love their third world immigrants.

And the hypocrisy! Is this a sample of what is to occur on a national level in several western nations? Talk about virtue signaling coinciding with reality, as Leo Kearse explains:

Like most nice, kind, middle-class people, they march against the “far-right” and voted Lib Dem, a left-wing party who want to welcome refugees.

Then the government announced plans to create an enormous migrant camp holding 1,256 asylum seekers on the edge of Piddington. Piddington’s lefties realised they were going to have to deal with the consequences of their own opinions. They thought this camp would be somewhere else, next to some working-class people, as is usual. But no, it’s going to be next to them. So they’re now trying to get the migrants moved — but without looking anti migrant themselves. …

Women of Piddington recorded a video begging women in Parliament to stop the camp. You’ve got to admire the optimism of appealing to politicians who do nothing while grooming gangs operate across working-class areas, except for telling the victims they should “shut up for the good of diversity”. …

Rachel from Piddington condemned the “far right” and their “fear and xenophobia”. Well, if you don’t have any fear of this migrant camp, why not let it be built? She also condemned other people in the village for their racism and bigotry — while also saying that they’d made her black husband feel welcome. For a bunch of racists, these villagers don’t sound very racist.

National newspapers, who’d completely ignored working-class people concerned about migrants in their area, suddenly found the space to run stories about middle-class women worried about camps in their area. Every woman who spoke to the media was keen to stress that they weren’t opposed to the migrants coming to Britain — they just didn’t think that near their house was a suitable location. …

Like all the women, [Alice West, another Piddington woman] was keen to stress that this wasn’t about the background of the men. Alice said, “If you added 1,256 males of any demographic to the end of our village, the risk to women would rise”. Really? Because it used to be a military base with 2,500 personnel, mainly men. Nobody was worried about it then.

For all that the women protest “it’s not about the type of man, it’s the numbers, we’re too middle class to be racist”, they all deliberately chose to live in a place that has one type of man. Piddington is 96% white.

Their worst fear: being called “racist”:

I wish the people of Piddington, the people everywhere in Britain, would get over this anxiety, this hang-up of being called racist. Just let yourself be called racist. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s a trick. It’s engineered social pressure designed to make you accept being conquered, having your land taken from you, having your children attacked.

I get called racist all the time. I just say, “Thanks!”

A reader adds:

This business in Piddington shows clearly, to anyone who hadn’t yet understood, that the government prioritises illegal immigrants over British citizens.

However, it also shows the stupidity of people like those who live in Piddington and who voted for the lefty Liberal Democrats (whatever they actually stand for).

They’re getting what they voted for. What else can one say to them except “it serves you bloody well right”?

Marco Rubio delivers a brutal indictment of Third World Mass Immigration and Open Borders

Marco Rubio delivers a brutal indictment of Third World Mass Immigration and Open Borders. By Benny Johnson, and Mike LaChance at Gateway Pundit.

Sometimes it seems like he was born for the role of Secretary of State. His understanding of geopolitics is so intelligent and seemingly natural.

You can tell the speech was a success by the way the liberal media is sneering at it.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio:

“They tell us that we are compelled by a sacred legal obligation to give up our power, to surrender our sovereignty, to submit to the whims of our enemies, to allow our cities to descend into violent anarchy, to welcome in any foreigner from anywhere in the world who arrives at our doorstep without permission, to transform our towns into refugee camps for the entire planet.”

“And beyond our borders, too, they would have us believe that we must allow our rivals to act against us with impunity, that those who flood our country with drugs and crime and death should be met with little more than the occasional and polite complaint.”

“There is nothing, there is nothing in our history or the history of any other great nation that requires us to recognize the authority or legitimacy of any of these ridiculous ideas.”

 

 

The Conservative Alternative:

Marco Rubio is right.

‘International law’ implies that there’s a global unelected government that rules over us all.

It must be rejected.

 

Contrast this with the UK, where the globalists are firmly in charge — and rubbing out our culture:

Twiggy Forrest spends millions pushing for Big Government censorship

Twiggy Forrest spends millions pushing for Big Government censorship. By Joanne Nova.

Michael Shellenberger has connected some dots which Australian journalists don’t seem to have. While they were busy writing about Gina Rinehart buying Pauline Hanson a plane, they didn’t notice that there is a whole web of connections, loosely in the order of $10 million in funding, between Andrew Forrest and groups which promote the Digital Duty of Care Act (DDoC) and other online harms and regulation which is so obviously designed to censor us.

Andrew Forrest even gave Julie Inman Grant — our eSafety Commissioner — an all-expenses paid AI policy summit with 30 government, academic and technology leaders at Forrests’s Minderoo Station. She forgot to mention the $5,000 worth of hospitality in the official gifts register. Five days after the summit Mindaroo messaged everyone there about developing their ideas into a strategy. What looks, acts and smells like it thinks it is a government policy unit? It almost looks like a pet project of Andrew Forrest?

Forrest also helped fund an ABC series, “The State of Man,” which whipped up a scare campaign about young men online tripping over, the horror, a Joe Rogan podcast. This is the scary “manosphere”. Conveniently, it came out two days before the Minister announced the new Digital Duty of Care bill in Parliament. Handy eh?

All-purpose censorship:

The legislation threatens to fine publishers as much as $109 million dollars. So the fear is not just the direct censorship this would bring but the preemptive extra censorship that would be likely when a publisher couldn’t be sure what was permitted. The government would pretend they weren’t censoring anyone, but the companies would censor anyway “just in case”.

Furthermore, people criticizing “Net Zero” could have been deemed a risk to public health under the original vague definitions, and thus the DDoC could, in theory, have been used to squelch skeptical opinions, and Andrew Forrest probably doesn’t want Australians to talk about what a waste of money wind and solar power, or hydrogen power is. It would directly threaten his funding stream, wouldn’t it? …

How his money talks:

The web of funding is extensive: The Minderoo Foundation gave $7.5 million to an activist group called “Our Watch” and an undisclosed sum to another activist group called “Teach Us Consent”. Mindaroo also funded the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership (Julia Gillard). the Australia Institute, the Tech Policy Design Institute, and others. One of the groups he funded was the Cambridge University Centre for Technology and Democracy, in the UK. He gave them £3 million pounds and they are advocating similar laws in Britain. Apologies to the UK. …

Who benefits? Xi and the Chinese Communist Party, among others.

Not only is Andrew Forrest dependent on Australian government subsidies and potentially earning convenient favours at home, but he is also dependent on Chinese funding. Not only is China his major customer, but he has also arranged a $2b loan for his decarbonization plans from the Bank of China and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China.

We have to ask whether he might also be earning some favors with President Xi?

After all, the DDoC censorship laws would make Australia less competitive, and a little bit more like China. Given our patsy role buying Chinese goods to ‘control’ the weather, presumably President Xi would also prefer to negotiate with big-spending left-leaning Australian governments. Anything that suppresses right wing critics in Australia is nicer for the CCP on so many levels. ..

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Forrest has worked hand-in-hand with the Australian government in China, to the point where commentators said it looked like he had a “Ministerial Role”.

Shellenberger doesn’t suggest that China might be using Forrest as a political lever, and nor is there any evidence that this is happening. But we know Forrest is vulnerable, and China’s commercial leverage over his company, Fortescue, is real. We also know Forrest’s access to senior Chinese political and financial figures is well documented. That raises a question worth asking: could these relationships provide an avenue for political influence, whether or not anybody has used it?

In another article Shellenberger lays out the precarious position Andrew Forrest is in. His green delusions have cost him (and us) a fortune, and when China came knocking for cheaper iron ore, Forrest’s competition could lower their prices, but Andrew Forrest did not, and his iron ore is right now, piling up on ships in Chinese ports.

Useful idiot? I can’t see Twiggy Forest as a George Soros or Klaus Schwab, masterminding and funding the globalists and undermining the West. Forest just isn’t at their level:

  • George Soros lived in China. In the 1980s, he established a branch of the Open Society Institute in Beijing, which was shut down in May 1989 due to political pressure and accusations from the Chinese state security establishment.
  • Klaus Schwab visited China multiple times but did not live there. He first traveled to China in 1979 with a delegation of European CEOs and later established the World Economic Forum’s Beijing office in 2006, but he resides in Cologny, Switzerland.

Over 80 percent of Students Expect Lower Grades If They Don’t Say They Hate Western Culture

Over 80 percent of Students Expect Lower Grades If They Don’t Say They Hate Western Culture. By David Strom at Hot Air.

Academics don’t like Western Culture, and they aren’t afraid to shout that from the rooftops. They are very passionate in their hatred. They announce it every day in the classroom.

Students are genuinely scared to disagree because they are pretty sure the professor will punish them, which reduces the value of the $100,000/year in tuition and fees they pay for the privilege of being harangued.

“A new survey of nearly 2,200 students at five Chicago-area universities found 84% felt pressure to criticize Western civilization to succeed academically” …

“When students were asked whether challenging a professor’s negative view of Western culture could result in a lower grade, 83 percent agreed or strongly agreed.”

This is a new development:

As a former academic who both attended and taught at a very liberal college, I can tell you this is hardly normal compared to a few decades ago; university professors may have fought like cats and dogs over countless petty and not-so-petty things among themselves, but punishing students for thinking was something almost everybody agreed was a no-no….

It’s a whole different world. The institutions have been captured by the radical Left, which aims to use the positions of power (and the money) to destroy the West.

Ask Abdul El-Sayed’s sister, who is a University of Chicago professor, about that:

“At Socialism 2025, @UChicago professor Eman Abdelhadi called her employer “evil colonial landlord.” Use it. Organize it. Seize its structural leverage. We don’t have power… but I work at one of the biggest employers in Chicago… a place with thousands of people I could potentially organize… This is where I need to build power. She openly says it’s “brutal” organizing academics. But despite her disdain, Abdelhadi sees the university as a tactical weapon — to build a Palestine-aligned political base from within.”

Gee, I wonder why students there fear disagreeing with her. Her entire goal is to bring down the system that, in her eyes, makes you a privileged student.

Get on board or face the consequences. So the students, for the most part, do.

Modern education: Whites are uniquely bad, so replace them

Modern education: Whites are uniquely bad, so replace them. By Caldron Pool.

We’ve reached the absurd point where a Westerner is expected to accept responsibility for his ancestors’ sins while being discouraged from taking any pride in their achievements. Apparently, the guilt is hereditary, but the glory isn’t.

This nonsense has done enormous damage to the West. What sort of people can be expected to defend a civilisation they’ve spent their lives being told was built on nothing but oppression and injustice? Why preserve something you’ve been taught the world would be better off without? …

Hostility:

What’s particularly telling is the hostility … interest in European heritage attracts. We’re forever being told to respect other peoples’ cultures, celebrate their traditions, and recognise the importance of their ancestral ties. Yet when Westerners express the same affection for their own, we’re suddenly warned about the dangers of nationalism, racism, and the far right.

Well, people are getting tired of it. …

Get over it:

Something is changing, and you can see it particularly among younger generations.

There’s a renewed interest in ancestry, heritage, and the old homelands. People are digging into their family histories, learning about their ancestors, rediscovering old customs, and developing an affection for the places and peoples from which they came.

For many of Anglo-Celtic and European descent, it’s a rediscovery of something previous generations took for granted: that they belong to a people with a history, a homeland, and an inheritance worth preserving. …

White guilt has had its decades in the sun. It has taught generations to look at their inheritance with contempt and mistake that contempt for moral virtue.

Possibly Related, by Commentary Australian Greens (not the Greens).

According to international PISA data, Australia’s average maths score for 15-year-olds plunged 46 points between 2003 and 2025, while reading proficiency has slipped by roughly two years.

Grooming young Aussies

What would remigration look like?

What would remigration look like?

The parallel societies forming in Australia break social cohesion and threaten only future conflict. They signal an intention not to assimilate, and a desire to conquer. Is remigration a good response?

Fred Pawle:

[Austrian political activist Martin Sellner’s 2024 book Remigration,] is, in my opinion, one of the two most important books in the world right now.

The other is Mindless (disclosure: Mindless was written by my wife), which on the surface exposes the Marxification of the education system across the Anglosphere, but on a deeper level also explains how Western citizens came to blithely accept the destruction of their societies through the unrestricted absorption of hordes of unassimilated immigrants: their teachers taught them that multiculturalism (along with climate catastrophism, white colonial guilt and gender fluidity) was imbued with virtues that evil “far right” conservatives will never understand. …

It’s a coin toss to decide which of these is more pernicious — the brainwashing of our poor benighted youth or the rapidly increasing replacement of all of us in our own communities by immigrants — but together they are more than the sum of their parts. The West has an existential fight on its hands, and it’s about time more people woke the hell up about it.

Sellner makes his case methodically and diplomatically, but doesn’t pull his punches: “If conducted with dignity and discretion, [remigration] is not merely morally justified; it is our national and ethnic duty.”

He starts with a definition. Remigration is more than mere deportation. The latter involves kicking out anybody who legally doesn’t belong…

Remigration …  is the removal of all people who are a drain on the host nation and do not share in its culture or contribute to its collective wellbeing: …

  1. Asylum seekers. If they arrived needing legitimate asylum, fine. But eventually they must leave. …
  2. Burdensome foreigners. These are people who have conjured permanent or long-term residency through marriage, student visas and other methods. … Such immigrants should be made to feel unequivocally unwelcome. This could be done by stricter controls over their movements, a separate social system, taxation on remittances and so on.  …
  3. Non-assimilated citizens. These people remain a burden despite being granted citizenship, and must also go. Here, Sellner is careful not to advocate for the state to expel people based on ethnicity, religion or other categories. Such power will always eventually be abused by the state. In some cases, removing citizenship is legally plausible, but for the most part discouraging unassimilated parasites (my word, not his) is a long-term project that involves, again, making them feeling unwelcome while creating inducements for them to move to another country. …

Sellner goes into considerable detail about establishing model cities in north Africa, in partnership with other governments, that are eminently more familiar and comfortable to the migrants who currently sit in crowded terrace houses or hostels throughout Europe plotting ways to rape and kill the people who extended to them the hand of hospitality (again, my words, not his). …

This is a profound topic. The survival of Western Civilisation depends on us reclaiming our own societies, and robustly excluding those who don’t speak our language, contribute nothing, leech off our welfare systems or, worse, do us harm.

Basil the Great on a speech by Rupert Lowe, leader of Britain’s Restore Party, which advocates remigration.

Those who:
– Refuse to work
– Claim benefits
– Live in social housing
– Hate our way of life
– Commit crime
– 2nd Gen who commit serious crimes

These are all legal migrants, they will all be deported

Combine that with the illegal migrants Restore have committed to deporting, and you’re talking about potentially 5-7 million people. …

Restore Britain have already pushed the overton window repeatedly and continue to drag the country along with it as time goes on.

John Carter:

Remigration is not politically unacceptable in Canada. Quite a substantial fraction of the population already supports it.

White advocacy in a multicultural context might sound very nice, but it simply won’t be allowed. It doesn’t matter that it would be reasonable, fair, and equitable. Non-whites are not interested in being reasonable, fair, or equitable. They’ve got a good thing going and have no intention of giving it up. They’re going to call you a Nazi for advocating for whites to be treated fairly, just like they’ll call you a Nazi for advocating for remigration.

Commenters:

The idea that they can be imported in masses *illegally and against our will* but cannot be exported in masses because “legality” is ridiculous.

You simply sell remigration to Canadians as the compassionate option of returning people back to their home countries to live with their people so that Canadians can live with theirs. …

Canada is now a full blown anti-white apartheid state. …

If you keep treating your opponents as honest actors, and that this is all happening by accident, or for some benevolent public good that you can’t understand, I’m sorry but you are a useful idiot at this point.

Your government hates you, they are doing this on purpose.

Abolish State Payroll Taxes

Abolish State Payroll Taxes. By Commentary Australian Greens (not the Greens).

To hire a corporate worker at their headquarters in Melbourne, NAB has to pay a 4.85% payroll tax plus a 1.0% “Mental Health and Wellbeing Surcharge” (yes, really) straight to the Victorian government for every dollar paid to their employees. It’s literally a penalty for hiring Aussies. If they pay an employee $100k in a year, they also have to pay $5,850 to the state government.

Meanwhile, NAB can offshore that exact same corporate role to India, Philippines, or anywhere else overseas. The cost of doing that? Zero. No more payroll tax, no penalties, no exit tax, and no more statutory overheads to the Australian government.

Every single state in the country has a payroll tax for large corporates. The rates range from 4.95% in South Australia all the way up to 6.85% for the ACT.

For NAB alone, they’re forced to fork out $135 million a year in payroll taxes. They could hire well over 1,000 Aussies for that price.

You get less of what you tax, but more of what you subsidize.

When John Howard proposed the GST in 1998, he envisioned a 15 per cent GST to replace a range of Commonwealth and State indirect taxes, explicitly including payroll tax, petrol excise, and customs duty, while also funding personal income tax cuts.

After negotiations with lefties who held the Senate balance of power (the Australian Democrats), the GST rate was reduced from 15 per cent to 10 per cent, the tax base was narrowed (e.g. by exempting fresh food), and the states were only required to abolish four of the originally proposed nine state taxes (financial institutions duty, debits tax, stamp duty on marketable securities, and “bed taxes”) — so payroll tax was not abolished.

Dropping out is magic thinking and it’s what they want you to do

Dropping out is magic thinking and it’s what they want you to do. By Kaiser Von Lohengramm.

The concept that we will just have some major collapse and anarchy is pure fiction.

In every instance of a failed state ever, power is seized by already existent strongmen who exist within the system, even if its fragmentary and warlords fighting one another, this is still what happens. Even in a place like Haiti, the infamous warlord Barbecue was himself once a prominent leader within the Haitian national police.

These are patterns within history which are ironclad, and I believe that there is nothing new under the sun. …

Why dropping out — taking the “Benedict option”  — is a foolish move:

So, … what might these attempts at dropping out, balkanizing, avoiding politics as they exist and the powers that be actually look like?

Well, they might succeed. You might genuinely have a community of a few thousand White, Patriotic families, with a purveying Christian culture, in a homogeneous community you pretty much control all in a rural area living an extremely safe and sound life in your day to day. This is a plausible future, and even in the event of a total Gay Race Communist victory forever cemented into power, they may permit you to have this. But it will come at a cost. …

You will still be taxed. Heavily. Roughly 50% of your income will be taken from you and redistributed to others. You will receive, again, nothing in return, save for the Gay Race Communists telling you that they will not destroy everything you have built and kill you, which is the consequence of not paying. And they will make certain you remember that, with their foot soldiers showing up en masse every now and then to protest outside your reservation and call for your destruction, just as a reminder of what consequences await you should you fail to pay your reparations.

This scenario is one which is grounded in reality. These are the lives that those in Orania, South Africa live. They are permitted their local community, their autonomy, the preservation of their heritage and culture and in exchange, they are practically slaves to the South African Government who’s productivity is leached from them. Occasionally, blacks calling for the death of the Boer show up and march about outside to remind them who they serve and who is in charge.

This is your actual, best case scenario which you could live in if Localism somehow succeeds. …

Instead, what is most likely to occur is that you are simply starved out. Your community is deemed in some way to be illegal, and thus starts a process of debanking, removal from all payment processors, labeling as extremists legally, discrimination claims, fines and tax liens placed on you. All of this is to completely isolate you from any kind of funding at all. You will not be allowed to purchase any of the many supplies needed for basic life even in a small farming community, such as animal feed, gasoline, vehicles, basic tools.

Even things like off the grid electricity like solar can be prevented simply by denying your ability to get replacement parts or batteries through constraint. They can also place third party liabilities, that anyone who treats with you or provides employment or support of any kind is now themselves subject to liability and fines and rendered destitute simply for the act of support.

They will place you under a siege without even needing to put a single foot soldier anywhere near you. And you will cave. …

What will happen:

The vast majority of people will not want that existence. They will adjust to the new normal. There won’t be some grand civil war, it will just be them trying to eke out the best lives they can under this new existence …

Every last homogeneous town will have refugees airdropped into it and diversified. Every single locale where it is more underground, where it is not an overt stand, will be destroyed quite often without the powers that be ever being aware of you. It will just happen by who they import and bring to you. …

Any kind of organizing, reprisal, will be shut down hard, most often by these same, glory-less methods of simply rendering you an economic pariah until you cave, and hammering anyone who does anything for you with third party liability laws for doing so. …

You might hold on to some hope that a Messiah might come and save you from this, that some day someone will rise up. But how can you expect this when you, yourself, never truly rose up? You’ve checked out, dropped out of any kind of fight. Dreamed of some autonomous zone that you may never even actually try to build, some localist pipe dream. …

Face it, and fight now while you still have the resources to fight:

All because you refused to stare reality in the face and clung to delusions. Optimism is cowardice….

You engaged in magical thinking and thought that simply retreating from everything would somehow result in victory when it makes no sense and has never happened once in the history of all of humanity. You thought surrendering the fight was victory….

The hour is very late…. So that is what you must do. Live in reality. Constantly think about whether or not your plans, your ideas, have a pragmatic basis. And not only think about it, talk about it, but do it. Take a hard look in the mirror at who you are, what you are capable of, what talents you have. Get a full accounting of what you have available. Then work to increase it, organize, network with others who are likeminded. Social Media is your friend in that regard, it can connect you pretty well. And then over the next two years do absolutely everything possible to prevent the future described above from occurring.

John Carter:

This is why I completely reject renunciationism — the Benedict option, the intentional community, the off-grid tribe innawoods. There’s no actual security to be had. You’re merely rendering yourself powerless and completely at the mercy of your enemies.

American whites in particular have been following this path of retreat and submission en masse for generations. The great abandonment of the cities for the suburbs conceded political power, legitimacy, and cultural influence to the race communists. It has all been downhill from there.

How’s retreat working out for you so far?

The idea that you can win by setting up a techno-Amish commune and waiting out the collapse is just a more extreme version of moving from your old urban neighborhood to the suburbs to escape the Euphemism-Americans you aren’t even brave enough to openly name. How’d that work out? Are white Americans more or less powerful and secure as atomized suburbanites, as compared to being embedded within a densely connected multigenerational community?

You actually need to fight. If you don’t, you’ll just get rolled.

Cultural change to make way for immigrants from low trust societies

Cultural change to make way for immigrants from low trust societies. By Alexandra Marshall.

High Trust societies rely on social and cultural norms to do most of the heavy-lifting in law enforcement. Citizens don’t typically commit frequent, violent, or large amounts of crime. Those who do are outliers.

If you then import millions of people from Low Trust societies with completely different social and cultural norms, absolute disaster is inevitable.

The only way to preserve the High Trust society is to ruthlessly enforce existing laws with severe, immediate, and mandatory penalties to reinforce accepted boundaries. Newcomers who refuse to lift their behaviour will either languish in jail or they will leave.

Instead the ENTIRE WEST is collectively lowering its basic cultural and social standards either because it can’t or won’t enforce democratically decided laws.

The end result will be High Trust, gentle citizens turned into victims. Think of the girls in the UK and how much effort the government and its authorities went to hide their abuse.

Commenters:

Thing to remember is that those high trust societies evolved in part because we used to hang a large number of the bottom quintile. …

It only takes a small percentage of people to not obey the law before police become unable to enforce the law in any meaningful way. That’s why you increasingly see police enforcing ridiculous laws (online speech “violations”, etc.), because they can no longer enforce actual laws. …

Currently ON seem to be the only political party that recognize and are serious about restoring a high trust society and not just trying to use AI to force everyone into enforced behavior management for citizens ….

Exacerbating the issue is the fact that governments are handing out freebies and enticements courtesy of citizen tax dollars. …

 

Guess who?

 

If you bring people in from violent, lawless nations, don’t be surprized when they behave in a violent lawless manner. …

You’re shying away from the racial element. …

The biggest threat is people whose life experience is completely defined by high-trust to the point where they think it’s a default state that will always exist no matter what. They don’t realize it’s only through active, ongoing resistance to entropy that high-trust exists.

People get it. Why doesn’t our ruling class?

Lefty vengeance on Elon Musk

Lefty vengeance on Elon Musk. By Glenn Beck.

The Left has begun to unleash a campaign of vengeance on Elon Musk. But did they even think this through?! Because it won’t end well for them. …

Elon is a trillionaire with a rocket company. If Texas tries to shut him down, he’ll just move to another state. If Congress tries to make his life a living hell, he’ll move to any other country that wants his businesses and innovations. I’m sure Argentina would love for him to build there.

And if the whole world turns on him, there’s always space.

When government power and mob tactics get unfairly weaponized against builders like Elon, they leave. But guess what happens after that? Because it’s even worse for our country.

The next builder doesn’t come.

If the Democrats make an example out of Elon because of his political stances, it tells all future innovators that they’re not safe here. Not unless they fall fully in line… kind of like fascism.

Assassinate Elon, nudge nudge. By Hon. Vickie Paladino.

The New York Times is going to do everything they can to help leftists murder Elon Musk.

Because let’s face it, that’s what they really want.

They know the hearings and subpoenas will go nowhere. All this is just about getting as much rage content out into the leftist terrorsphere as possible in hopes of inspiring a Louie Mangione or Tyler Robinson to get the job done.

The left celebrates assassinations. They’ve worked very well for them. And they’re going to escalate.

Commenters:

Politics is reverting back to what it was for centuries. Its all about clearing the field of your political opponents. It works for them because the Left has institutional control.

Trump will become irrelevant in two years. So the left will focus on Elon.

Australian power prices to double by 2029

Australian power prices to double by 2029. By Perry Williams, Ben Packham and Jacquelin Magnay in The Australian.

Australian power prices are ­projected to nearly double by 2029 as delays in building giant wind farms and the closure of coal plants throttle the nation’s energy transition …

Wholesale electricity prices will surge up to $110 per megawatt hour from the current $60MWh, with the government’s Capacity ­Investment Scheme failing to ­deliver enough new renewable ­capacity before the country’s biggest coal stations exit the power grid, modelling by consultancy Rystad Energy shows. …

Labor promised before the 2022 election to reduce average household electricity bills by $275 by 2025. Instead prices rose. …

Treasury officials have also ­admitted that the government’s net-zero modelling predicting the collapse of Australia’s $130bn ­fossil-fuel sector ignores record overseas demand for the nation’s coal and is built on assumptions that contradict the government’s own economic forecasts.

What did Australia miss out on to afford its renewable power system? Handre:

Government stimulus spending doesn’t create resources. It redirects them. When Washington borrows a billion dollars and injects it into infrastructure or green energy, it pulls that capital away from whatever private actors would have funded.

The seen benefit (the bridge, the solar panel factory) obscures the unseen cost: the businesses never launched, the technologies never developed, because the capital was conscripted first.

The Australian ruling class fell hard for the disproven carbon dioxide theory of global warming, without doing due diligence. So, Australia has spent huge resources on building a second electricity system. Yes, a renewables system needs to keep the old fossil fuel system alive for the times when the intermittent renewable power just isn’t there, so we end up with two systems. And they earnestly told us renewables would be cheaper — because the sun and wind are free! What idiots. Who benefits?

Leftist outrage at white girls making monkey noises to black guys

Leftist outrage at white girls making monkey noises to black guys.

All over media in the US, causing both strong outrage and glorious feelings of virtue among the annointed:

 

The double standard is exhausting.

 

 

End Wokeness:

Last week, 4 black teens killed a 15-year-old white boy. 0 MSM outlets covered it.

Meanwhile, this video of white college girls making monkey noises is a literal national breaking news story.

Lozzy B:

The selectively outraged Left & MSM lose their minds over monkey noises & hurt feelings while ignoring the systemic abuse & racially targeted violent Antiwhite hate crimes & the murder of White people by Blacks.

 

 

Still silence over the 200,00+ white girls raped and assaulted by Muslim gangs in the UK, but lots of coverage of Russell Brand’s imprisoning over a rape from 20 years ago, now that he’s left the left.

 

AI Designer Babies for 14-Point IQ Boost

AI Designer Babies for 14-Point IQ Boost. By ZeroHedge.

A startup backed by Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund says its latest model can sort IVF embryos by intelligence, with 14 IQ points between the top and bottom of a batch of ten. …

Vitruvian doesn’t edit DNA. It scores the embryos an IVF cycle has already produced, so parents can choose which one to implant. Besides intelligence, Nucleus has pitched comparisons of each embryo’s height, eye and hair color, and risk of breast cancer, type 2 diabetes and autism.

According to the company’s whitepaper, the expected gap between the highest- and lowest-scoring embryo in a batch of ten is 14.3 IQ points; with five embryos, it’s 10.8. Choosing the top embryo instead of an average one is worth half that spread, the whitepaper says: about 7 points with ten embryos, and about 5 with five.

Kian Sadeghi of Nucleus Genomics, on their Vitruvian program:

Vitruvian’s intelligence model can optimize embryo DNA for 14 IQ points — nearly a standard deviation. …

Parents across the world now have the choice to substantially increase their child’s intelligence.

And the next generation can choose to do the same. AI is no longer the only intelligence that will compound. Humanity can now direct its own evolution. …

Getting better:

The models were trained on 1,000,000+ people, validated across 40,000+ siblings, and used more than 7 million genetic markers.

Genetic optimization, like AI, has followed a scaling law: as datasets have grown, so have model capabilities. This trend will continue.

14 IQ points is equal to the decrease in the average western IQ since it peaked in 1880 (after allowing for the Flynn effect, an artifact due to increased familiarity with test taking).

Prediction: The ruling class will tut-tut and say this is terrible and doesn’t work, while eagerly max-partaking in the new tech.

hat-tip Phil C.