On the day of Truth and Reconciliation, we should all celebrate that there are no bodies of 215 murdered children at the Kamloops Indian Residential School. No bodies? No problem!

Something historic is happening across the West, and the legacy press can't see it, because the press is part of what is collapsing. Peoples who were told for forty years that they had nothing in common are converging. Americans, French, Italians, Danes, British, Dutch. Different languages, different histories, and the same conclusion reached at the same time. They have all seen the same thing at work in their own countries: what the French call islamo-gauchisme, the alliance between the radical left and political Islam. And they are all saying no. To understand why their hegemony is close to total collapse, you have to use their own concept. "Hegemony" comes from Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist who understood that power doesn't rest on force. It rests on consent, on people accepting a worldview as obvious, as the only respectable one. That's why the left spent fifty years on what one German activist called the long march through the institutions. Universities, newsrooms, publishing houses, cultural ministries. Own the narrative and you own the country. But hegemony has a weakness Gramsci himself understood. It dies the moment consent dies. And consent is dying everywhere at once. They are losing the media war. In the 1970s, around 70% of Americans trusted the mass media. Today it's less than a third. In France, the gap between what the TV news says and what people see on their own street has become a joke. The gatekeepers lost the gate. An engineer with a phone can now reach more people than an evening news broadcast. The monopoly on the narrative, the foundation of the whole edifice, is gone. And reality is finishing the job. Look at France. A movement that started in high schools ended on October 17 with city halls stormed, Limoges city hall burning and looting across Marseille, while the radical left blamed the police. The French saw it with their own eyes, without a filter. Today's polls show the radical left's candidate losing a presidential runoff by roughly two to one. You can deconstruct a text. You can't deconstruct a burning city hall. Then comes the blow they can never recover from: abundance. Collectivism has always been a politics of scarcity. Its whole logic is that the pie is fixed, so someone's gain is someone else's theft, so the state must take and redistribute, ration and control. That's why its latest form is degrowth. Planners need scarcity the way fire needs oxygen. What is being built right now makes that logic obsolete. AI is collapsing the cost of intelligence. Robotics is about to collapse the cost of labor. Reusable rockets have already slashed the cost of reaching space. Elon Musk and thousands of builders like him are proving every day that the pie is not fixed. It can grow faster than anyone imagined. In a world of abundance, envy loses its grip and the planner loses his excuse. And AI does one more thing: it ends opacity. When any citizen can trace public money in minutes, the networks that live in the dark have nowhere left to hide. So what comes next? Two things, in this order. First, the reckoning, and this is where we have to be better than them. There will be no purges and no lists, and nobody will be prosecuted for having been wrong. Being wrong is not a crime, and we will never become what we fought. But aggravated corruption is a crime. Public money diverted to networks, fraud, abuse of office: those must be investigated, proven and judged one by one, by independent courts, with evidence, due process and the presumption of innocence. We don't jail people for their ideas. We jail people for stealing. That difference is the whole difference between a free civilization and the regimes we oppose. Second, the reunification of the West. That doesn't mean another supranational empire run by unelected officials, which is the model that failed. It means a West of strong, sovereign nations that choose to work together. Agreements between countries that control their borders, produce their own energy, build their own AI and defend themselves, and that trade and cooperate as equals because they share the same foundations: the free individual, the rule of law, the right to build. Gramsci's heirs spent fifty years winning the institutions. They are losing them in five, because they forgot that hegemony only lasts as long as reality cooperates. Reality has stopped cooperating. Now it's our turn to build.

To my American friends: if you don't want to repeat France's mistakes, read this. In 1983, kids from the French suburbs, mostly sons and daughters of North African immigrants, marched from Marseille to Paris. Their demand was simple: treat us as French. Equality. Same rules, same country. A year later, the Socialist Party captured that energy. SOS Racisme was born, with its little yellow hand and the slogan "Touche pas à mon pote" (Hands off my buddy). Concerts, celebrities, prime-time TV. On paper, a beautiful anti-racist movement. In practice, it changed the deal. The message to an entire generation stopped being "become French, this country is yours." It became "you are different, you are a victim, and France owes you." The right to difference replaced the duty to belong. Anti-racism became a political weapon and a moral alibi for the left. Assimilation is a demanding promise: you take on the language, the history, the codes, and in exchange the nation adopts you completely. We abandoned that promise. Instead of building the conditions for assimilation, we built the conditions for resentment. Then add socialism on top, and you get a lethal cocktail. A school system that stopped teaching and started preaching. Fewer fundamentals, more grievance. Kids who struggle to write a paragraph but can recite that France is a colonial, systemically racist country. A welfare state that teaches you the country owes you everything and you owe it nothing. A political class that explains every failure by discrimination, never by choices, effort or culture. Tell a teenager for 40 years that he's the victim of the country he lives in, and don't be surprised when he treats it like an enemy. Look at France right now. Since mid-September, a high school "movement" has turned into weeks of street clashes: nearly 700 police officers injured, more than 200 students hurt. On October 17, a nationwide day of protest that started over fuel prices and the cost of living. The Prime Minister himself said it was no longer a student movement but urban violence. And the far left tied the day to colonial memory and the 1961 Algerian massacre in Paris. A protest about gas prices, rewired into a trial of the nation itself. That's the software we installed in the 80s, running at full speed. Now look at New York. What I see forming there is the exact alliance we've had in France for 20 years: hard-left economics plus identity grievance, with political Islam welcomed as an ally instead of recognized as a problem. We even have a word for it: islamo-gauchisme. The far left needs a new oppressed class and new voters. Islamists need a political shield. Each uses the other. To be clear: this is not about Muslims as people. Millions of French Muslims are fully, proudly French, and they are often the first victims of this alliance, because it locks their kids into a victim identity and hands their neighborhoods to the most radical voices. It's about a political model. And I've watched it play out for four decades. America's superpower has always been assimilation. You show up, you become American. Hyphen optional, flag mandatory. The day you replace that with "you are a victim and this country owes you," you've started the French experiment. We ran it. I can tell you how it ends. Don't.

When Muslims are a minority, they care about human rights. When Muslims are a majority, there are no human rights.

Is the @WNBA Transphobic?

Paris 2026 tours. Available now!

Two days ago I wrote about the trap this generation keeps falling into. 1.5M of you read it. The most common reply: "OK, but who builds the trap?" Fair question. Here's my answer. And let me be clear from the start: there is no secret room. No puppet master. What exists is far more banal and far more durable: a machine of incentives, where every person in the chain is paid to keep the same story alive. Nobody has to coordinate. The money does it for them. Let's start at the bottom of the machine, with the person nobody ever looks at. PART ONE: THE MACHINE, LINK BY LINK A. The NGO bureaucrat. His salary depends on the problem existing. He isn't paid to solve it. He's paid to document it, denounce it and campaign about it. An NGO that actually solved housing would have to lay itself off. So the incentive is never "fix." It's "mobilize." And nothing mobilizes like a villain. B. The program officer. The person who decides which NGO gets funded. He has to show "impact" to his board, and impact means reports, campaigns, reach, people in the street. A group that quietly builds 200 homes produces a boring report. A group that fills a square produces a great one. C. The fiscal sponsor. The plumbing. Many activist groups have no legal structure of their own, so their money flows through an umbrella nonprofit that receives and redistributes it. This is legal and common, and it makes the money nearly impossible to trace from donor to banner. D. The university administrator. Subsidized tuition didn't buy better teaching. It bought administration: entire offices whose job is to read every interaction between students as a power relation. Remove the lens and the office has no reason to exist. E. The academic. Careers run on grants and peer committees. Publish inside the dominant frame and you rise. Publish outside it and you're "problematic." Nobody has to forbid anything, because everyone can read the incentives. F. The subsidized artist. Film, theater and festivals are funded by committees that reward the "right" themes. The capitalist villain isn't a creative choice. It's a funding criterion nobody writes down. G. The public broadcaster. Paid by the taxpayer, never by the viewer. It never has to win you over. It has to please the people who renew its budget. Guess which villain it will never investigate. H. The teacher. Usually sincere, usually underpaid, trained in the same universities as everyone else. He passes on the lens he received, in good faith. That's what makes it so effective: the people transmitting it believe it. I. The international institution. Agencies and programs built around permanent crises. When a crisis ends, so does a budget. The narrative of eternal oppression becomes, quite literally, a business model. J. The politician. The last link, the one who cashes in. The machine produces anger. The politician harvests it and sells, as the cure, more of what caused the disease. Ten links, and not one of them needs to be evil. Each one just follows its interest. That's what makes the machine so hard to stop: you can't arrest an incentive. PART TWO: NOW THE REAL NAMES The European Commission. Between 2021 and 2023, more than €7.4 billion of EU money went to NGOs, in internal policy areas alone. In 2025 the EU's own Court of Auditors concluded that nobody, not even Brussels, has a reliable overview of where it all goes. When MEPs looked into the LIFE environmental program, the Commission itself admitted that some NGO work programmes it had funded contained "undue lobbying activities." In plain terms, public money paid activists to lobby the institutions that pay them. The auditors found nothing illegal, and that's exactly the point. It's all legal: the state paying people to ask the state for more state. Open Society Foundations. Less a puppet master than a patron. By its own records, it gave Jewish Voice for Peace $875,000 between 2017 and 2022, a group active in the Columbia protests, and it has funded the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights. Does it pay kids to pitch tents? There's no evidence of that. It does something more powerful. Year after year, it funds the organizations that produce the frames, the slogans, the trainings and the talking points. You don't need to pay the protester when you pay for the lens. The fiscal sponsorship networks. The money doesn't have to go to the group on the poster. It goes to an umbrella, which passes it on. That's how fact-checkers can honestly say "no direct grant to the student group" while the ecosystem around it is funded. Both statements are true. That's the design. The French state. €1,714 billion of public spending in 2025, 57.3% of GDP, the highest in Europe. Public debt hit €3,595 billion at the end of June, 119% of GDP, a record since INSEE started measuring. Interest alone runs around €79 billion this year. On top of the bill sit public universities, public broadcasting, a centralized curriculum and culture funded by committees. In France the machine isn't an ecosystem. It's an administration. New York City. In June, a Rent Guidelines Board with six of its nine members appointed by the mayor voted to freeze rents on about a million stabilized apartments. That included the first two-year freeze in the city's history. One board member resigned, saying the board had been rebuilt to deliver the freeze. The first leases under it took effect on October 1st. Watch what happens to maintenance, to new construction, to the vacancy rate. Every city that has run this experiment got the same result. And when it fails, the machine will already have its culprit ready: the landlord. THE LOOP Now put it together. The state funds demand and blocks supply, so prices explode. The young suffer. The state then funds the NGOs, universities, culture and media that explain to them why they suffer. Those institutions point at the market. The young vote for more state. More state funds more NGOs, and the loop closes. The flag on those kids' shoulders the other morning wasn't the start of anything. It was the output, the last screen of a machine that runs all day, every day, on your taxes. You can't arrest an incentive. But you can cut its funding, and you can teach people to see it. That's what this account is for.

Next year, I will give one of my SpaceX shares to every kid in America. This will be the first of many.

Liberal French Woman.

You've probably seen the video. A young Frenchwoman in Paris, in tears, begging looters to stop. "Why are you doing this? That's not what we stand for." Some accounts are mocking her. "She voted for it." I won't. Because what you see on her face is not stupidity. It's a disease that has infected the entire West, and it has a name: suicidal empathy. The term comes from Gad Saad, an evolutionary behavioral scientist at Concordia University in Montreal. A man who fled the Lebanese civil war as a child, and who knows what it looks like when a society falls apart. His new book, Suicidal Empathy: Dying to Be Kind, is the follow-up to The Parasitic Mind. Here is the thesis, and why it concerns every one of us. Empathy is one of the best things about us. It evolved for a reason: to care for our children, our kin, our tribe. It was calibrated for a world where the people you felt for were the people around you, and where empathy always came paired with its counterweight: the instinct to protect your own and to recognize a threat. Suicidal empathy is what happens when that mechanism misfires. When it fires at the wrong targets, in the wrong amounts, with no brake. When we feel more for the criminal than for his victim. More for the stranger who breaks the rules than for the citizen who follows them. More for how compassionate we look than for what our compassion actually produces. Where does it come from? Four layers. First, biology. Empathy is a spotlight, as the psychologist Paul Bloom put it. It lights up the one face in front of you and leaves everything else in the dark. The crying migrant on the boat is visible. The thousands of future victims of a broken system are statistics. A spotlight is a terrible tool for running a country. Second, our own civilization. The West is the civilization that put the victim at the center of its morality. Christianity taught us to care for the stranger, the poor, the weak. It was one of the greatest moral revolutions in history. But cut off from its other half, justice, responsibility, the duty to protect your own, it turns into something else. Third, ideology. In The Parasitic Mind, Saad described idea pathogens, ideas that hijack our reasoning. Suicidal empathy is the emotional counterpart: an ideology that hijacks our compassion. It sorts the world into oppressors and victims, then demands unlimited empathy for whoever ranks as the victim, whatever they do. Fourth, status. In the age of social media, empathy has become a display. Posting "refugees welcome" costs nothing and earns applause. The bill goes to someone else: the working class, the suburbs, the women walking home at night. The results are everywhere. Criminals treated as victims of society. Sexual assaults by migrants met with lenient sentences. Self-defense branded as aggression. Borders treated as cruelty. Saad's conclusion is simple: a society dies when it would rather display infinite tolerance than use its survival instinct. Now the part I'll add myself, and that few people dare to say. On average, women score higher than men on measures of empathy. It's one of the most consistent findings in psychology, across cultures, and it makes perfect evolutionary sense: for most of human history, the survival of children depended on it. It's a strength. But it means an ideology that weaponizes empathy will hit women harder. And the data shows it: in country after country, young women have moved sharply to the left of young men, especially on immigration. This is where men have a responsibility. Not to mock. Not to lecture. Not to say "she deserved it." Empathy has always needed a counterweight, and that counterweight was the protective instinct: the one that draws lines, says no, and stands between the threat and the people it loves. Men abandoned that role. They were told it was toxic, and many believed it. So they stayed silent at the dinner table, at work, with their partners, sisters, daughters and friends. That has to end. Men have to have this conversation, honestly and with respect: compassion that cannot say no is not compassion. It's surrender. And the first to pay for it are women. Many women already understand this better than anyone. Some of the bravest voices in this fight are women, precisely because they are the first to feel the danger in the street. A civilization rests on a balance: compassion and strength, openness and borders, mercy and justice. When one side swallows the other, the foundations crack. What we are watching in Europe is what happens when empathy has no counterweight left. Look at that young woman again. She isn't the enemy. She's what this ideology made of a generation that was told kindness would be enough. Our job is to make sure she's the last generation that has to learn it this way.

The indigenous people of British Columbia do NOT need to be conquered. Their subjugation by the British Crown was completed over 150 years ago. Just ask the Chilcotin war chiefs who massacred a road crew in 1864 believing it to be an act of war. Governor Frederick Seymour marshalled 100 men, tracked them down, took them as prisoners, had them tried, convicted, and then hanged for murder under British law. Or ask the 200 Cowichan tribesmen who in 1853 grabbed their arrows and rowed out in war canoes in defiance of a colonial order to relinquish a man accused of murder. Governor James Douglas gathered 150 men on two warships and sailed under commission of the Crown into their village. It only took two hours. The man was handed over without a shot fired. Ask the Penelakut who, the following year, made the mistake of firing upon and killing a sailor aboard another Douglas gunboat arriving to arrest men accused of murdering two settlers. The village was shelled for 30 minutes and then burned. Within weeks, the culprits were apprehended, tried, convicted, and executed for the murders. There was never any need or desire among the colonial authorities to enter treaties after these skirmishes because the sovereignty of the Crown was abundantly clear. The few treaties on southern Vancouver Island that Douglas did enter early in his tenure were not offered out of necessity, but practicality. Sometimes you settle not because you accept the legitimacy of another party’s claim, but to avoid unnecessary conflict. What you did not see during the founding of British Columbia, however, was colonial malice or revenge. Slavery, torture, and retributive cycles of violence which had prevailed on the land since time immemorial quite suddenly came to an end. Crown justice was buttressed by the Mercy of the Cross. In 1872, Judge Matthew Begbie, who had sentenced the Chilcotin Chiefs eight years earlier, commuted the death sentences of four Metlakatla men, including the Chief, convicted for murder. They were returned to their village and trusted into the care of Anglican priest William Duncan. Begbie wrote: “When the head is white, the heart ought to be prudent and moderate.” Duncan reported in the years following that the men had become happy and docile under his instruction. When gold miners surged northward from San Francisco, colonial protection was provided. When smallpox broke out in 1862, thousands were vaccinated. These too were gracious acts of sovereign power. The natives are restless in British Columbia today. We don’t need to reconquer them. We don’t necessarily need treaties either. What we do need is to restore the peace, order, and good governance that colonial authorities established long ago through the sovereign exercise of the will of the Crown tempered by the wisdom and grace of the Cross.

🚨BREAKING: CAF has commissioned an independent investigation into Cambridge’s appointment of Dr Jason Arday as its youngest ever black professor, amid growing professional disquiet over his academic record, the circumstances of his appointment, the University’s handling of concerns raised about his scholarship and, more recently, the scope and direction of Cambridge’s own inquiry. You can find out more here: ardayinvestigation.net/ The investigation will be chaired by Professor Swaran Preet Singh, Lord Singh of Solihull, a former Commissioner of the Equality and Human Rights Commission who previously led the independent investigation into allegations of discrimination within the Conservative Party. He will be joined by a distinguished panel comprising Harvard psychologist Professor Steven Pinker, UCL sociologist Professor Alice Sullivan, Cambridge historian Professor Robert Tombs and Labour peer Professor Maurice Glasman. Award-winning investigative journalist Nick Wallis, whose work helped expose the Post Office Horizon scandal, will lead the investigation with a dedicated research team. CAF has been contacted by numerous Cambridge academics who are deeply concerned that the University’s own investigation will fail to confront the wider institutional culture in which the Arday affair unfolded. Whether these concerns are justified is for the independent investigation to determine. But Cambridge is one of the world’s oldest and greatest universities, and what happens to its academic culture has implications for higher education as a whole. So we think it’s worth going the extra mile to make sure the right questions are asked and the right lessons learned. CAF strongly encourages current and former academics, students and other members of the University community, as well as others with relevant knowledge, to come forward with information. This might include policy documents, internal correspondence or first-hand accounts concerning Arday’s academic record and appointment, the University’s response to concerns about his scholarship and its treatment of those who raised them, and the operation of institutional policies relating to recruitment, promotion, academic misconduct, research integrity and EDI. Anyone wishing to contribute can contact the Investigator directly at: investigator@ardayinvestigation.net The investigation website provides further guidance on submitting information, including arrangements for particularly sensitive material: ardayinvestigation.net/

For those who missed the BC provincial leader’s debate, this is all you need to know…

Tim Miller is the international voice for all of us transgendered Muslim women. All of us who identify as trans Muslim women should support Tim Miller because she is oppressed and being persecuted by the white, male, Christian patriarchy.

Tim Miller. Transgendered Muslim woman. Absolute based legend. @JohnCleese - This is the most Monty Python joke in reality I have ever seen. Everyone who supports transgender Muslim women must support Tim Miller’s quest for recognition.

Reconciliation propaganda in high school exposed by BC teen A 16-year-old B.C. high school student says he is being denied the opportunity to return to class unless he removes his YouTube video called “Lies and Reconciliation,” which exposed some of the propaganda that was pushed on students during his school's Truth and Reconciliation Day programming. Isaac Simpson, a Grade 11 student enrolled in a Lower Mainland school's film and television program, decided to put his filmmaking skills to use after growing frustrated with what he was being taught about Canada's history, often unbeknownst to parents. From a masked Black Lives Matter advocate telling students about truth, to another virtual speaker telling the youth to embrace discussions of “land back,” to a disturbing exaggerated illustration depicting Catholic nuns and an RCMP officer forcibly tearing Indigenous children from their mothers, Simpson's video gives parents a rare look inside the classroom. “I got really sick of all the indoctrination being pushed down students' throats,” Simpson told me. “They were just telling you what to think, not how to think.” But his decision to expose the material came at a cost. After initially being suspended for what the school described as a period of “pause and reflection,” Simpson and his parents attended a meeting with school officials that the teen likened to an interrogation. Simpson documented that experience in a second video posted to his YouTube channel, Isaac Simpson's Flying Circus. Both videos have since been gaining attention online. Now, Simpson says he has been told he cannot return to school unless the videos come down. He refuses to comply. “I'm not taking it down because, you know, I stand by what I said,” Simpson explained. I caught up with the young filmmaker to find out why it was important for him to expose what's happening in his public school despite the risk. For Simpson, the issue is bigger than his suspension. Currently, "parents have no way of figuring out what is being taught in schools,” he said. I also spoke with his mother, former Global News director and current B.C. political commentator Anita Krishna, about the school's response and what comes next. REPORT by @DreaHumphrey:

Based. Legend. Hero. I would convert to Islam to show how we have a biased, two tiered judicial system that favours Muslims.

JUST IN: 🇨🇦 Canadian Prime Minister Carney says he plans to increase immigration into Canada.

University debate: "The most vegan meal on earth is a grass-fed steak." Vegan: "I'm sorry, I've read the motion three times. Is it a misprint?" Anthropologist: "No." Vegan: "You're going to stand in front of four hundred people and tell them a steak is vegan." Anthropologist: "The most vegan. I'd like credit for the full claim." Vegan: "It's a dead cow." Anthropologist: "One. What did you have for lunch?" Vegan: "A lentil and rice bowl. Nothing died for it." Anthropologist: "It came off a ploughed field. Mice, voles, ground nests, every insect in it, cleared out several times a year by a machine the width of this stage. One bullock feeds a person for twelve months. I'm on one death. You lost count at the starter." Vegan: "Those are accidents." Anthropologist: "I'll let the voles know it wasn't personal." Vegan: "Fine. The planet. Cattle take up enormous amounts of land." Anthropologist: "Hill, rain and grass. Land no plough can touch. He eats what grew there by itself and nobody has to clear a thing. Your lentils needed the field emptied first." Vegan: "We could rewild it." Anthropologist: "With what?" Vegan: "...Grazing animals." Anthropologist: "I've brought some." Vegan: "This is absurd. Humans can get everything they need from plants." Anthropologist: "There's a lawn outside. Help yourself." Vegan: "We can't digest grass." Anthropologist: "He can. Four stomachs and a vat of bacteria. He's the only system on earth that gets everything out of a plant, and he hands it over as protein, iron and the B12 you're taking as a tablet." Vegan: "So your argument is that the cow is vegan." Anthropologist: "Strictly. Never touched meat in his life. I'm simply eating a plant-based diet that's been finished properly." Vegan: "You cannot call that vegan." Anthropologist: "Fewest deaths, no plough, no supplements. If you've a better word for what you were after, I'll use it." Moderator: "Time." Vegan: "I'd like the motion read out again." Moderator: "It's still not a misprint."

WOW. Holy shit. The best response to Palestinian bullshit ever. Meticulous. Masterclass by @benshapiro You’ve gotta watch this

BREAKING: Nearly half of the girls cross-country team in Camas, Washington, just forfeited their race. They refused to compete against a boy. This is bravery. Vote YES on I-638 to stand with them. Video: @KnownHeretic