The Demonization of Male Ambition, the force that built civilization

The Demonization of Male Ambition, the force that built civilization. By Lisa Britton.

We’ve spent decades treating male ambition not as a force that built civilization, but as a problem to be solved. It’s time to stop. …

For decades, we’ve systematically demonized male ambition under the banner of “equity.” In schools, we pour resources into girls’ STEM programs, leadership groups, and other career success initiatives while boys are left to fend for themselves. We tell young men to “step up” while simultaneously demanding they “step aside” so women can shine. We urge them to “open up” about their emotions, only to shame them the moment those emotions don’t align with progressive rhetoric.

Boys learn early that their drive, their competitiveness, their desire to build and conquer is suspect and something to be shamed away rather than celebrated.

Fortunately there are still exceptions. But Elon Musk did not grow up in America, but rather in Apartheid-era South Africa.

 

The results of this are predictable and heartbreaking. Young men today are struggling with purpose, direction, motivation and hope. Suicide rates for males remain tragically high. Workforce participation among men in their prime is dropping. A growing group feels angry, bitter, and invisible.

We chant about “toxic masculinity” and then act shocked when the boys we raised without positive outlets for their natural energies turn inward or lash out. We’ve told an entire generation of males that their ambition is bad for society, then wonder why so many check out. …

Let’s be real. Male ambition is the engine that brought humanity out of the dirt and into modernity. Throughout history, men have been driven to protect, provide, and achieve status, often to win the admiration of women and secure their place in the social order. That drive built cities, invented technologies, crossed oceans, and even split the atom — with the love, help and support of women, of course.

Nikola Tesla, the visionary inventor and a mind a century ahead of his time, understood this. … He argued that much of our progress stemmed from men’s deep-seated desire to provide and impress, and he worried that forcing men and women into identical roles would stifle the ambition that powers innovation. Tesla saw the complementarity of the sexes, not their sameness.

Camille Paglia, the brilliant and fearless cultural critic who I’ve admired for years, put it even more bluntly: If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts.

If women had remained in charge…

She wasn’t insulting women but stating a truth about our evolutionary paths. Women, on average, excel at nurturing, relationship-building, managing and sustaining communities. Men, on average, have driven the innovation, provision, risk-taking, and large-scale problem-solving that define our progress. Both are amazing and essential for humanity. Pretending otherwise doesn’t make us more enlightened; it makes us delusional.

We’re living in the world male ambition built. The phones we use to tweet about “the patriarchy,” the airplanes that let us travel and post on Instagram, the medical advances that slashed maternal mortality, and the internet that allows anti-men memes to go viral are the fruits of restless, ambitious men who refused to accept the status quo. To demonize their ambition while enjoying its benefits is the height of ingratitude.

And yet here we are, in an economy that now increasingly rewards feminine-coded traits like collaboration and nurturing. Male-dominated sectors like manufacturing and construction are shrinking or being automated away. Women have surged into higher education and the white-collar workforce, which is wonderful. But instead of cheering male excellence in the areas where men still lead, we shame it. We frame every male success as a woman’s loss. Every boardroom with more men than women becomes proof of systemic bias rather than evidence of different interests, risk tolerances, or life choices. This zero-sum thinking is poison.

I think the truth is more hopeful: men’s successes are not women’s failures. Our fates are intertwined!

A society that produces strong, ambitious, successful men is a society that creates safer streets, more stable families, greater prosperity, and more opportunity for everyone — including women. When men have purpose and direction, they build wealth that funds things like schools and hospitals, curing diseases. They create technologies that ease women’s lives. They defend the borders and communities that allow us all to thrive and be safe.

The belief that we must tear men down to lift women up is not equality; it’s self-defeating spite.

We need a narrative change, and we need it now. We have to stop teaching boys that their ambition is toxic and start teaching them that it’s noble (when channeled responsibly.) We should celebrate male excellence in male-dominated fields just like we celebrate female excellence in female-dominated ones. We should provide boys the same targeted support and encouragement we’ve given girls for decades. And we should reject the lie that the sexes are interchangeable. …

The alternative is dark. Keep shaming male ambition, and we’ll continue to watch our young men disengage — from education, from work, from society itself. We’ll breed resentment where there should be love and gratitude. And we’ll stall the very progress that lets us debate these issues from the comfort of heated homes and screens.

Desperate Australian Government increases solar subsidies because it is failing to meet its renewable target

Desperate Australian Government increases solar subsidies because it is failing to meet its renewable target. By Joanne Nova.

Every subsidized solar panel installed makes the country poorer.

Solar is such a bad investment that most businesses won’t do it, even in sunny Australia, unless someone else is forced to pay some of the cost. Minister Chris Bowen is about to trash the free market some more to “give” a 20% discount, so that this particular bad investment happens more often.

China thanks him for selling out Australians so that slave traders in China can make more money.

The Labor government is set to fail all their renewable targets, so they’re desperate to throw another big solar subsidy bomb to get solar panels installed on warehouses, shearing sheds, and factories.

SRES stands for Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme, it’s been working for years to suck money from poor households to help fund solar panels on middle to high income homes. Now the government wants to expand the limit from 100 kilowatt up to 1 megawatt installations so businesses can eat up the secret “subsidies” too. …

Ponder the miracle that somehow all these warehouses will be covered in panels for a cost of just “$1-$2 a year” on our bills.

That’s not a misprint… the Fairy Solar Queen will be tagging a ride with Santa Claus to deliver this magic. And if it’s so incredibly cheap we wonder why all those idiot businesses didn’t install them before?

 

Australia solar fairies will be hard at work!

 

They call it “market funded” but it’s not a free market. It’s a forced market in carbon credits you have to buy that are not even listed separately on your electricity bill. …

We already have record high electricity prices and this will only make it worse.

We already have too much solar. Every solar panel added means we need another battery, or a forty-billion-dollar pumped hydro elephant, or some scheme to force us to use more energy at midday when it isn’t convenient.

We already have record curtailment where as much as 18% of our grid scale solar capacity had to be thrown away in Q4 last year. Not to mention that we just found out solar panels degrade faster than anyone expected, which will bankrupt a lot of solar installers if enough panels blink out before the warranty does.

Geoff Chambers, in The Australian:

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen will slash costs for businesses, manufacturers, schools, hospitals, farms and community organisations to install larger solar panel systems and prop-up the Albanese government’s faltering 82 per cent renewables by 2030 target. …

The expanded solar program, lowering upfront installation costs for commercial, industrial, and agricultural buildings by about 20 per cent, is expected to deliver savings of almost $200,000 for some businesses. The impact of compliance costs on bills is expected to be small, in the order of $1 to $2 a year, which the government says is designed to reduce each year to 2030.

If renewables were really cheaper, there wouldn’t be any need for subsidies, would there?

Climate subsidies are not corrupt. Nothing to see here.

Climate subsidies are not corrupt. Nothing to see here. By Craig Kelly.

Just weeks after Chris Bowen gifted Labor’s billionaire donor Lindsay Fox $19.63 million of taxpayers’ money to buy him a fleet of electric trucks, Lindsay Fox has purchased a $20 million luxury helicopter.

Under Albanese, Australia has become one of the most corrupt nations in the world.

 

Net Zero is a complete scam; it’s basically a wealth transfer mechanism that shifts wealth out of Australia to the Chinese Communist Party—and a handful of grifters and spivs in Australia clip the ticket—and then throw financial support to the Teals and Labor to keep the scam running.

Peter St Onge:

“Climate change” boils down to exporting your entire industrial base to Asia, where the emissions don’t count.

NGO’s get billions to promote the imaginary crisis. Blue-collars get unemployment.

Related:

Hillary lost and The Clinton Foundation went broke

Biden lost and he can’t get money to build his library

USAID was shut down and the DNC had to mortgage their HQ for money

Anyone else seeing a pattern here?

So what would happen if governments stopped paying money for renewables and net zero?

Organised crime funded by NDIS powers Australian economic growth

The NDIS is effectively a funding mechanism for organised crime. By Tarric Brooker at MacroBusiness.

Since the Albanese government came to power in May 2022:

  1. The GDP per working-age adult has dropped by 3.1%.
  2. NDIS spending has increased from $29 billion to $54 billion.

Meanwhile, during a recent Senate inquriy into the NDIS, Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission executive Adam Meyer stated that crime syndicates had set up dedicated fraud networks targeting NDIS participants, who were tricked or threatened with violence to set up fake claims. …

[NDIS] fraud is estimated to be costing the taxpayer $3.7 billion per year.

When appearing before a Senate committee, NDIS Integrity Chief John Dardo revealed that an internal investigation found that 90% of plan managers who manage funding for up to 100 NDIS participants (about 900 of 1540 managers in total) portrayed “significant indicators of fraud”.

“There was “not sufficient judiciary (capacity) to process the cases we have in the pipeline in the country. Prosecution is not the answer. It’s too late. The end game can’t be prosecution. We’ve got to get to prevention.” …

The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) [concluded] that the NDIS is effectively a funding mechanism for organised crime; in the other conclusions, the NDIS Integrity Chief states that there is so much fraud the courts lack the capacity to prosecute it all.

NDIS fraud powering the economy?

It leaves one wondering to what degree the cash injected into the economy via NDIS-derived fraud is powering the nation’s economic growth. After all, in the words of the ACIC executive Adam Meyer, the funds are being “recycled” into other criminal enterprises.

Another clean-up job for the next non-Labor Government.

The Next 40 years of investments

The Next 40 years of investments. By Karl Denninger, in a mash up of here, here, and here.

This is a crucial economic post, because it warns of a fundamental economic change occurring over the next 40 years. It is a long term (“secular”) phenomenon, a forest that most everyone misses for the trees, at first.

TL;DR: The investing strategy that worked for the last 40 years — borrow as much as you can and buy assets — will now fail disastrously, because the great interest rate cycle has just flipped.

Economic cycles are real. The most-profound ones tend to be of long duration, equal to or beyond a human lifetime, just like geologic and climate cycles. …

You need to look at this for however long it takes until you realize what it means.

 

 

That’s the 10 year Treasury rate. Unfortunately it only goes back to 1962 on FRED but if you were to keep looking backward you would see that it has a roughly 80 year period through history.

This is a Kondratieff cycle which is roughly correlated with human lifespan. That is when the last person who went through the previous one is dead then the same cycle tends to repeat.

1981 – 2021 saw declining interest rates:

In this case we’re talking borrowing rates; the general shape of them has been, for 40 years, from the upper left to the lower right. [It is] not possible for it continue forever because rates below zero are in fact simply confiscating wealth from the lender … and thus will never be permitted on any sort of durable basis. …

In generally-decreasing rate environments (note that it wasn’t a straight line in either direction in the past) you can roll over borrowing at decreasing interest cost. This in turn encourages ever-higher leverage. Yes, small busts occur when you bottom-tick one of the declining points and then rates go higher for a little while (gee, you don’t see that just before 2000 and 2008 do you?) but the longer-term trend is down. …

Corporate and personal behavior have been molded by this for the last 40 years. Effectively no corporate borrowing has ever been paid off during the last 40 years because it has always been cheaper to roll it over than it was the last time. It therefore appears “stupid” to retain earnings and pay it down. But when the turn comes, and it clearly has, now every turn comes with higher interest expense instead of lower and now if you don’t retain earnings and pay it off you risk bankruptcy. …

2021 – 2061 will see increasing interest rates:

The trend reached its terminus in 2020; we now have roughly forty years of increasing rates on a long-term basis in front of us. About five of those years have already occurred and there are 35 more to go, like it or not. …

The previous 40-ish year cycle is over folks, and the upward swing is now occurring. It has roughly three to four decades to run before it turns the other way. …

It appears to be “free” to continue to accumulate national debt in a declining rate environment. But when that long-cycle turns, and it now has, you must not only reduce deficit spending it must be less than economic expansion or the ever-increasing cost of borrowing will inevitably go vertical on inflation and destroy the nation and its citizens.

US debt interest payments are starting to go vertical, as US Treasury bonds (typically 10 years duration) get repriced to the ever higher interest rates:

 

 

The market is too short-term focused, and always misses these big turnings at first:

The market is ignoring this. That’s idiotic and it is precisely that which leads to very serious market and economic dislocations.

The detonation hasn’t happened yet because corporations tend to take out roughly 10 year paper. Thus the serious rollover problems are just beginning to happen now and the same is true for much of the Federal Debt

Economics have cycles just like this and we forget them for the same reason we do with the natural world; its inconvenient to read actual written history and comport your behavior with what appears to be an inexhaustible thing at a given point in time but which history has repeatedly proved is in fact not. …

Decades ago I recall being taught about the “business cycle” and that it was driven by human psychology that never has and never will change, and thus you should be aware of it and cautious in thinking that cyclicality won’t happen again at an inopportune time. Yet in the last 20 years I’ve not heard this once — not in the media, not in academia and certainly not among businesspeople! Indeed everyone believes that the Fed and “powers that be” have slayed said cycle and its dead, buried and gone. Wrong. …

Uh oh. Government welfare has to be cut way back, or else we get massive inflation — a bit like the 1970s, but starting from much higher expenditure levels:

There is no way to control the otherwise runaway federal interest expenses other than to dramatically cut deficit spending …

Asset prices will all trend down in real terms (except for the alternative moneys — which are in competition with the paper currencies):

The only rational expectation is that all of the premium generated by that compounding of debt into lower rates (that is in all asset classes, including real estate and stocks) from that prior 40 year trend is going to come back out.

That’s at least 50% in real estate on an average basis (and much more in some areas) and almost-certainly 75% or more in leveraged asset markets (like stocks) …

When does it become impossible for the market to ignore and thus those outcomes occur? When [the borrowed money] must be either paid off (which there is no money to do) or rolled over (at materially higher interest rates.)

If you’re thinking that any of the formulas that used debt as a successful tool for other than financing some element of consumption or production to be paid in full (e.g. a house to live in with no expectation of profit from its eventual sale or an industrial building and equipment to make a product with sufficient cash flow to pay it off on the original terms) you are going to be wrong for the next three decades unless, by pure happenstance, you hit the window of one of the short-term cycles that allows you to exit by paying off the principal on one further rollover without being ruined.

None of the schemes from the 1980s forward are going to work otherwise until another 30+ years pass. …

Debt:

To survive economically in a secular rising rate environment you must not be dependent on leverage — that is, debt — whether that dependency is direct or indirect. That is, your financial operating condition whether as a person or business must be on the basis of retained earnings. …

The term “cash on cash” means just that — the cash return on cash cost.

If you never violate that then you may come up against tough times or even be forced out of whatever business or line of employment you’re in but you will not wind up with a negative balance because you can’t. You can wind up with zero but never less than zero. …

If you put up $100,000 to buy a house in cash the most you can lose is $100,000. But if you only put up $20,000 as a down payment (20%) you can lose five times what you put in….

During a secular declining rate environment it looks attractive to do the latter and most of the time it is … But in a generally-rising rate environment only cash is reasonably safe …

The fire sale cycle:

When the fire sales come — and they will — you must only buy for productive use that which you can earn a profit from cash on cash for real. If you have only a little cash then you can only do little things. That’s ok; as this cycle progresses through the next several decades there will be more opportunities and both patience and fiscal rectitude is rewarded in a generally-rising rate environment.

Why?

Because not everyone who has previously committed to a Ponzi-style financial scheme will blow up at the same time. This in turn means that the mark-down of asset prices of all sorts will come in a step-wise fashion and there will be plenty of people who, believing that “the previous paradigm” will shortly reassert itself, think they got a bargain and thus take out leverage to acquire said asset.

They will all prove to be wrong and many of them will have to puke up said asset at a lower price when they subsequently blow up due to being unable to maintain said asset’s earning capacity against ever-increasing costs of holding it in the form of higher rates and lower prices for comparable assets. …

Contemplate the dude who has levered into rental cabins here in the Smokies. [Consider] the guy down the street with another one; he gets foreclosed on and I buy his for half the price of what you paid. You’re dead because I can undercut your nightly rate by 20% or more and still make money; your cabin sits empty. The problem comes if I took out debt to do it and then a year later you blow up and your cabin goes up on the market at a 75% discount to the original price of both. If I paid cash I’m still ok (I must drop my price and thus will be making less) but if I borrowed the money now I’m bankrupt as well because when that happens the new owner of the other one undercuts me and I cannot match him!

This is the leverage cycle in reverse and it is coming in all asset classes. Stocks (and worse, crypto!) are the ultimate leverage game in this regard and will get hammered since virtually every corporation has debt on their balance sheet and they never generate enough retained earnings to pay it off.

Everyone looks at “debt coverage” as interest only on said loans but in a rising rate environment that is going to continue for three decades that doesn’t help you since you’ll have to roll it at a higher rate and thus a materially higher interest expense — which immediately and durably subtracts from operating income. Worse, corporations cannot raise prices into this to cover it because the very same cycle hits the customer (whether industrial or consumer) at the same time.

Political magic won’t help:

The key thing to remember is that this is a multi-decade secular trend, not something The Fed or the next Congress (or President) will be able to alter through fiscal or other economic policy. Yes, there will be counter-trend moves just as there were in the previous 40+ years but the actual top and change in the secular trend is decades into the future — not six months, a year or two years down the road.

You must evaluate all economic opportunities through this lens; if you do then you will find plenty of opportunities provided you do not have leverage on now that prohibits you from taking advantage of them when they present themselves — and they will. …

Housing:

Prior to the 1980s we were in a generally-rising rate cycle. You bought a house, you had a mortgage, and if you were wise you stayed in the house to raise your kids and then you had a mortgage-burning party when it matured and you made the last payment. Virtually everyone of my parent’s age when I was growing up did precisely that; mortgage burning parties were common. Over the last 40 years they’ve been non-existent.

Oh by the way home prices went up slower than wage increased during that time!  Why?  Because rates were generally rising and thus the payment one could make, was limited by wage increases and due to generally rising rates the amount you could borrow was capped. In addition no bank in its right mind would allow less than 20% down because in a rising rate environment if there was a recession and you lost your job without that equity cushion the bank would take an actual loss trying to resell your foreclosure; that 20% down payment was the only way to mitigate that risk.

In that time more than a four year loan on a car was unheard of and even that was considered rather dangerous.

This world is coming back and neither you or anyone else can stop it from happening.

The “powers that be” may not want that to happen but it is happening. The markets, whether real estate, stocks or mundane and routine businesses like medical care and car dealers don’t believe it — yet — but they will recognize it eventually simply because facts just are and if they don’t adjust they’ll go bankrupt and cease to exist.

I think he’s saying to get out of debt fast, and stay out of debt as much as possible for the next 35 years. Expect asset prices to trend down and interest rates to trend up until 2060.

Australian-designed small nuclear reactor and landing craft both succeed for the US, but Australia’s Labor Government didn’t want them

Australian-designed small nuclear reactor and landing craft both succeed for the US, but Australia’s Labor Government didn’t want them. By Robert Gottliebsen in The Australian.

Today I reveal yet another defence bungle. We have contracted to spend $4bn building landing craft in WA using overseas designs instead of using superior and lower-cost, locally designed landing craft.

But the US marines may have come to the rescue. They recognised our mistake and have leased an Australian-designed landing craft which they kindly called Matilda to tour the Pacific islands to show how Australia’s well-designed landing craft can help people manage the impact of cyclones and storms.

But this tragic Australian saga goes way beyond the design of landing craft. The Australian landing craft designers realised that to be really effective, it needed to be powered by a small nuclear-driven generator rather than diesel motors.

The chief of the nuclear section of the Queensland landing craft design operation, Bobby Gallagher, recruited top nuclear scientists from the ANSTO Lucas Heights nuclear facility in Sydney, plus Queensland engineers, to design a unique nuclear-powered generator that could be carried on the back of a utility truck and operate in the size of a container (Matilda can carry 84 containers).

But when Peter Dutton lost the 2022 election, it meant the Australian nuclear design could not be tested in Australia, so Bobby Gallagher took the technology to the US. …

The NT exercises confirmed to the Americans that the Australian-designed vessels are brilliant for landing tanks, containers, troops and heavy military equipment on beaches. …

But the Pacific island communities want Matildas for cyclone and similar storm disasters. They also want nuclear power so they can quickly reach a disaster zone and supply electricity to communities where a cyclone has cut off power.

Once again, Australian-developed technology — albeit now taken to the US — has come to the rescue. It makes you feel proud that we can use Australian-sourced landing vessel technology plus our nuclear skills to help Pacific island communities while creating a vessel that will be invaluable in modern warfare.

But now the story turns very sour because Australian defence bureaucrats turned their backs on our proven landing craft technology and awarded a $4bn contract to build vessels in WA based on Dutch technology.

Back to the Australian small modular reactor (SMR):

July was an amazing month. While the Americans were testing Matilda in Darwin, ready to display it to the region, Bobby Gallagher’s so-called Unity Nuclear Battery was wheeled into the Idaho National Laboratory, where it became the third new US reactor to achieve criticality as part of the US-planned moonshot.

As Graham Lloyd explained, the Australian-designed Unity Battery, now owned by Gallagher’s US company Deployable Energy, uses a 1MW microreactor that can run for five years without needing to be refuelled.

It is easily transportable and can be run in series to power a single industrial facility, a ship, an island or a mine site, or be scaled up further to underpin a small city or a major data centre. It does not require water for cooling, can be buried underground, can replace gas to back up renewables and uses only a tiny fraction of the land needed for other power sources to generate the same output.

A mobile nuclear reactor built in 150 days.

Of no interest to Australia’s Labor Government, but now a success in the US.

Gallagher aims to have 100,000 nuclear batteries deployed by 2040, with a target cost of $0.05 per kWh (your retail electricity currently costs around $.30 per kWh, six times as much).

An Australian-designed nuclear battery on the back of pick-up, in the US.

The Replacement Clock

The Replacement Clock.

A new website, which:

Tracks the European-descended share of the world’s population and of 45 nations from 1950 to 2100. It consolidates historical figures and modeled projections into a single interactive timeline — sourced, auditable, and methodologically transparent. …

The Replacement Clock aims to make accurate demographic information more accessible to people of European descent.

 

 

European ancestry of Australia:

  • 1950      97.7%
  • 2020     69.0%
  • 2026     65.1%
  • 2032     62.1%
  • 2100     40.8%

European ancestry in 2026 and 2100:

  • Australia    65%        41%
  • US              52%         32%
  • UK               78%        51%
  • Canada       62%        39%
  • NZ               64%        44%
  • France        78%         54%
  • Germany    81%         56%
  • Spain           84%        55%
  • Italy             92%        70%
  • Poland         98%        73%
  • Lithuania    98%        79%
  • Iceland        91%         62%
  • Denmark     89%        55%
  • Sweden       78%         47%
  • Europe        85%         57%
  • Argentina    42%         28%
  • Uruguay      72%          54%

US Democrats going communist

US Democrats going communist. By Warren Squire at Twitchy.

On Friday night, talk show host Bill Maher backed up his claim that his ‘vote is in play’ because communists are taking over the Democrat Party. Maher went on a nine-minute rant about how the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) are actually communists – and he brought the receipts to prove it.

There were audible gasps by the audience as he shared those tyrannical tidbits. How disillusioned is Maher with his communist-accepting party? He said he’d vote for former Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin before any DSA-aligned Democrat candidate. …

The Democrat Party of the 90s would be considered Republicans today. [In fact, Trump was a Democrat in the 1990s.]

 

 

Commenters:

I think Bill Maher is a great example of how political lines have shifted. He hasn’t moved, politically, but the left has moved so far left that he looks moderately conservative.

Which in turn makes moderate conservatives look like far right extremists. …

It’s wild that Bill Maher and James Carville have to sound the alarm on the rise of commies in the Democratic Party. …

Pretty sure there is still absolutely no way Maher will ever vote for a republican.

Australia usually follows the US after a few years.

It’s in Islam’s nature

It’s in Islam’s nature. By John Lucas, who starts with the well known fable of the scorpion and the frog.

The scorpion replied, “I can’t help it. It’s in my nature.”

And so it is with the governing Iranians. The holy war of jihad is in their nature. “Death to America!” is not just a meaningless slogan to keep the masses happy. It is their strategy and purpose. They are determined to conduct jihad against the United States, Israel, and Western Civilizaion to achieve their religious dream of a worldwide caliphate. Their nature is to act to accomplish this by whatever means they can.

All indications are that President Trump thinks he can change their nature. He seeks to purge the hatred and devotion to jihad from their nature. He tries to play the negotiator’s “good cop, bad cop” routine by first threatening to destroy them and then offering them the carrot of prosperity and wealth via economic development.

But it is ironic that while Trump is simultaneously playing the dual roles of both the good cop and the bad cop, he apparently is oblivious that the same tactics are being employed against him by the “good cop” negotiators (who he says are “rational, smart and strong”) and the “bad cop” IRGC (“Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards or you’ll be living in Hell.”) …

I have lost count of the number of times that Trump has announced a cease-fire because the “good cop” Iranians supposedly were “desperate” to negotiate. Inevitably, however, these optimistic announcements are followed almost immediately by further Iranian attacks and escalation, which, of course, are the work of the “bad cop” IRGC. And now it is happening again. Trump is, I respectfully submit, being played.

Any deal will only be temporary:

The current decision makers in Iran are not going to make “deal,” at least not one that is meaningful and that will last. Even if they suffer a military defeat, it will not change their nature or their goal of expanding the caliphate.

The Islamists have been at this for well over a thousand years. Their attempted expansion from Spain into northern Europe was turned back when Charles “The Hammer” Martel defeated them in the year 732 at the battle of Tours in modern day France between Tours and Poitiers. And Islamists had been at war with the western world for at least a hundred years before that. But that defeat obviously did not defeat their desire to expand the caliphate, which still drives them today. Abandoning their religious and imperialistic goals is not in their nature. They are not going to change their nature by abandoning their fundamental religious beliefs and objectives. …

 

 

I will leave you for now with General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur’s simple but powerful “Message from the Far East,” which he sent to the West Point Corps of Cadets in 1949:

“From the Far East I send you one single thought, one sole idea — written in red on every beachhead from Australia to Tokyo — There is no substitute for victory.”

The Iranian cancer will be excised by victory, not by a “deal.” But, like Charles Martel’s crushing victory at Tours almost thirteen hundred years ago, a military defeat, even of the magnitude threatened by Trump will not change their nature. History tells us that any victory will be temporary, at best.

Covid anger over the lack of accountability

Covid anger over the lack of accountability. Elizabeth Nickson at Absurdstan lets rip.

They believe themselves to be our natural leaders and we the proles who are dumb as rocks and need their guidance. “What is truth?” they say. It’s rhetorical. “Whatever I say is truth is truth”, they answer. The Science is whatever I say it is. White supremacy is the real evil. Men can have periods and babies, the only thing holding back people of color is prejudice not incapacity and culture. Climate change is catastrophic. … No other truth is allowed. Oh yeah, and whites are evil. White Anglo males are the locus of pure evil.

Yeah, we believe nothing, buster. Nothing. ‘The Science’ is dead. Trust in public institutions, especially health, is dead. We don’t believe NOAA [climate], we don’t believe the United Nations. We know the World Economic Forum is filled with extractive demons. The rules-based order was created with our money and is also garbage. All the institutions are filled with unethical success-heads who would do anything to keep their jobs. No one is noble. Everyone is corrupt. The Senate is corrupt. The Judiciary is corrupt. The Democrats are corrupt. The Socials are fully corrupt. The Science is whatever you need to prosecute your perverse plans. ,,

They — the Senators and Judiciary, the bureaucrats, RINO’s and Democrats — hate America, hate whites, hate white men, punish and marginalize conservatives, have no idea the anger they ate facing. Which is this: I admit I play the first five seconds over and over.

US Senator Bernie Moreno roasted Fauci, last week

I was standing on my feet shouting and punching the air, metaphorically speaking. I was not alone, people have been simmering for years now, waiting for revenge, for accountability, for payback for some of misery inflicted upon us. And the very real harm, the millions of lost businesses, the peculiar illnesses that followed the vaccines. The ostracism, the scolding in the face of reason, the hysteria. …

Deaths censored by the media:

In June, evidence of intent by the international health cabal in Tulsi Gabbard’s last minute classified releases was published and immediately censored. Evidence of cross-border collusion, of planning, of knowing how poisonous the vaccines were and directing the release anyway. Actual evidence from the declassified DNI releases that Fauci was ordering aerosolized releases in 2019 vanished as I read it. Stats of cancer rates soaring in country after country, saved in my cache, gone the next morning.

One billion deaths and injuries.People were publishing in a fever. One post after another. Personal injury. stats, stories, on and on and on. For a few hours on Thursday, X, Instagram, TikTok, even Facebook reels were choked with anger. Story after story, buried document after document, citation after citation.

Then, gone. By Thursday afternoon we were back to the usual. Why? Every corporation, university, and social network bears responsibility. They all bullied the people over whom they had the power of the purse, their degree, their jobs, their pensions, their future. They all bear responsibility for the injuries and deaths.

Everyone sentient knows now that the virus was created for harm, released for harm, and forced on us to further harm. That is the truth of it. …

Fooled:

Everyone else? Puppets. Child-like. Propagandized. Compromised

Almost everyone I loved was caught up in it. Our whole family, but one of Jamie’s sons, was vaccinated. Forced. No option. A friend, upon hearing we weren’t vaccinated, finished her dinner, got up, grabbed her husband by the ear and vamoosed. Six months later she took me to lunch and delineated the weird and terminal result of the vaccine on her family. A brother in his late 40’s, dead. A sister diagnosed with Diabetes 1 at the age of 50. Which is just….unheard of.

Every family was hurt. Everyone. And the deaths? My baby daddy — so young — tri-athelete, research cardiologist with an endowed chair. His parents lived into their late 90’s, but he was a pharma guy, developed cardiac drugs. Turbo cancer. Dead in months.

And now we know. But we don’t know know. The data is censored. I asked my best friend GPT to find me records of cancer spikes across all countries, early deaths, injuries. It went into hyperdrive, spooling and spooling, where usually it can deliver government stats in less than 90 seconds. I fed it the actual site. More spooling. They are blocked. The liability of all of them: media, bureaucrats, social networks, every corporate chieftian, every university president….plain to see. …

What smoke?

I ask you: why the fuckity fuck was America and no doubt Canada, the EU and the UK funding 40 “biolabs” in Ukraine, 120 in the world? 120? Why? What were they doing? What on earth is the real reason behind Gain of Function? They haven’t stopped it by the way. In fact, Kennedy’s NIH recently banned GOF, at least it looks as if they did, but, according to Jeff Childers, there are all kinds of work arounds buried in the legislation….

Our ruling class:

It is clear to all of us now that many, if not most people in positions of power are profoundly unethical. They are all wedded to their success, pensions and titles. They are enmeshed in the religion of leftism. Every institution was arrayed against the people, against truth and against real science.

They did it for the money, for their careers, their pensions, their kids education. They did it to stop Trump reordering ‘their’economy.

Possibly the biggest crime ever, as measured by the numbers of people killed or injured. More than the Holocaust or Stalin or Mao. But plausibly deniable, because most people took the vaccines or caught covid and appear to be ok, so the ruling class can tough it out with censorship and willful ignorance.

We’ve lost the war against climate change. Time to scrap net zero.

We’ve lost the war against climate change. Time to scrap net zero. By Alistair Heath in The Telegraph in the UK.

This is notable as a first among mainstream newspapers in the English speaking world. Of course, climate skeptics have been saying something similar forever. But we don’t have Fauci’s diaries to suddenly expose the establishment as liars. Instead we must wait for the climate to not change like they said it would, and for the economic cost of net zero to become unbearable. Three+ decades so far.

Climate change is real, but Britain can do almost nothing about it.

The war against global warming has been lost, with only grievous collateral damage to show for it. We have crippled British industry, hammered consumers and pushed the grid to the brink of blackouts, all with no discernible impact on global emissions and the climate.

It’s time to accept this sobering reality, cut our losses, cease tilting at (and building) windmills, ditch the despicable con that is net zero, and learn to cope with, and whenever possible, even enjoy, a warmer, drier, more volatile Mediterranean climate, if that is indeed to be our fate.

Hubris has ruined us, a tiny nation accounting for 0.8 per cent of global CO2 emissions from combustible fuels. We were fooled into believing that we could single-handedly lead the way in saving the world, a futile gambit if there ever were one. Britain slashed its own discharges by 44 per cent between 2000 and 2023, according to the International Energy Agency, yet what good has it done?

Britain’s re-embrace of collectivism, of energy rationing, our advanced case of suicidal empathy, have achieved little other than putting us at the mercy of China.

Net zero represents the pinnacle of arrogance, a case study in the illusion of control, a landmark in human vanity and, in Britain’s case, exposes a ludicrously exaggerated view of our own importance given the UK’s negligible economic and environmental footprint in 2026.

President Xi thanks the ruling class of Britain for its assistance.

Joanne Nova:

This feels like a major step forward in the newspaper debate.

Allister Heath is Editor of The Sunday Telegraph, and he unleashes beautifully on the whole vainglorious, pointless self sabotage that is Net Zero. Perhaps his most deadly question is “what good has it done?” Or perhaps it’s the answer to “how bad can it be?” — fergoodnessake, it might make Britain “more Mediterranean”.

Finally, a mainstream editor is edging closer to using my favourite weapon — connecting the distant ends of the climate debate together. Instead of just saying it costs too much, or we’re going about it the wrong way, he ridicules the hubris of trying to change the global climate in the first place and then almost (but not quite) mocks the sacred ogre — the idea that a warmer climate is a catastrophe: we might even enjoy a warmer drier more Mediterranean lifestyle, he says. Or as I would say, we’re spending billions trying to prevent more Beachy weather. He hasn’t quite got that far. But he’s on fire.

Since this appears to be landing at the right time and place, this might be quite contagious. It could be the permission slip people need to jump off the global warming bus.

Normally, any writer saying “climate change is real” is a part of the problem. The climate debate starts and ends with science, and we must win that war to stop science being used and abused as a perpetual Big Government theft machine. But somehow his use of it doesn’t grate on me, perhaps because the pandering ends after just four words, and the rest of his questions expose those same experts as having lost the plot. If climate change is real we should never have bothered with trying to mitigate it, we should have just adapted, and where were they? Where were all the climate scientists? They turned into renewables salesman. Allister Heath doesn’t get that far. But he has opened the door, and mercifully, he doesn’t spend another word telling us we should still reduce emissions.

Joanne has been pointing out for ages that the aim of net zero is to improve the weather a hundred years hence. Turn off your AC now so there will be slightly fewer floods in Bangladesh in 2100!? Even if they were right about the science — which they’re not — is that worth doing? At what cost to us?

Oxford Union debate: “The West is right to be suspicious of Islam”

Oxford Union debate: “The West is right to be suspicious of Islam”. By Basil the Great.

This is absolutely brilliant from Laurence Fox.

It’s a perfect moment to demonstrate not only how intolerant Islam is but also it proves the entire Oxford Union audience know as well despite pretending otherwise.

Laurence is about to unveil an image of the Prophet Muhammad, the whole audience are in suspense, there are interruptions, they plead with him, they try to shut him down, the rules come out, there is an intake of breath.

You can tell the room is completely on edge from this!

Because they know if he does, his life will be at risk and the Oxford Union may well be at risk too from the supposedly tolerant religion the other side are defending.

Proving Laurence’s point, that Islam is not compatible with our society at all.

I won’t ruin what happens you will have to watch for yourselves but Laurence’s trick here is absolutely brilliant and well worth 3 minutes of your time.

 

 

Tommy Robinson asked them can we agree that executing boys, ethnic cleansing and paedophilia are all wrong.

And that Human rights, free speech, rights for children, women and gays should be protected.

And they voted in favour of Islam.

 

 

The motion failed, Islam won: the opposition won 33 votes to the proposition’s 30 votes.

Flashback to 2013 when the Oxford Union debated “This House Believes Islam Is a Religion of Peace”. Islam won that one too, 286 votes in favor and 168 against.

Lethal globalism in Ceuta

Lethal globalism in Ceuta. By Brendan O’Neill at spiked.

For make no mistake – our rulers’ abandonment of our borders is a direct attack on us.

They’re essentially saying there is nothing about the Spanish way of life or the British way of life that is worth defending. Your country, your communities, your history, your citizenship, your welfare state – it is all so spectacularly worthless that it isn’t even worth putting a fence around it to protect it from people from foreign lands.

What the globalist elites depict as kindness to foreigners is in truth a savage assault on the rights and dignity of citizens. Enough is enough. Stop the boats. Fortify the borders. Save nationhood from these nihilists disguised as altruists. …

Invasion, not asylum seeking:

Can we say ‘invasion’ now? What other word is there for the rough intrusion of tens of thousands of young men into the sovereign territory of a foreign nation? Surely not even the sappiest leftist in his tattered keffiyeh and ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirt would describe the thuggish gatecrashing of an independent nation as ‘asylum seeking’? …

Local people have been assaulted or stabbed, and shops have been looted all across Ceuta. Footage here of a Spanish man being knocked out cold in Ceuta by marauding migrants.

This woman in Ceuta was absolutely shaking on camera, SURROUNDED by illegal migrants, and begging for the army to intervene… “I am surrounded. I am scared. This is an invasion.” Europe’s southern gate just swung wide open, and ordinary people are wondering where the government is.

Lethal globalism:

The fall of Ceuta exposes the lethal strain in globalism. It speaks — screams in fact — to the chaotic trashing of sovereignty, democracy and our very way of life that globalism and its gold-collared acolytes have brought about. …

The Ceuta crisis is the rotten product of the death cult of globalism. A toxic combination of institutional paralysis and ideological capture by the globalist delusion has meant our leaders have wilfully abandoned the first duty of the state: to protect its territory from external actors. The spirit of resignation over the crisis at our borders is staggering and depressing

In Spain, Britain, France, Germany, the cry goes out: there is nothing we can do to stem the arrival every day of scores of men from foreign countries. The fatalism is breathtaking. There is no comparable moment in history, outside of war, when nation states have so supinely surrendered their territory to foreign actors.

This is what some on the left have been calling for:

When you watch the videos of the mass migration invasion of Spain, remember this is exactly what their far-left politicians wanted.

This is the Left’s playbook around the globe: import millions of migrants, bribe them with amnesty and welfare, and then allow them to vote so they can cancel out the votes of actual citizens.


Germany’s far left party “Die Linke” have demanded that Germany take in all of the illegal migrants from Ceuta.

Some on the left say Spain should give Ceuta back to the Muslims, because it was conquered by the Christians in 1405. Well then, perhaps the Turks should give back Constantinople (1453)? Or Egypt ~700 AD?

By late Friday, Spanish authorities claimed that most of the migrants had either left willingly or been pushed out by security forces.

To restate the obvious:

I noticed that the ABC News last night was careful to show the very few women in the invading crowd very prominently. That’s a form of lying.

Why are the Spanish in Ceuta? Possibly related:

hat-tip Stephen Neil