.@coatesaholic @PhilCoates9 @MartinDaubney @LeeAndersonMP_

On my way to the office this morning, I passed a group of young people protesting, a Palestinian flag draped over their shoulders. And I asked myself a question I can't shake: why does this generation always fall into the same trap? No matter the history. No matter the context. Even the ones from wealthy families, who went to the best schools, who were dealt every good card. Always the same trap. I don't think it's stupidity. I think it's a mechanism. And a mechanism can be taken apart, piece by piece. A. The observation: everything the state touches becomes unaffordable. Look at economist Mark Perry's famous chart, the one people call "the chart of the century." It tracks US prices since 2000. At the top, what explodes: hospital services, college tuition, textbooks, childcare, housing. Increases of +100%, +150%, up to +250%, far above general inflation. At the bottom, what collapses: TVs, software, phones, toys, clothing. A TV today costs a fraction of what it did in 2000, for an infinitely better product. Look at what separates the two groups. It isn't technology. It isn't complexity. It's one variable: how much the state is involved. At the top, sectors that are subsidized, regulated, shielded from competition, where the state funds demand and blocks supply. At the bottom, sectors where companies fight every single morning to serve you better and cheaper. B. The mechanism: why it's systematic. When the state subsidizes demand without freeing supply, prices rise. Every time. Guaranteed student loans, and universities raise tuition. Housing aid plus blocked building permits, and rents skyrocket. Administered healthcare, and bureaucracy eats the budget before it ever reaches the patient. In France it's even more vicious, because the price doesn't disappear: it hides. You never see the hospital bill, you pay it through payroll contributions. You never see the cost of school, you pay it through taxes. Public spending at 57% of GDP, one of the heaviest tax burdens in the world, more than €3.4 trillion in debt. And the result? Overflowing ERs, falling PISA scores, young people who can't afford to live in the city where they work. The market didn't fail in these sectors. It was never allowed in. C. Suffering demands a culprit. A 22-year-old lives all of this in their bones. They can't find a place to live. Their degree either buries them in debt or opens no doors. The future feels blocked. That suffering is real, and I don't deny it for a second. But human beings can't stand suffering without a culprit. They need a face. A scapegoat. And this is where everything is decided: who taught them how to read the world? D. Whoever tells the story picks the villain. Schools are public. Universities are public. Culture runs on grants. Film goes through funding committees. Public broadcasting shapes the narratives. The people handing down the interpretive framework are, overwhelmingly, paid by the very system that creates the problem. Do you really think that system is going to name itself as the culprit? No. It names the capitalist. The boss. The landlord. "The rich." The multinational. The commercial West. Same role, same casting, every time. E. One lens, a thousand causes. And this brings me back to that flag. A generation taught to read every situation through a single lens, oppressor on one side, rich, Western, capitalist, oppressed on the other, will apply that lens everywhere. To housing. To climate. To conflicts on the other side of the world. The cause changes, the lens stays. That's why the trap is always the same: it's not the cause that draws them in, it's the way of thinking that was installed in them. F. The perfect inversion. Here's the irony. Capitalism is the force that drove down the price of almost everything it touched. The state is the force that blew up the price of almost everything it captured. And young people blame the first for the crimes of the second. It's like blaming the firefighter for the fire because you saw him at the scene. G. The ballot box confirms it. In the US, a few weeks out from the midterms, a large share of urban young voters is getting ready to vote Democrat for more state, more spending, more regulation. New York elected a self-described socialist mayor, carried by young voters, on promises of rent freezes and city-run grocery stores. Rent freezes, the policy that has made housing scarcer everywhere it's been tried. The cure that worsens the disease. In France, it's the same play in two acts. Part of the youth votes for the radical left, which promises more state. Another part votes for the center, which promises to "manage" the state well, and has dug the debt deeper than ever. Two different ballots, one shared assumption: the problem is the market, the solution is the state. H. The way out. These young people aren't stupid. They're right to be angry. They're just aiming at the wrong target. The day they understand that their rent, their tuition and their hospital are expensive precisely because the state runs them, their anger will change direction. They'll stop protesting against those who create. They'll start protesting against those who capture. That day, the greatest intellectual scam of our time will be over.

Dangerous ISIS terrorist involved in mass executions and stonings claims asylum in the UK and is seen wandering near Windsor Castle. Link: mol.im/a/16217337

Why Danny Kruger Is Integral to Reform UK’s Future Yesterday, I attended the Battle of Ideas festival in Westminster, where I listened to Danny Kruger MP in conversation with Baroness Claire Fox. The discussion was entitled Will Reform be allowed to rule? Taking on the Blob. As a Reform voter, I found this one of the more interesting discussions of the day, particularly because Danny is responsible for Reform’s preparations for government. Danny made a point that stood out to me. Sometimes we need to be more ‘vulgar’ towards those who oppose our views. I understood exactly where he was coming from. We have become so accustomed to politicians watching every word they say, terrified of upsetting the establishment, that very little actually changes. Claire Fox provided a good balance. She challenged Danny, reeled the conversation back in when necessary and made it clear that this was not going to become a party political broadcast. I appreciated that because I hadn’t travelled to London to listen to people agree with each other. The questions from the audience were equally pertinent. There were school teachers and lawyers raising genuine concerns, and they were not necessarily coming from a left-leaning position. It was refreshing to hear people questioning the practicalities rather than simply repeating the usual political arguments. One of the areas discussed was the complexity of legal status and the difficulties that come with trying to implement substantial political change. That immediately brought me back to my own analysis of Restore’s mass deportation proposals. Whatever your position on immigration, you cannot simply announce mass deportations and expect them to happen in a vacuum. There are legal frameworks, individual circumstances, administrative processes and international obligations to consider. You cannot just bypass all of that because it makes for a good political soundbite. And this is where I think Danny’s work is particularly important. We often talk about ‘the Blob’ as though it is some distant political entity. I don’t believe it is merely institutionalised. I think it is deeply entrenched within the machinery of government, and any party serious about changing the direction of this country needs to understand precisely what it is walking into. Danny’s proposals in Fixing the Centre address many of these issues. There is clearly a great deal of work taking place behind the scenes with Danny and his team, much of which the average voter probably never considers. I have never been particularly interested in politicians who simply tell me what I want to hear. I want to know how they intend to deliver what they promise, what obstacles stand in their way and whether they have actually thought beyond winning an election. I came away with a greater appreciation of the work Danny is doing. Not because I agreed with every word, but because I could see the thought being given to the practicalities of governing. As a Reform voter, that matters to me. There is a considerable difference between campaigning to change Britain and actually being in a position to do it. And after yesterday, I think Danny Kruger’s role in preparing Reform for government deserves far more attention than it receives. @danny__kruger @reformparty_uk

🔺 EXCLUSIVE: How did a secret mission in Syria lead to a crisis within Britain’s special forces? Insight, The Sunday Times investigations team, can reveal the full story behind an SAS operation in Syria in 2022 — and its aftermath thetimes.com/uk/defence/arti…

The murder inquiry outlasted the premierships of Johnson, Truss, Sunak, Starmer so Qs not limited to one PM or party — as for the current administration, @wesstreeting confirmed last night he will *not* meet the SAS men involved or their lawyers. Per sources, this is because some have submitted complaints to military police. I assume this reflects the fact defence secretary also oversees military law enforcement — a tension that apparently meant the MoD was unable to give any meaningful comment or view on the whole affair. That includes SAS men sent out of helicopters into nighttime battle against ISIS 48 hours after police interviews, and having homes raided and murder allegation raised before families.